Jeremy L. Dillon
RW Monitor
8/1/2014
A South Carolina court issued a scathing decision this week against the Barnwell low-level waste disposal facility’s disposal practices, questioning the state Department of Health and Environmental Control’s license renewal for the EnergySolutions-owned Chem-Nuclear site amid concerns of water contamination. The South Carolina Court of Appeals determined an administrative law court (ALC) erred on four counts in a suit filed by the Sierra Club questioning the license renewal. “In conclusion, we find the record in this case conclusively demonstrates Chem- Nuclear has taken no action whatsoever to prevent even one rain drop from migrating onto one active vault or trench,” the court opinion said. “Additionally, while initial clay caps and enhanced caps reduce the migration of water onto inactive disposal units, there is no evidence and no finding by the ALC that DHEC has required, or that Chem- Nuclear has taken, any action that would reduce this migration to the smallest possible amount.” The opinion later stated, “The fact that DHEC did not require Chem-Nuclear to take any action or make any changes to its disposal practices casts doubt upon DHEC’s decision to renew the license.”
The court did not immediately revoke the license, but it did give Chem-Nuclear 90 days to establish an action plan that would address the areas where the site was not in compliance, especially in regards to rain water contamination. Should the plan fail to adequately address these areas, the court would then revoke the license. According to EnergySolutions spokesman Mark Walker, the company is still reviewing the decision. “We are reviewing the ruling and will formally respond at the appropriate time to the courts,” Walker said. “Our commitment to safety and compliance of the Barnwell disposal facility remains a top priority for EnergySolutions.”
DHEC, for its part, maintained this week that the site is in full compliance of regulations and protective of public safety. “The Court of Appeals based yesterday’s opinion on findings from a 2005 order of the Administrative Law Court,” DHEC spokesman Mark Plowden said. “As a result, the court did not have the benefit of all information related to its concerns. DHEC diligently enforces the regulations to ensure the facility is operated in a safe manner and closely monitors compliance at the facility.” Plowden added: “Tritium in groundwater from the site does not pose a health risk to the residents of Barnwell County or the State. Sampling of nearby private wells shows no impact from the site. Improved disposal practices required by DHEC and implemented by Chem-Nuclear at the facility are reducing tritium migration to groundwater.”
Sierra Club Is ‘Cautiously Happy’
The Sierra Club, for its part, celebrated the court’s decision after fighting the disposal practices at Barnwell for over a decade. Chapter Chair Susan Corbett told RW Monitor this week that the organization is pleased with the decision, but will wait to see if any meaningful changes take place. “It’s about time,” Corbett said. “When they built this site, they promised it wouldn’t leak for 400 years. It didn’t make it 20 years. The disposal practices are bad. They facilitate water passing through the site in open trenches and vaults with holes in them to allow water to pass through. As a result, water soluble nucleotides get picked up by the water and carried underground or off-site.” She added: “We are cautiously happy. We are going to wait and see what they really decide to do, and if they really decide to change their practices.”
The Sierra Club’s argument centered around the site’s responsibility to prevent the spread of tritium by rain and groundwater through its exposure to waste. DHEC announced last year at a meeting of the Atlantic Compact Commission that tritium levels were trending upwards in six locations, and in the most recent annual trending report from Chem-Nuclear, the company released similar results of tritium in the groundwater. “In the 2013 annual trending report, 27 monitoring locations were evaluated for changes in tritium concentrations,” the Chem-Nuclear report said. “The tritium data indicated that 10 monitoring locations showed no evidence of trending either up or down, six locations showed an upward trend and 11 locations showed a downward trend over the most recent five-year period (third quarter 2008 to second quarter 2013).” The report also indicated, though, that tritium concentrations in Mary’s Branch Creek have actually decreased over the five year period, a change from the stable levels of tritium from the previous 12 years.
