Kenneth Fletcher
WC Monitor
4/24/2015
Review and design work for a long-term storage facility for elemental mercury would move ahead with $1.3 million in funding included in the House version of the Fiscal Year 2016 Energy and Water spending bill that cleared the Appropriations Committee this week. In September 2013, DOE released a final Environmental Impact Statement for the Storage and Management of Elemental Mercury, though a schedule for a Record of Decision finalizing a storage site remains uncertain. The funding in the House bill, though, would “allow the Department to perform the requisite environmental reviews and conduct other design and planning activities as needed to produce a record of decision,” states the report accompanying the House bill. It also requires a DOE report within 180 days on the proposed facility.
DOE’s EIS names as a preferred alternative the Waste Control Specialists site near Andrews, Texas. A site is needed because of the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008, which requires DOE to designate a facility to manage and store elemental mercury for the long-term. Approximately 1,300 tons of DOE mercury is currently stored in 35,000 of the 3-L flasks at the Y–12 National Security Complex in Oak Ridge, Tenn. DOE analyzed potential storage sites for storage containments able to house 10,000 tons. Alternatives considered three potential sites at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant—Section 10, Section 20, and Section 35—that would involve construction of new buildings. DOE would build a new facility at WCS, but with minor modification an existing building located there could also provide storage of up 2,200 tons of elemental mercury.
House Panel Seeking Answers on DOE’s Options
The House panel outlined answers it is seeking from DOE on the site in the report it has requested. DOE would need to report on “its preferred alternative, other alternatives that were considered, a rough order of magnitude cost estimate for new construction of a mercury storage facility if new construction is a feasible alternative, and an estimated fee structure to recover the costs of operations and/or construction of such facility,“ the House report states. “The report shall also identify whether there are any potential conflicts that may be encountered regarding competition with private sector disposal and storage facilities.”