The Department of Energy is asking the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Andrew Wheeler, to overrule an EPA regional office in a dispute over water discharge standards for radionuclides at the Oak Ridge Site in Tennessee.
Jay Mullis, manager of DOE’s Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management, said in an April 5 letter to Wheeler that the Atlanta-based Region 4 is seeking standards on polluted water discharges “much more stringent” than those now used at government and commercial nuclear sites across the United States.
At issue is a dispute dating to 2016 over an EPA “focused feasibility study” on water management and waste disposal standards across the 35,000-acre Oak Ridge Reservation. The EPA, along with the state and the city of Oak Ridge, say it is vital to address the findings before DOE begins building a new on-site landfill at Oak Ridge.
The feasibility study includes significant discussion on wastewater discharges from the existing Oak Ridge landfill, and how the issue might be addressed for the new facility.
Currently, water from the existing landfill, which carries contaminants from solid or hazardous waste, is released to drain through an unlined ditch to mix with clean stormwater in the sediment basin, prior to being assessed for its level of radionuclides, according to Tennessee.
The state regulations do not allow the use of “underdrains,” which have been proposed by the Energy Department for the new landfill. These underdrains beneath landfill waste are used to collect and carry water away from the landfill. Bear Creek feeds into the East Fork Poplar Creek.
The Energy Department does not dispute the EPA’s authority under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) to make final regulatory decisions for Oak Ridge, which became a Superfund site in 1989, Mullis said. But EPA Region 4 is challenging longstanding Atomic Energy Act criteria on managing radionuclides by DOE and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, he added.
Clean Water Act rules traditionally defer to Atomic Energy Act standards when the runoff contains radionuclide materials, Mullis said.
“Our agencies should work together, relying on these protective limits, to avoid extensive and unnecessary cleanup requirements that do not yield a measurable benefit in public safety,” Mullis wrote.
It was not immediately known when the EPA administrator might rule on the dispute.
Mullis was responding to a March 21 letter from Mary Walker, acting administrator for EPA Region 4, on the feasibility study.
Walker said current DOE wastewater standards at Oak Ridge don’t provide adequate protections against discharges of contaminated runoff into Bear Creek. The safeguards for toxic pollution in this case “appear in part to be based on dilution,” rather than the Clean Water Act’s technology-based standard, she wrote.
Best available technologies, such as ion exchange, activated carbon, or reserve osmosis, should be considered, according to supporting documents attached to Walker’s letter.
The Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), which agrees with EPA Region 4, said DOE should not publish a draft record of decision (ROD) on the planned new 2.2-million-cubic yard landfill, dubbed the Environmental Management Disposal Facility (EMDF), until the Oak Ridge discharge issue is determined.
The Energy Department is expected to issue a draft ROD for the landfill around May 7, government sources said this week. The ROD is expected to spell out in detail the plans for the new landfill, respond to stakeholder comments, and includes assurances for the protection of human health and the environment.
The City of Oak Ridge, Tenn., also wants the ROD postponed until the Energy Department responds to local concerns. The city has yet to receive formal responses to questions raised on site characterization, waste acceptance criteria, mercury treatment and disposal, and life-cycle costs for on-site versus off-site disposal of waste, Oak Ridge City Manager Mark Watson wrote in an April 2 letter to DOE, EPA, and the state.
The Energy Department published its preferred alternative for the new landfill in September 2018, and the comment period on the project concluded in December.
The new landfill would take low-level radioactive and mixed waste from remediation at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the Y-12 National Security Complex. It would replace the existing facility, also located in the Bear Creek Valley, that is expected to reach capacity in the mid-2020s.
“It is important for a future onsite disposal facility in Oak Ridge to comply with the Tennessee Water Quality Control Act and State regulations as well as protect downstream surface water users who eat fish sourced from these waters,” Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation Commissioner David Salyers said in an April 5 letter.
The state and EPA said in recent documents Bear Creek already has a high level of radionuclides from the existing landfill. It is important for adequate safeguards to be established for the new landfill as more mercury-laden buildings are demolished in future years at Oak Ridge, according to the state and EPA.
The existing landfill, the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility, discharges wastewater with hazardous substances into Bear Creek, according to EPA Region 4. The new Environmental Management Disposal Facility would also discharge wastewater into Bear Creek and its tributaries, Walker wrote.
“There is no exception for discharges of radionuclides” under Superfund, according to Walker. The DOE safety safeguards for toxic pollution in this case “appear in part to be based on dilution,” EPA said. “This approach ignores the [Clean Water Act]’s technology-based standard.”
