Piketon, DOE spar over proposed on-site waste site

PIKETON – As those involved with cleanup operations at the former Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Piketon celebrate the most recent funding allocated for work to create an on-site waste disposal facility, officials within Piketon's village government are stepping up efforts to prove that work should be stopped.

Officials from the village met with a representative of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency July 10 to discuss conclusions reached by a third-party environmental consultant, The Ferguson Group’s Karl Kalbacher, who the village hired to evaluate plans for a 100-acre disposal cell that would handle low-level contaminated waste from the cleanup work.

The disposal cell has been touted as a cost saving for the cleanup of that low-level waste would not have to be shipped off the DOE property, and a Record of Decision approving the project called it a safer option because of increased accident risks involved with transporting waste to other locations.

Waste with higher levels of contamination would still be sent elsewhere for disposal.

Concerns explained

In his review of the more than 4,000-page DOE study used to create the Record of Decision, Kalbacher concluded that cracks exist in the bedrock below the level represented in the Record of Decision, creating a potential problem. The Record of Decision evaluated three options for waste disposal from the cleanup work, including no action at all, the creation of the on-site disposal facility and shipping all waste off site.

“The (Record of Decision) says that DOE will dig down to competent bedrock, but their landfill construction specifications leave large areas of fractured bedrock in place which will create a faster pathway for low-level nuclear and hazardous wastes to migrate and could also undermine the structural integrity of the landfill,” Kalbacher said. “It simply should not be constructed this way and, at a minimum, it must be modified. We don’t know why or how Ohio EPA concurred with this.” 

Kalbacher further voiced concerns that the site would be in violation of a Toxic Substances Control Act provision requiring that the bottom of a landfill line system be installed at least 50 feet from historic high-water tables. The data from DOE, he contends, states the depth of groundwater in some areas of the landfill site is as shallow as 21 feet below the surface, making it impossible to meet the 50 feet requirement.

Piketon Mayor Billy Spencer, in a press release, said the results of the review show problems with the process that led to the Record of Decision and accused DOE of lying to village residents.

“What else has to happen for people to recognize this whole path forward is flawed?” Spencer said. “The bedrock is cracked and we have a neighbor 1,000 feet from where this thing is supposed to be built. DOE has lied to the public about the geological conditions. They were caught in the lie, yet the Ohio EPA doesn’t seem to think anything ought to change.”

Spencer went on to say that opposition to the creation of the disposal cell has been consistent from the village, the Site Specific Advisory Board, two townships and two school districts in the area. He also said that money already spent on the project should not be considered as having gone to waste if work was stopped.

“The work done to date has been the clearing of trees and the construction of infrastructure, all of which are necessary for economic development of that area, which is exactly what should happen there,” Spencer said. “It’s time for the Record of Decision to be reopened, to change this decision and ship this waste to the desert and time to get on with the business of doing something positive with that land that can actually lead to jobs.”

Spencer, in a letter sent to U.S. Senators Rob Portman and Sherrod Brown, further voiced the concerns and added a few other points. First, that the cost benefit to the project is not as great since the timetable for completion of the cleanup has been set back from 2024 to 2044. Second, that stockpiling waste on the property until the cell is completed adds cost and increases risk, and finally, that the radioactive footprint of the site will be extended from its center where decommissioning work is ongoing to one of its edges in close proximity to residential areas.

The Record of Decision shows that the Department of Energy did not have concerns about the site when the document was issued in June 2015.

"DOE has evaluated the environmental impact, if any, of the excavation and disposal." it states. "DOE’s analysis has determined that placement of this waste in the OSDC will be protective of human health and safety and the environment, assuming such waste meets the waste acceptance criteria."

Moving forward

Dennis Carr, project director for the cleanup site's lead contractor, Fluor-BWXT, is currently limited in what he can say about the village's concerns until the Department of Energy issues its expected response to those concerns in the next week or two. 

Carr told Ross County Commissioners this week during a routine project update that the on-site disposal facility was awarded the full $41 million requested this year for the work, about double what project managers were expecting would be approved.

"So, as a result, we've been able to turn on a lot more work and we've placed quite a few sub-contracts for work and we're aggressively pursuing that work — we think now through Christmas we're going to be moving about 1.4 million cubic yards of soil," Carr said.

He added that as work progresses, they are setting aside the clay-like material from the soil and will be screening it and using it as part of its liner material. Another roughly million cubic yards of soil is expected to complete the excavation of the site next year if the same amount of funding is made available.

"Obviously, our objective was to find the best available geology, and that's where it was," Carr said. "It's on an undeveloped hillside and it doesn't have utilities, so we decided to do that in the interest of long-term performance of the disposal facility."

A threat to groundwater?

Piketon Village Councilman Dennis Foreman is passionate in his stance against the construction of the facility, which he prefers to call a nuclear waste dump. His greatest concern is with waste getting through the liner and into cracks in the bedrock down to the groundwater.

"The reason they built the (plant) in Piketon in the '50s was because we have a lot of water," Foreman said. "Yucca Mountain (nuclear waste depository) is in the desert, and you're not going to affect anyone putting nuclear waste in the desert."

The Record of Decision notes that a cover and intrusion barrier will be designed with the intent of stopping any penetration of the barrier by humans, tree roots or burrowing animals, with institutional controls to be put in place to restrict access to the site and prohibit activities that would expose the waste.

"While the cover remains in place, migration of contaminants into groundwater and surface water is the only credible pathway for exposure," the document states. "Modeling indicates that exposures will be within an acceptable risk range at the designated receptor locations downgradient of the disposal cell. This assumes that the disposal cell remains intact, it performs as predicted, and institutional controls adequately prevent unacceptable uses of the disposal location."

In response to one of the public comments made regarding groundwater depth in the Record of Decision, the DOE stated that its surveys showed the depth to be adequate at the site of the disposal facility.

"DOE has conducted numerous geologic investigations and concluded that competent unfractured bedrock formations (i.e., Cuyahoga and Sunbury shale) underlie the selected location," the response reads. "This location is on top of a hill and is not located above the ancient Teays River Valley mentioned in the comment which was filled by the Gallia and Minford formations millions of years ago. Therefore, the shallow groundwater present in the Gallia formation is absent in the selected OSDC location. The selected location has very good surface drainage features and the existing ground surface is up to 175 ft above the regional aquifer, which is in the Berea sandstone formation."

What's next?

As an uptick in work on the facility takes place, village officials will continue pressing their case for a stoppage. 

Kalbacher, in a July 12 letter to Margaret Guerriero, acting director of the Superfund Division of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Region 5 in Chicago, laid out the village's case as it applies to the Toxic Substances Control Act.

"We were told at the meeting by Ohio EPA that they have requested the United State Environmental Protection Agency-Region 5 to provide a regulatory decision on Toxic Substances Control Act requirements with respect to chemical waste landfill design and placement for the proposed Department of Energy Onsite Disposal Cell ...," he wrote. "On behalf of the Village of Piketon, I am writing you to express the Village's perspective for requiring full compliance with TSCA requirements to place the bottom of the landfill liner a minimum of 50 feet above the historical high groundwater mark and to prohibit any hydrological connection between the waste and any surface water."

James Lee, a spokesperson for the Ohio EPA, said it was his understanding that it was DOE that has requested the regulatory decision from Region 5 of the U.S. EPA. He also said that the agency has received Kalbacher's report and is in the process of reviewing it.

"If in that report, there is relevant new information, the agency will respond appropriately," Lee said.

U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry will have an opportunity to see everything taking place on the DOE site in Piketon when he makes a scheduled visit to the cleanup on Monday.