Village of Piketon
Office of the Mayor
411 West Street
Piketon, Ohio 45661
(740) 289-8154
E-mail-piketonmayor@yahoo.com
Fax-(740) 289-3565

Billy R. Spencer
Mayor

January 3, 2018
Robert E. Edwards, III
Manager
Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Environmental Management
1017 Majestic Drive, Suite 200
Lexington, KY 40513
Craig W. Butler, Director
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
50 West Town Street
Suite 700
P.O. Box 1049
Columbus, OH 43215
RE: Village of Piketon, OH Position on Area D Proposed Landfill, PORTS Facility
Dear Mr. Edwards and Mr. Butler,
On behalf of the Village Council of Piketon, I want to thank you both for meeting with Piketon
officials on December 20, 2017 in which the proposed On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF)
was the topic of discussion.
The meeting was also attended by staff from the Ohio
Congressional Delegation, the Pike County Commissioners and Speaker Rosenberger. I also
wish to thank Director Butler for seeking outside review from US EPA Region V of the
Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PORTS) OSWDF project.
I appreciate and recognize the efforts undertaken by DOE and OH EPA to address the concerns
raised by the Village of Piketon through its environmental consultant, The Ferguson Group, on
the plan to construct the OSWDF at Area D of the PORTS facility. The report prepared by the
US EPA Region V (dated December 19, 2017) discusses the structural integrity of the proposed
OSWDF site and the low probability that the Berea Formation at the OSWDF will become
contaminated. The US EPA report also touches upon the bedrock fractures that are present at
the OSWDF site, and Director Butler makes note of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources
support of OH EPA’s position. I would like to respond to each of these items in the order
presented.
1) Structural Integrity of the OSWDF at PORTS Area D: Director Butler states in his
letter of December 19, 2017 that the underlying bedrock at Area D is strong enough to
support the weight of the OSWDF cells. In support of Director Butler’s perspective,

 the US EPA Region V evaluated the geotechnical data from the OSWDF portion of the
RI/FS and concluded that the OSWDF should be able to be constructed on the existing
bedrock with the proposed fill capacity without compromising a typical composite
liner system, if the fill sequencing and other conditions are carefully considered and
rigorously followed during the operation of the landfill.
The Village of Piketon appreciates the efforts undertaken by Director Butler to seek
out a third party review from the US EPA Region V on the question of structural
integrity at Area D with respect to the OWSDF.
2) Low probability that the Berea Formation will become contaminated: In Director
Butler’s letter of December 19, 2017 he states that the Berea Formation will not be
contaminated at Area D from the construction and placement of low-level nuclear and
hazardous waste at the proposed OSWDF. Included in Director Butler’s letter is the
following statement made by Michael Harris, Acting Division Director, Land and
Chemicals Division, US EPA Region V,
“BAH and EPA also evaluated hydraulic and hydrochemical data for evidence of a
hydraulic connection between the Berea and Cuyahoga formation. EPA concluded
that there appears to be no evidence that a hydraulic connection exists at the
site, but identified limitations in the data that do not make this conclusion
definitive.”
On page 24 of the December 19, 2017 Director Butler letter to the Mayor of Piketon,
the US EPA Region V makes the following assertion regarding the potential for
contaminants leaching into surface water and the limitations of the RI/FS investigation
of the OSWDF area,

The above captioned portion of the US EPA Region V Report on the DOE investigation
undertaken at the OSWDF reflects the agency’s concern that the proposed low-level
nuclear and hazardous waste landfill could leak radioactive and hazardous chemical
contaminants into the surface water media. In addition, the US EPA Region V is also

 not willing to conclude that the Berea formation will be protected from the landfill
leachate. Further, US EPA describes in detail the Agency’s concerns on the scope of
investigation undertaken and encourages DOE to undertake a more comprehensive
investigation.
3) Bedrock Fractures: In the December 19, 2017 letter, Director Butler states the
following with respect to bedrock fractures,
“we presented in great detail evidence in the form of photographs of the rock
cores, rock quality data, and pump tests results which directly counter the claims
of the bedrock being “highly fractured” and unsuitable.”
In Director Butler’s letter of November 24, 2017 to Senator Portman, he wrote the
following statement regarding the bedrock fractures,
“Regarding boring logs, many of the fractures noted by the Village of Piketon
were mechanical fractures caused by drilling, and not inherent fractures in the
geology. For example, using photographs of soil bore 35 (SB-35), the core is not
highly fractured. However, the SB-35 boring log prepared by DOE’s consultant
(i.e. FBP) indicated many fractures being logged. The duly noted fractures were
mechanical breaks with no obvious staining, which are indicative of breaks that
occur during the coring process instead of being pre-existing fractures of the
formation.”
The Village’s consultant, The Ferguson Group, has only relied on DOE’s RI/FS data in
his analysis of the extent of bedrock fracturing at the OSWDF. He has determined that
the entire OSWDF landfill footprint will be constructed on bedrock that is fractured at
depths greater than 20 feet of ground surface. While I recognize that OH EPA does not
agree with this analysis, surely the Department would agree with the analysis
rendered by the US EPA Region V. In the US EPA Region V’s analysis of the bedrock
fracture the Agency comments specifically on SB-35 as representing natural fractures
which directly contradicts Director Butler’s analysis. US EPA Region V states the
following in the December 19, 2017 correspondence:
“USEPA could not conclusively differentiate from photographs whether a
facture or break was mechanical (i.e. formed during drilling and removal of
the rock core; was not present before drilling) or natural (i.e. formed insitu, existed prior to the investigation, and may be partially mineralized,
weathered, or sediment-filled). While the boring logs described natural
fractures as being calcite-filled (e.g. SB-24, 135’ depth) or clay-coated
(SB-35, 36.64’ depth) or exhibiting other kinds of mineralization or sediment
coating, the rock cores were not archived after the investigation for
evaluation, and these features could not be discerned from photographs.
Therefore, making deductions on the formation of fracture features with
certainty was not possible.”
Based upon US EPA Region V’s assessment of the fracturing present at the OSWDF, the
Village of Piketon remains concerned that DOE with OH EPA’s support for constructing a
low-level nuclear and hazardous waste landfill at a site that is documented to be
fractured in essentially 100% of the site area and at depths greater than 20 feet of
ground surface. This is the public record for the Area D OSWDF as presented in Boring
logs in Appendix B of the RI/FS report, and the US EPA Region V is not contradicting
this fact.

 4) Comments from the Ohio Department of Natural Resources regarding the adequacy
of placing the OSWDF at Area D: Director Butler includes in his letter that the
Department sought out review of the OSWDF investigation from the Ohio Department
of Natural Resources (DNR), Geologic Survey. He states that DNR supports OH EPA’s
conclusions, however, there are two outlying concerns I wish to note:
a) A letter has not been transmitted to the Village of Piketon on the Ohio DNR
position on the OSWDF, and
b) The OH DNR website contradicts the representation made by Director Butler with
respect to landfill siting of the OSWDF.
The following URL site, http://
geosurvey.ohiodnr.gov/environmental-geology/solid-waste-disposal describes the
conditions in which DNR will support the placement of a landfill in the state of
Ohio.
Geologic and Hydrologic Considerations in Solid-Waste Management
“Waste disposal on regulatory floodplains and areas within 200 feet of streams,
lakes, or wetlands is prohibited…..In the site-selection process of locating a
landfill, regulatory criteria such as those previously described are useful in the
preliminary screening or reconnaissance phase of site selection. All areas which
cannot meet these criteria are eliminated automatically from further
consideration. Areas not excluded during this process become candidates for
detailed geologic and hydrologic assessment.”
The Village of Piketon notes that OH EPA has already granted a waiver to DOE for
encroachment of a stream within 200 feet at the OSWDF, and the DOE has
apparently given itself an “allowance” for meeting the TSCA landfill siting
requirement of maintaining a 50 foot separation from the bottom of the liner to
the historical high groundwater mark. The Village’s consultant has documented that
essentially the entire footprint of the OSWDF fails to meet the TSCA 50 foot separation
requirement with the most shallow groundwater elevation recorded by DOE at 9 feet
below ground surface. Based on the DNR perspective presented on their web site with
respect to landfill siting, the OSWDF should have been eliminated from consideration.
Summary
The comments offered by the US EPA in their December 19, 2017 Report to the Ohio EPA on
the OSWDF reinforce the Village of Piketon’s concerns with having a low-level nuclear and
hazardous waste landfill constructed at Area D. I urge both the DOE and Ohio EPA to take a
step back and give careful consideration to the consequences if your analysis – your
perspective – turns out to be wrong and this landfill starts leaking nuclear waste into the
surface water. This has already happened at Oak Ridge and I’m certain DOE thought they
got it right when they built that landfill too. Let’s error on the side of caution and complete
the necessary studies, or do as DOE decided to do at Oak Ridge which was to choose to find/
investigate an alternative site.
I want to work this out with all parties and hope we can come to agreement on a path
forward. Let’s not dig in our collective heels on hardened positions. The people of Southern
Ohio deserve our collective best efforts. I await your response to my concerns and my offer
to work with you to develop a consensus approach.
Sincerely

 Billy Spencer
Mayor
Attachment
Pc: The Honorable Robert Portman, US Senator
The Honorable Sherrod Brown, US Senator
The Honorable John Kasich, Governor of Ohio
The Honorable Brad Wenstrup, Congressman – District 2