Better info could help reduce DOE cleanup costs, GAO report finds

Better information regarding the specific work needed to finish cleaning up contaminated soil and legacy landfills at Department of Energy nuclear sites could help the department better prioritize cleanup projects and improve budgeting decisions, according to an audit by the Government Accountability Office.

The report, Nuclear Waste Cleanup: DOE Should Collect Information Specific to Soil and Legacy Landfills to Inform Overall Remediation Efforts, looked at eight nuclear cleanup sites currently managed by the DOE's Office of Environmental Management and found that the remaining soil and legacy landfill cleanup at those sites will cost about $15 billion over the next six decades.

The office's estimated scope, schedule, and cost for cleanup, however, may change as more information becomes available, affecting the final cost estimates for those sites, according to the GAO.

As an example, the GAO said the cleanup of one legacy landfill at the DOE-EM's Los Alamos National Laboratory cleanup site "could cost about $12 million under one potential remedy, but about $805 million if another remedy is selected."

Conclusion: The GAO found that the DOE-EM cites data to department headquarters in an aggregated form, with soil cleanup information combined with that of other activities, such as groundwater cleanup. As such, the GAO said that department headquarters has been unable to readily identify the scope, schedule, and cost of soil and legacy landfill cleanup over the 12 sites where such work is being performed.

"Being able to identify soil cleanup activities-distinct from broader cleanup efforts-would allow EM headquarters to more adequately prioritize cleanup across sites to achieve the most efficient risk reduction," the report states.

Recommendation: The GAO has recommended that DOE-EM headquarters "collects and uses information specific to the scope, schedule, and cost of soil and legacy landfill cleanup to enhance technical and policy support provided to sites and inform prioritization decisions to reduce risk."

The DOE-EM deferred responding to the GAO's recommendation to a later date, neither agreeing nor disagreeing with the report's recommendation.