{"id":4652,"date":"2019-05-19T14:47:40","date_gmt":"2019-05-19T20:47:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/?p=4652"},"modified":"2019-05-19T14:49:36","modified_gmt":"2019-05-19T20:49:36","slug":"this-town-didnt-want-to-be-a-radioactive-waste-dump-the-government-is-giving-them-no-choice","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/?p=4652","title":{"rendered":"This Town Didn’t Want to Be a Radioactive Waste Dump. The Government Is Giving Them No Choice."},"content":{"rendered":"\n

May 16, 2019 – By Yessenia Funes in Earther<\/a><\/strong>
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

PIKETON, OHIO<\/strong>\u2014David and Pam Mills have grown tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers, and okra on their secluded Appalachian property for about 18 years now. This will be the first year the retired couple doesn\u2019t. They just can\u2019t trust their soil anymore. Not with what\u2019s being built barely a five-minute walk away.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
The view from the backyard of David and Pam Mills, where the Department of Energy is building a giant nuclear waste dump site in Piketown, Ohio.\u00a0Photo: Matthew Ashton (Earther)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Past the shed and through the gray, bare trees that grow in the backyard, bulldozers and dump trucks are busy scooping tan-colored dirt atop an overlooking hill on a brisk January afternoon. They\u2019re constructing a 100-acre landfill for radioactive waste. The machines are there most days until the sun goes down; David, 60, hasn\u2019t been able to escape their roaring for two years. Wearing a black-and-gray baseball cap, he drives his rusty orange tractor down the hill, against the crunch of dead leaves, to take a closer look. On a short metal fence marking where the Mills property ends, a sign reads, \u201cU.S. PROPERTY, NO TRESPASSING,\u201d in big, bold letters with red, white, and blue borders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Department of Energy (DOE) owns what sits on the other side: the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant. The DOE built the 1,200-acre facility, located just outside town of Piketon about an hour\u2019s drive south of Columbus in southcentral Ohio, in 1954, as one of three plants<\/a> it was using to enrich uranium and develop the country\u2019s nuclear weapons arsenal. Now, the agency is trying to clean it up. The landfill\u2014or \u201con-site waste disposal cell,\u201d as the department calls it\u2014would extend about 60-feet down and house 2 million tons of low-level radioactive waste comprised of soil, asbestos, concrete, and debris. It\u2019ll be outfitted with a clay liner, a plastic cover layer, and a treatment system for any water that leaches through it. When finished, it will be one of the largest nuclear waste dumps east of the Mississippi.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Waste could begin entering it as soon as this fall.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
The clean up of the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Piketon, Ohio, is spurring the construction of an on-site landfill that community members are pushing back against.
Photo: Matthew Ashton (Earther)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Mills have never taken issue with the DOE facility, but they don\u2019t want this landfill. They\u2019d rather see all this junk shipped off to disposal sites in the Southwest, where some low-level waste has already been sent. After all, what if the landfill leaks?
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIt\u2019s gonna contaminate everything,\u201d David says, after he shows me how close the landfill sits to his property. \u201cIt\u2019s just a matter of time.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The couple is far from alone in their fears. The 2,000-strong Village of Piketon passed a resolution<\/a> in August 2017 opposing the landfill. So did the local school district<\/a> and the Pike County General Health District<\/a>, where Piketon resides. The rural, low income, and largely white county is home to more than 28,000 people across a number of small towns and cities, some of which have passed their own resolutions against this project. Driving through neighborhoods behind Piketon\u2019s main highway, lawn signs covered in red stating \u201cNO RADIOACTIVE WASTE DUMP in Pike County\u201d can be seen everywhere.\u201cThere were a lot of things they didn\u2019t know and a lot of things they didn\u2019t worry about that much, again, in the drive to develop nuclear weapons and to build up the nuclear arsenal. The legacy of that inattention is what we\u2019re dealing with today.\u201d – Edwin Lyman, senior scientist and acting director of the Union of Concerned Scientists\u2019 Nuclear Safety Project<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In January, the Village of Piketon approved the purchase<\/a> of a $5,000 air quality monitor to track any potential contamination resulting from the landfill\u2019s construction and the cleanup of the rest of the site. By March, Scioto Township, also in Pike County, purchased<\/a> its own air quality monitor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While Piketon\u2019s air quality monitor should be set up within the next month, a separate analysis is already raising alarm bells. The Zahn\u2019s Corner Middle School, which sits barely a 10-minute drive away from the plant, closed on May 13<\/a> after university researchers detected enriched uranium inside the building, and traces of neptunium appeared in readings from an air quality monitor right outside the school. While the DOE believes everything\u2019s fine, the Pike County General Health District has been calling<\/a> for the department to halt work while it investigates the matter. Townspeople worry this contamination is a direct result of recent activity at the plant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

All of this highlights deep public distrust over the nuclear facility\u2019s cleanup plan. And after reviewing thousands of pages of documents\u2014including independent studies, the project\u2019s record of decision, and the remedial investigation and feasibility studies that went into writing it\u2014to understand the risks, it\u2019s clear the public isn\u2019t worried for nothing.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Researchers just found traces of enriched uranium and neptunium inside the Zahn\u2019s Corner Middle School in Piketon, Ohio, which is not far from where the landfill is being built.
Photo: Matthew Ashton (Earther)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Here\u2019s the thing: Nothing is technically illegal about the landfill. The DOE, though the polluter, is taking the lead on cleaning up the facility, and the Ohio EPA supports its plan. Whether their decision is morally right given local opposition is another matter. But this is what often happens when a corporation or governmental entity needs to dispose of toxic waste: It gets left in an overlooked town no one\u2019s heard of.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Piketon existed long before the Portsmouth facility did. The village was established in 1846 and has, largely, been a farming and logging community ever since, local county historian Jim Henry told Earther.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n
\"\"
Image: Google Maps, Shutterstock<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant\u2014locally known as the A-Plant (for Atomic Plant)\u2014was the town\u2019s first real industry. During the Cold War, the United States was in need of weapons of mass destruction, and these weapons required enriched uranium. Beginning in the early 1940s, the DOE started separating isotopes of uranium to isolate uranium-235, the one used to build nukes. Facilities like the A-Plant were tasked with doing the separation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before the A-Plant, residents had to leave the boundaries of Piketon if they wanted an industrial job, so they were glad to see it arrive. Those whom I spoke with made it sound like it gave the town a sense of patriotism.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What they, and everyone really, didn\u2019t understand at the outset of the Cold War was the lasting impacts uranium enrichment could have. Sure, scientists understood radioactive material could cause cancer, but they thought that it\u2019d take a lot<\/em> of radiation, explained Edwin Lyman, a senior scientist and acting director of the Union of Concerned Scientists\u2019 Nuclear Safety Project. Now, we know any exposure<\/a> poses a risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

\u201cThey knew certain things. There were a lot of things they didn\u2019t know and a lot of things they didn\u2019t worry about that much, again, in the drive to develop nuclear weapons and to build up the nuclear arsenal,\u201d Lyman told Earther. \u201cThe legacy of that inattention is what we\u2019re dealing with today.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Once the secrecy around what these plants were doing and their potential impacts on human health began to crack in the 1980s, facilities started to shutter, Lyman said. The public was outraged, and the anti-nuclear movement was born. That\u2019s, in part, why construction of new nuclear plants in the U.S. halted for about three decades<\/a>. Portsmouth eventually succumbed to the same fate as similar weapons enrichment facilities when it shut down in 2001. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now, more than 15 years later, the DOE is left with the task of cleaning up the more than 2 million tons of low-level radioactive waste and thousands more tons of hazardous waste the plant\u2019s operations left behind. Completing the landfill is estimated to take another 10 to 12 years, with the entire clean-up projected to go on until 2035<\/a>. Although smaller in scale, the effort draws some parallels to the clean up of Washington state\u2019s infamous Hanford site, a plutonium-enrichment facility that left behind hundreds of contaminated facilities<\/a> whose cleanup is estimated to last at least another 40 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The agency has built these on-site landfills before\u2014back in 2006<\/a> in Fernald, Ohio, and in 2002<\/a> in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, both of which also enriched uranium. The facility at Oak Ridge has resulted in mercury contamination in nearby waterways, as the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation has noted<\/a>, giving the Ohio community further pause.\u201cIt\u2019s impossible to guess the cost of maintaining a local landfill for hundreds of years into the future.\u201d – Kathy Setian, former Superfund project manager for EPA Region 9.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The decision to house A-Plant\u2019s low-level radioactive waste on site boiled down to money. The DOE says it will save $218 million by burying the waste on site versus shipping it to facilities in the Southwest desert, according to a record of decision released in June 2015<\/a>. However, if the landfill\u2019s construction schedule were to extend by four to five times, the cost\u2014currently estimated at $882 million\u2014would rise significantly. And the Government Accountability Office found earlier this year<\/a> that the DOE has a history of underestimating costs and timelines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIn terms of \u2018too expensive,\u2019 I would expect the community to push back against that,\u201d Kathy Setian, who worked for over 20 years as a Superfund project manager for EPA Region 9<\/a>, told Earther. \u201cIt\u2019s impossible to guess the cost of maintaining a local landfill for hundreds of years into the future.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Money aside, shipping radioactive waste off-site has other benefits. Some 24 wetlands and 38 streams sit near the landfill. To bury the waste on-site, the DOE must waive a requirement that prevents it from constructing the landfill within 200 feet of these kinds of water bodies. The department can do so because even though it\u2019s not technically a Superfund, it\u2019s being regulated as one, a common practice for such DOE facilities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The DOE wouldn\u2019t comment on why it chose this site despite the nearby streams nor would it say how that impacts environmental risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the local hydrology is a key point of concern among community members. The region has a rainy climate, and it\u2019s been seeing above-average<\/a> levels of precipitation in recent years. More than anything, it\u2019s the idea of rainfall causing the landfill\u2019s contents to leak into the groundwater that makes people so nervous.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Elizabeth Lamerson is one of those people. The 40-year-old is a former environmental specialist in hazardous waste management with the Ohio EPA office. She was also an employee at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant during its early years of clean up, where she helped ship low-level radioactive waste out West. Her husband still works there. But in recent years, they\u2019ve both become fierce opponents of the plan to bury the waste on site. Their home, which they had built for them and their two sons, sits within 2 miles of the plant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Elizabeth Lamerson, a resident who opposes the landfill, lives within two miles of the plant and used to work there. Photo: Matthew Ashton (Earther)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

In fact, Lamerson\u2019s visitors have to cross a huge \u201cNO TRESPASSING\u201d sign when they turn off a highway to reach her house. Other signs shouting \u201cPublic Access Not Permitted\u201d in red cover what were once outposts for security when the plant was still cranking out enriched uranium. There\u2019s even an open sliding fence on the road reminding guests that the DOE could, in theory, lock it shut behind them if it wanted to.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lamerson is soft-spoken and warm, but she speaks with authority. Since leaving her job at the plant nearly five years ago, she\u2019s met with nearby mayors, school boards, and county commissioners, convincing them to sign resolutions opposing the facility. She\u2019s made it her mission to inform everyone she can that Piketon\u2019s future is at stake.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lamerson has even purchased her own $5,000 air quality monitor to test for enriched uranium and other radioactive elements near her home. The Lamersons don\u2019t want to move, but they are willing to do so if that air monitor picks up a dangerous reading. They don\u2019t want their kids to get sick.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When Lamerson walked into the Chillicothe City Council Chambers some 20 miles north of Piketon on a winter day back in 2017, she was surprised to see table-size 3-D models of the landfill. Posters colored black, white, orange, and blue stretched from floor to ceiling, showing what it could look like. She was there to inform public officials of the threat the proposed landfill could pose to her family and friends and to urge them to sign a resolution against it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Despite the fancy cut-outs put together by DOE contractor Fluor-BWXT, Chillicothe city council members passed a resolution that day against the waste cell. And it wouldn\u2019t be the last: at least 11 counties, townships, city councils, and school boards in southcentral Ohio have come out against the project. Unfortunately, the plan was set by the time these resolutions passed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here\u2019s the thing: Many residents didn\u2019t even know about the landfill until after the DOE had already decided on it. The public had between November 2014 and March 2015 to comment on the project. The department published its record of decision in favor of the landfill on June 30, 2015. Then, the backlash hit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The plan does have its supporters. The DOE received 507 comments from residents, elected officials, and technical experts, and most were in favor of the landfill because they believed it was \u201cthe safe option,\u201d as one business manager said, or because they believed it\u2019d help spur local job creation. Many comments voiced that keeping the waste on site seemed like the only way to clean up the site.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Pike County Board of Commissioners also supports it. Its members believe that those concerned are in the minority, and they also see the landfill as the only real way to clean the facility up. Moreover, they trust the DOE and the Ohio EPA to do their jobs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cNobody wants a waste cell, but it\u2019s the most practical thing to move forward,\u201d said Commissioner Blaine Beekman during a county commissioner\u2019s meeting in Piketon that Earther attended. Commissioner Tony Montgomery agreed, saying that while \u201cwe wouldn\u2019t want another […] regular trash dump in the county again if given the choice,\u201d he sees no other option.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The newest commissioner, Jerry Miller, seems to feel differently. He was adamantly opposed to the landfill during his campaign. He\u2019s still, recently, been posting Facebook statuses that carry more criticism of the cell and DOE than his colleagues. He didn\u2019t return Earther\u2019s request for comment, though. Neither did the DOE when asked to describe the steps it took to receive public input for its decision.\u201cDOE has a history in this community of not listening. DOE is not a popular government agency in this community.\u201d – David Manuta, former chief scientist at Portsmouth.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Regardless of where they stand on the project, everyone says they want what\u2019s best for Piketon. But a lot of com.munity members worry that the town will continue to be impoverished and devoid of business opportunities so long as it\u2019s home to the landfill. Who\u2019s going to want to invest in a place that\u2019s a nuclear dumpsite?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And Piketon officials don\u2019t trust the DOE at all. Neither does the plant\u2019s former chief scientist, David Manuta, who worked there for nearly 11 years and has seen firsthand the operations that went on. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cDOE has a history in this community of not listening,\u201d Manuta told Earther. \u201cDOE is not a popular government agency in this community.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Piketon\u2019s distrust runs so deep that Mayor Billy Spencer hired an independent contractor, the Ferguson Group, in November 2016 to review the department\u2019s record of decision on the landfill. And it found that the record of decision contained some errors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Ferguson Group used the same data DOE collected to support its final decision. The contractor took a close look at the bedrock and water table at the proposed landfill site, which can help indicate the threat of potential contamination should the cell\u2019s 3-foot-thick clay layer liner and water treatment system fail. It found that, by the DOE\u2019s own accounting, the water table was fewer than 50 feet from the landfill in some sections\u2014the minimum required distance under federal regulations. Streams were flowing near the proposed site. The bedrock was full of fractures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fractures refer to any cracks in the bedrock that could allow water (and any contaminants in that water) to travel into groundwater. An ideal location for such a site would have few to no fractures to prevent this from happening.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That\u2019s exactly how the DOE portrayed the landfill in its record of decision. After taking thousands of core samples throughout four study areas, the DOE selected its current site. It asserts that the site\u2019s geology is the safest among the options examined because it has \u201ccompetent unfractured bedrock formations.\u201d It wrote, \u201cAt depths greater than 20 ft, the bedrock was found to be intact with no fractures or cracks.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But, well, this isn\u2019t true\u2014not even by the DOE\u2019s data. As the Ferguson Group points out in its analysis, fractures deeper than 20 feet exist throughout the entirety of where the landfill will be built, with some reaching as deep as 70 feet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThis is the craziness of it all. They go out there and investigate this what we call \u2018ideal site,\u2019 right?\u201d Karl Kalbacher, the Ferguson Group consultant Piketon hired for this analysis, told me. \u201cThere\u2019s groundwater just oozing out of the ground, which tells you there\u2019s a very shallow water table. They document that there are streams that are flowing through the proposed site area.\u201d\u201cThey know that most people aren\u2019t going to read [these documents]. And the people that do read it, they\u2019re counting on them not understanding.\u201d – Karl Kalbacher, independent consultant with the Ferguson Group<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a letter obtained by Earther<\/a>, former Ohio EPA Director Craig Butler told the Village of Piketon in 2017 that these fractures resulted from drilling the core samples, not from the geology. But the EPA itself could not confirm this interpretation in its assessment of the core photographs, per the letter. The letter also notes that the EPA \u201cconcluded that there appears to be no evidence that a hydraulic connection exists [between the landfill site and the aquifer], but identified limitations in the data that do not make this conclusion definitive.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

An independent geologist who requested anonymity concurred that it was difficult to determine whether the fractures were naturally occurring or an artifact of drilling based on the boring logs. He agreed that there are \u201cmost certainly fractures,\u201d but added that it would be hard to say they are definitively associated with a higher risk of contamination and that the clay above the rock could help prevent it. 
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When reached for comment on the fractures and discrepancies, Heidi Griesmer, Deputy Director for Communication for the Ohio EPA reiterated that the agency concurred with, and continues to support, the DOE\u2019s record of decision \u201cbased on a thorough review of all the hydrogeologic data collected during the RI\/FS [the initial analysis], including but not limited to: core samples, boring logs, pump tests and geophysical tests.\u201d
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cOhio EPA also participated in various meetings and site inspections to field verify the data,\u201d Griesmer continued. \u201cUltimately, Ohio EPA determined that the proposed site meets the State of Ohio siting criteria for a waste disposal landfill\u201d with the exception of its proximity to streams, for which the project was granted a state exemption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The DOE provided no further comment on the matter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The fact that bedrock fractures exist at depths where the landfill is being excavated doesn\u2019t automatically make this location dangerous. The Ohio EPA, which is the lead regulator for the facility\u2019s hazardous waste permit, clearly doesn\u2019t think it\u2019s a problem. But Kalbacher asserts that the possibility the DOE could be giving false information to the public is<\/em> dangerous. The mayor of Piketon agrees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThey know that most people aren\u2019t going to read [these documents],\u201d he told Earther. \u201cAnd the people that do read it, they\u2019re counting on them not understanding.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To opponents of the landfill, all these fractures and discrepancies raise concerns about the DOE\u2019s commitment to keeping the region contaminant-free. So does the recent independent analysis from Northern Arizona University<\/a> that prompted the closure of Piketon\u2019s Zahn\u2019s Corner Middle School this week. That analysis found that the Scioto River and village creeks, as well as dust and soils from the school and private homes, are currently contaminated with enriched uranium, neptunium, and plutonium\u2014all radioactive carcinogens. While the analysis did not measure concentrations, it found that much of this contamination could, indeed, be traced back to the plant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
The view from Perimeter Road, which wraps around the entire Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, and also can take visitors to Elizabeth Lamerson\u2019s homPhoto: Matthew Ashton (Earther)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

In a statement emailed to Earther, the DOE said those concentrations are very low. \u201cRoutine air samples in the area of DOE\u2019s Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Piketon revealed trace amounts of two radiological isotopes that were more than one thousand to ten thousand times below the established threshold of public health concern,\u201d the statement reads. \u201cDOE treats all detections seriously\u2013even those that are at such low levels.\u201d
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe Department of Energy is committed to the safety, health and protection of our workforce, the general public and the environment at all our sites,\u201d the statement went on. \u201cAccordingly, we are working together with the local officials and stakeholders to engage an independent third party to perform an additional analysis of the air and ground readings to properly assess the situation. We are confident that those findings will allay any cause for further concern.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Regardless of whether the DOE is concerned, the evidence suggests demolition of the plant and construction of the landfill may already be spreading some contaminants via the air. Add in the threat of the landfill impacting groundwater, and opponents see several additional health risks in a regional already overburdened by cancer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pike County\u2019s cancer rate of 487.9 per 100,000 incidences is higher than the state average<\/a> of 459.8 per 100,000 incidences. In fact, all the counties surrounding Portsmouth\u2014Vinton, Ross, Highland, Adams, Scioto\u2014have some of the highest rates in the state<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jeanie Williams, a 63-year-old who\u2019s lived in a spacious trailer home since 1972 right alongside the plant\u2014not far from where the Mills live\u2014knows that statistic all too personally. Cancer took Williams\u2019 brother in 1999. Her dad worked at the plant and died of lung disease about 10 years ago. Her stepfather worked there and died last year from cancer. Her daughter is battling colon cancer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Williams herself was diagnosed with multiple myeloma, a cancer that takes over the bone marrow, in 2014. She can\u2019t be sure what caused it but fears it has to do with where she lives. It\u2019s why she doesn\u2019t enjoy sitting on the porch swing on her lovely deck anymore. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cEvery time I go to take a deep breath, I don\u2019t know if I\u2019m doing more damage,\u201d she said, as her fireplace roared, keeping her warm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

High levels of cancer in Piketon could be due to any number of things, said Michael Sarap, the chair for the state\u2019s Commission on Cancer, including high smoking rates<\/a>\u2014the poorest counties in Ohio see a quarter of their constituents smoking\u2014and lack of healthcare access. However, exposure to radioactive material could be responsible for some of the cancer, too, Sarap said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe difficulty is in proving that exposure specifically caused a cancer in a specific individual especially when the population is reporting a number of different types of cancer,\u201d he wrote in an email to Earther.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The state health department isn\u2019t aware of any community-wide surveys or studies conducted to determine the role the A-Plant may or may not play in the region\u2019s cancer rates. Conducting such a study would fall under the jurisdiction of the local health departments, said Ohio Health Department spokesperson J.C. Benton in an email to Earther. Since one was never done, all people can do is wonder.\u201cIt is the type of cancer they are seeing from people in our area that is very alarming.\u201d – Matt Brewster, Pike County health commissioner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cA study focusing on cancers that can be attributed to radiation exposure or exposure to transuranics for those who live within a certain distance from the site should be performed,\u201d said Pike County Health Commissioner Matt Brewster, in an email to Earther. \u201cI have heard numerous times from various doctors that it isn\u2019t necessarily the incidence rate that has them concerned, but it is the type of cancer they are seeing from people in our area that is very alarming.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For those who\u2019ve worked at a DOE facility handling radioactive material, like Williams\u2019 father and stepfather, the link is far more clear cut. In fact, sickness was so common in all DOE facilities\u2014not only those enriching uranium\u2014across the country that the Department of Labor created the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program<\/a> in 2001 to help provide financial compensation for it. This program has paid out more than $900 million<\/a> to Portsmouth employees alone. More than 5,000 Portsmouth employees<\/a> or their families have received up to $250,000 (not including medical expenses) each to make up for the bills and grief that come with a major illness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But people like Williams don\u2019t qualify for such programs. She never worked there.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pam Mills did work there, but it wasn\u2019t she who got sick; her 9-year-old nephew did. She lost him to bone cancer more than 10 years ago. She and her husband lost a dog to cancer, too. The couple wonders if the little creek that runs behind their home along the facility could\u2019ve carried any toxic contaminants into their family\u2019s lives. Both their pet and beloved nephew used to play there. They may never know: The DOE only began sharing<\/a> annual environment assessments in 2010.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Elizabeth Lamerson doesn\u2019t know if she and her neighbors will succeed in stopping the DOE from dumping radioactive waste in their backyards. The ground has already been excavated. The department is moving quickly to complete the landfill\u2019s construction.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No one\u2019s decided to take legal action, but that feels like the only way to stop the DOE at this point. Kalbacher, at least, believes the Village of Piketon has grounds to sue because the DOE waived that federal environmental law that would\u2019ve put a safe distance between the landfill and nearby streams, an ability typically reserved for Superfunds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n

\u201cI don\u2019t think it\u2019s appropriate for any state or federal environmental law or regulation to be waived when it comes to the citing of a low-level nuclear and hazardous waste landfill,\u201d Kalbacher told Earther. \u201cThere is another answer to this problem, and it is not what they are proposing.\u201d\u201cHonestly, Piketon versus United States government? How much money do I have to spend compared to how much money will they spend?\u201d – Village of Piketon Mayor Billy Spencer<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He\u2019s recommended Mayor Spencer file a citizen\u2019s lawsuit related to the federal Superfund law the DOE is using. Litigation takes money, though, and for a small town like Piketon, taking on the DOE would be a serious investment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cHonestly, Piketon versus United States government?\u201d Spencer said. \u201cHow much money do I have to spend compared to how much money will they spend?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For now, many residents of Piketon feel stuck. The situation has cast a cloud over the community, and the eeriness is tough to shake off as I leave the Lamersons\u2019 home.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To reach the main highway I take Perimeter Road, the single-lane two-way street that wraps around the plant. <\/em>Though the woods around the quarantined, fenced-off facility are pitch black, fluorescent lights shine on every corner. Despite being the lone driver on the road, I almost feel like I\u2019m being watched\u2014as if I\u2019m doing something criminal by simply driving so close to the plant\u2014as I scurry to get away.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Another view of the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant. Photo: Matthew Ashton (Earther)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Will this mess end when the last of the waste is buried and the machines fall silent? Or will that only be the beginning? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

David and Pam Mills just want to go back to the summer days when they could barbecue on the grill out back and invite friends over. They\u2019ve lost their peace of mind. Pam is willing to move and leave it all behind, but David hesitates. He sits at his wobbly kitchen table and glances out the window into the yard, where the sounds of construction vehicles and dirt being excavated are inescapable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That\u2019s an option I, as a visitor, have: to leave. But it\u2019s not so simple for folks who live here. Some don\u2019t have the money. Even for those that do, turning your back on your home is tough. And there\u2019s always hope that things will change; that the specter of pollution will go away and that the economy will finally flourish.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n


<\/div><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

May 16, 2019 – By Yessenia Funes in Earther PIKETON, OHIO\u2014David and Pam Mills have grown tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers, and okra on their secluded Appalachian property for about 18 years now. This will be the first year the retired couple … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[53,450,449,28],"class_list":["post-4652","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-nuclear-energy","tag-ohio-valley","tag-piketon","tag-pollution"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4652","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4652"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4652\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4668,"href":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4652\/revisions\/4668"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4652"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4652"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/valleywatch.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4652"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}