Oppose mercury storage facility in Kingston
To the Editor:
Anyone who has read The Oak Ridger over the past 35 years will know that mercury is arguably the single worst contaminant produced by the Y-12 National Security Complex. Mercury is surprisingly mobile in the environment; extremely difficult, perhaps impossible to clean up; and dangerous to human health even in small doses. Mercury from Y-12 has been found in the Tennessee River and downstream lake sediments as far as Chattanooga. Bacteria in streams and lakes can change the chemistry of mercury (methylation) to make it more biologically active, so that it concentrates through the food chain. Mercury in fish is a primary reason for the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) fish consumption advisories in East Fork Poplar Creek and Watts Bar Lake.
Congress passed the Mercury Export Ban Act (MEBA) in 2008, to severely limit the export of mercury from the U.S. and to require that the vast quantities of mercury held by the federal government be placed in a single facility for long-term storage. Sen. Lamar Alexander objected (Senate Report 110-477, pp. 15-16) to that facility being located on the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) for several reasons, including that Oak Ridge is still dealing with the cleanup of mercury spilled during and since World War II. As a result, the MEBA specifically states that the mercury storage facility shall not be located on the ORR. Sen. Alexander’s reasons are just as valid today as they were in 2008.
The original Environmental Impact Statement (EIS; DOE/EIS-0423, 2011) for this project did not include any sites in Tennessee. Now the second Supplemental EIS (DOE/EIS-0423/S2) currently under public review includes the Permafix facility on Route 58 in Kingston, only 14 miles down the road from Oak Ridge, as well as a site in Greenbrier, Tenn., north of Nashville. While inclusion of these sites obeys the letter of the law, consideration of the Kingston site clearly violates the law’s spirit. Sen. Alexander was able prevent this facility from being located on the ORR, and I believe he intended that DOE locate the facility somewhere outside Tennessee, not simply move it to the doorstep of the ORR. Locating the mercury storage facility in Kingston adds insult to injury. The Kingston site is within the watersheds already contaminated by Y-12 mercury and TVA ash, so any new releases would add to the already substantial burden of pollution in our local streams and groundwater. The risks of environmental release during transportation, transfers, re-packaging, and long-term storage (perhaps for many decades), are simply too great and far out-weigh any benefits from short- and long-term employment or increased tax revenue. While I would not wish this facility on another community, there are excellent technical, health, and economic reasons for this facility to be located in West Texas, Nevada, or other sparsely populated arid areas, rather than in humid, populous East Tennessee.
We don’t need another potential high-hazard polluter anywhere near Oak Ridge or in Tennessee. I urge citizens of Oak Ridge, Kingston, and surrounding counties to provide written comments opposing locating a mercury storage facility in Kingston or anywhere in Tennessee. I also urge TDEC to vigorously oppose locating this facility anywhere in Tennessee. The public comment period for the second Supplemental EIS is open until Aug. 22; zoom meetings are available on Aug. 2 at https://em-doe.zoomgov.com/j/ 1608025687?pwd=Zndsbkp6THA4V2lF dXE3ZGExclF6Zz09. More information is available at https://www.energy.gov/em/long-term-management-and-storage-elemental-mercury. I urge Oak Ridgers and Roane Countians, as well as those from surrounding counties, to attend one of the zoom meetings and to email comments to ElementalMercury_NEPA@em.doe.gov.
Chris Wieland
Oak Ridge
This article originally appeared on Oakridger: Letter: Oppose mercury storage facility in Kingston
