Skip to Main Content

Find COVID-19 Information and Resources
TDEC COVID-19 Response and Resources

EMDF Documents

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) released the Proposed Plan for public comment on September 7, 2018.  DOE received citizen comments regarding the proposed plan through Jan. 9, 2019.

At the request of the Sierra Club, the public was invited to join representatives from the Tennessee Department of Environment & Conservation (TDEC) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for informal discussions about the proposed facility at the TDEC office in Oak Ridge on October 11, 2018. A fact sheet and presentations from the meeting are available for your review.

On November 7, 2018, the DOE hosted a public hearing about plans for the proposed new mixed-waste landfill in Oak Ridge. DOE presented information about the Proposed Plan and provided an opportunity for the public to comment on the proposal. The November 7, 2018 meeting transcript is available for review. 

The documents listed below provide background information to assist the public in understanding DOE's Proposed Plan for the Environmental Management Disposal Facility (EMDF).

Informal Draft 0 (D0) Focused Feasibility Study, September 2011 - DOE provided the D0 report as an informal draft. It is not posted here because it was not subject to the document review protocols specified in the Federal Facility Agreement (FFA). TDEC provided informal comments to DOE via email. DOE, EPA, and TDEC met multiple times during 2011-2012 and were unable to resolve comments on the informal D0 report.

At this stage of the project, DOE called the proposed landfill the "CERCLA Disposal Facility (CDF)".

Draft 1 (D1), September 2012 (transmitted September 25, 2012)

EPA CommentsJanuary 2013

DOE Responses, June 2013 (see page 630 of 675)

TDEC CommentsFebruary 2013

DOE ResponsesJune 2013 (see page 656 of 675)

DOE, EPA, and TDEC met multiple times during 2012-2013 and were unable to resolve comments on the D1 report.

Draft 2 (D2)June 2013 (transmitted June 14, 2013)

EPA CommentsAugust 15, 2013

TDEC CommentsJuly 15, 2013

TDEC CommentsSeptember 9, 2013

DOE, EPA, and TDEC met multiple times during 2013-2014 and were unable to resolve comments on the D2 report.

Draft 3 (D3)March 2015 (transmitted April 1, 2015)

EPA CommentsAugust 6, 2015 [refers to D3 as D1 per agreement with DOE]

DOE ResponsesMarch 2016 (see page 1264 of 1352)

TDEC CommentsAugust 6, 2015

DOE ResponsesMarch 2016 (see page 1297 of 1352)

DOE, EPA, and TDEC met multiple times during 2015-2016 and were unable to resolve comments on the D3 report.

Draft 4 (D4), March 2016 (transmitted March 16, 2016)

D4 Erratum, March 23, 2016

TDEC LetterMarch 10, 2016 - DOE’s proposed evaluation of mercury in-cell macroencapsulation should not be in the D4 RI/FS report.

EPA CommentsMay 20, 2016

DOE ResponsesFebruary 2017 (see page 897 of 932)

TDEC CommentsMay 16, 2016

DOE ResponsesFebruary 2017 (see page 917 of 932)

TDEC LetterJune 17, 2016 - Response to DOE questions on EMDF

DOE LetterJuly 7, 2016 - DOE committed to independent CERCLA and DOE Order processes

TDEC PositionsAugust 24, 2016 - TDEC Positions on DOE Responses

TDEC LetterAugust 24, 2016  - TDEC Proposed Path Forward

EPA/TDEC LetterDecember 9, 2016 - EPA/TDEC Positions, per DOE Request

DOE LetterDecember 20, 2016 - Proposed Dispute Resolution Agreement (DRA) . The DRA was not accepted by EPA or TDEC

EPA LetterJanuary 6, 2017 

TDEC LetterJanuary 13, 2017 - DOE, EPA, and TDEC met multiple times during Summer/Fall 2016 and were unable to resolve comments on the D4 report, including issues that persisted through the D0, D1, D2, D3, and D4 draft reports.

Draft 5 (D5)February 8, 2017 (transmitted February 28, 2017)

EPA National Remedy Review Board RecommendationsApril 4, 2017

EPA Region 4 Responses, April 19, 2018

TDEC CommentsApril 21, 2017

DOE ResponsesJuly 18, 2017

DOE Formal DisputeMay 22, 2017- DOE invoked formal dispute over D5 RI/FS & remedy selection process

EPA LetterJune 21, 2017

DOE Formal Dispute Elevation , June 30, 2017- DOE elevated formal dispute to Senior Executive Committee (SEC)

EPA/TDEC LetterJuly  24, 2017 - Dispute Position

Dispute Resolution Agreement (DRA)December 7, 2017 - All three parties signed a Dispute Resolution Agreement (DRA) on December 7, 2017 agreeing to a path forward that allowed DOE to release a Proposed Plan for public comment based on DOE commitments to meet terms and conditions of the DRA.

D5 “Errata” pagesJanuary 11, 2018

TDEC CommentsJanuary 23, 2018

Limited Phase 1 Site Characterization Plan for East Bear Creek Valley Site (Site 5), October 22, 2013

TDEC Approval, November 27, 2013

EPA Comments, December 19, 2013

East Bear Creek Valley Site (Site 5) Characterization Report, March 2016 

See pages 698-879 in the East Bear Creek Valley Site (Site 5) Characterization Report for the following documents:

Appendix E – Attachment A: Phase I Characterization Report of the Environmental Management Disposal Facility Site in East Bear Creek Valley (Site 5)

Appendix E – Attachment B: Addendum to the Phase I Characterization Report of the Environmental Management Disposal Facility Option 5 Site in East Bear Creek Valley

EPA/TDEC Statement of Work (SOW), August 8, 2017 - Draft proposal for DOE to evaluate site conditions and siting requirements; incorporated in the December 7, 2017, Dispute Resolution Agreement (DRA) for the D5 RI/FS.

Draft 1 (D1) Phase 1 Field Sampling Plan (FSP)August 2017 (transmitted October 4, 2017)

TDEC ApprovalNovember 9, 2017

EPA ApprovalNovember 8, 2017

On December 7, 2017, the Dispute Resolution Agreement (DRA) for the D5 RI/FS stated that the Proposed Plan will include a TDEC/EPA approved Field Sampling Plan (FSP) as an appendix.

In accordance with the August 2017 SOW, which highlighted the need for data collection during the winter of 2017-2018, DOE prepared the D1 FSP in August 2017. DOE transmitted the D1 FSP to EPA and TDEC for review in October 2017. TDEC and EPA approved the D1 FSP in November 2017 to expedite data collection during the winter of 2017-2018. DOE  revised the approved FSP from December 2017 through April 2018.

Draft 2 (D2) Phase 1 Field Sampling Plan (FSP), December 20, 2017

TDEC Comments, January 16, 2018

EPA CommentsMarch 21, 2018

Draft 2 (D2) Phase 1 Field Sampling Plan (FSP)March 2018 (transmitted April 9, 2018)

D2 Errata PagesApril 26, 2018

TDEC ApprovalMay 7, 2018

EPA ApprovalMay 7, 2018

Technical Memorandum 1 (TM-1), July 2018 - DOE presents CBCV Site 7c data from part of March and April 2018.

TDEC CommentsJuly 26, 2018

EPA CommentsAugust 16, 2018

TDEC and EPA comments are based on a “pre-published” version that DOE transmitted on July 5, 2017. DOE provided associated data in electronic format on June 14, 2018

DOE Responses, June 11, 2019

Technical Memorandum 2 (TM-2), May 2019 - DOE presents CBCV Site 7c data from Spring 2018 through Spring 2019

Transmittal Letter, June 7, 2019

TDEC Comments, August 28, 2019

DOE Responses, December 9, 2019

EPA Comments, August 29, 2019

DOE Responses, November 25, 2019

Draft 1 (D1)June 2016 (transmitted June 28, 2016)

TDEC LetterAugust 24, 2016

EPA LetterJuly 7, 2016

Draft 2 (D2)June 2018 (transmitted June 5, 2018)

TDEC Informal Dispute, July 6, 2018

DOE Formal Dispute, July 20, 2018 

TDEC Formal DisputeJuly 30, 2018

EPA Informal DisputeJuly 10, 2018

Dispute Resolution Agreement (DRA), September 5, 2018 - DOE, EPA, and TDEC signed a Dispute Resolution Agreement (DRA) on September 5, 2018 agreeing that the Proposed Plan is approved for issuance and public comment and acknowledging resolution of the Formal Dispute regarding the Proposed Plan.

Draft 2 (D2) Revision 1 (R1)September 2018 (transmitted September 7, 2018) - DOE issued this version of the Proposed Plan for public review/comment.

EMDF Fact Sheet: Tennessee “State Acceptance”, October 11, 2018

Public hearing transcriptNovember 7, 2018 - DOE hosted a public hearing to present information about the Proposed Plan and provide an opportunity for the public to comment on the proposal.

Oak Ridge City Council Working Group meeting, November 27, 2018 – The city invited a DOE representative to present additional information and answer questions from City Council members about the Proposed Plan. A video of this meeting has been posted by the city.

Anderson County Commission meeting, December 3, 2018 – Citizens asked the Anderson County Commission to request a 90-day extension of the public comment period for the Proposed Plan. Commissioners passed such a resolution, and the DOE subsequently granted a 30-day extension through January 9, 2019. The County posted a video. Discussion of the proposed EMDF is during the following time segment (approximately): 00:34:00 – 01:00:45.

Anderson County Commission meeting, December 17, 2018 – Anderson County invited a DOE representative to present information about the Proposed Plan. The County posted a video. Discussion of the proposed EMDF is during the following time segments (approximately):

- 00:07:30 - 00:38:00 DOE Presentation

 - 00:50:00 - 01:08:00 Citizen Input

- 02:48:30 - 02:59:00 Commissioner Discussion & Vote to Host a Workshop on January 3, 2019 @ 6:00 pm at the Anderson County Courthouse (Room 312)

Anderson County Commission / Operations Committee meeting, January 14, 2019 – DOE’s proposed EMDF landfill was discussed by Anderson County Commissioners, citizens, representatives of the City of Oak Ridge, the Oak Ridge Environmental Quality Advisory Board, and TDEC. The County posted a video. This meeting followed a January 7, 2019 Commission workshop to hear input from the public. Discussion of the proposed EMDF is during the following time segment (approximately): 00:07:00-00:43:45.

Anderson County Commission meeting, January 22, 2019 – DOE’s proposed EMDF landfill was discussed by Anderson County Commissioners and citizens. The County posted a video. Discussion of the proposed EMDF is during the following time segments (approximately):

- 00:03:25 - 00:07:40 Citizen Input

- 01:44:25 - 01:46:30 General Discussion by Commissioners

 

Regulatory Positions and Key Concerns

TDEC Letter: FFA Agreements for the Proposed EMDF ROD, February 14, 2019

TDEC Letter: Critical Issues Related to the CERCLA Process, April 17, 2019

TDEC/EPA Letter: TDEC-EPA Request for Site Characterization Report (TM-2) & Model Information, May 2, 2019

TDEC Letter: Groundwater Conditions at the Proposed EMDF, July 8, 2019

EPA Letter: Request DOE Postpone Draft (D1) ROD pending FFS Dispute Resolution, July 25, 2019

EPA Comments from the Preliminary Groundwater Model Design Meeting for the Central Bear Creek Valley Site 7c, July 30, 2019

EPA/TDEC Letter: Recommended ROD Language & Process, October 9, 2019

Mercury-bearing Mixed Waste

Strategic Plan for Mercury Remediation at Y-12 (D1), March 28, 2013

EPA Comments, June 7, 2013

TDEC Comments, August 26, 2013

Mercury Remediation Strategy Workshop Notes, August 13, 2013

Strategic Plan for Mercury Remediation at Y-12 (D2), January 31, 2014

EPA Comments, May 2, 2014

TDEC Comments, May 29, 2014

DOE Responses, July 22, 2014

Strategic Plan for Mercury Remediation at Y-12 (D2/R1), October 6, 2017

TDEC Comments, February 14, 2018

TDEC Letter: Proposed Evaluation of In-cell Macroencapsulation of Mercury, March 10, 2016

TDEC Comments & DOE Responses: D3 RI/FS-with mercury information highlighted, March 16, 2016

TDEC Position: Mercury Impacts in Bear Creek, June 13, 2016

TDEC Comments: D5 RI/FS, April 21, 2017 – with mercury information highlighted 

DOE Response, July 18 , 2017 – does not address TDEC’s mercury comments

D5 RI/FS Dispute Resolution Agreement – with mercury information highlighted 

TDEC Audit: Waste Lot 301.4 Disposed at EMWMF, August 29, 2017 

DOE Response, November 1, 2017

TDEC Comments: Sampling & Analysis Plan for EMWMF (D1/R1), January 25, 2018 – with mercury information highlighted 

EMDF Proposed Plan, September 7, 2018 – with mercury information highlighted

TDEC Comments: Beta 4 Waste handling Plan, December 11, 2018

TDEC Letter: DOE’s Site Treatment Plan Obligations for Mercury Mixed Waste (see page 3 of 9), December 14, 2018

DOE Response (see page 5 of 9), January 25, 2019

TDEC Response (see page 7 of 9), February 12, 2019

DOE Response (see page 1 of 9), March 28, 2019

TDEC Response, September 13, 2019

DOE Response, October 31, 2019

TDEC Comments: Site Treatment Plan for Mixed Waste, Annual Update, Version 24, December 11, 2019 

Community Acceptance

City of Oak Ridge Letter: Request to Postpone D1 ROD, April 2, 2019

TDEC Letter: Response to City of Oak Ridge Request to Postpone D1 ROD, April 15, 2019 

Oak Ridge Reservation Communities Alliance (ORRCA) Letter: Request for Public Meeting Before Draft (D1) ROD, July 1, 2019

DOE Response to Oak Ridge Reservation Communities Alliance (ORRCA) Letter: Request for Public Meeting Before Draft (D1) ROD, July 19, 2019

City of Oak Ridge Letter: Request for Public Meeting Before Draft (D1) ROD, July 12, 2019

Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) Letter: Request for Meaningful Opportunities for Public Comment, August 1, 2019

Advocates for the Oak Ridge Reservation (AFORR) Letter & Fact Sheet: Support for the Hybrid Alternative, August 26, 2019
Notes: Date in letter (2009) is a typographical error; it should be 2019. In the interest of privacy, this copy omits the petition with approximately 174 names.

Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC)Letter: New Information Regarding the Proposed Landfill Site, October 1, 2019

Documents for Regulatory Review after Record of Decision (ROD) Approval

Site Preparation Plan, January 2, 2019

Phase 3 (Borrow Areas) Field Sampling Plan, January 15, 2019

EPA Letter, March 5, 2019

TDEC Letter, March 6, 2019

DOE Letter, April 4, 2019

Field Sampling Plan for Baseline Groundwater and Surface Water Characterization, March 14, 2019

TDEC Letter, March 28, 2019

EPA Letter, April 9, 2019

Phase 3 (Borrow Areas) Characterization Report, September 30, 2019   

EPA Letter, October 18, 2019  

TDEC Letter, October 29, 2019  

Perpetual Care Fund & Cost Evaluations: Onsite vs. Offsite Disposal

TDEC Letter: Cost Information Request, November 29, 2018

TDEC Letter: Follow-up Cost Information Request, February 26, 2019

TDEC Letter: Perpetual Care Fund, March 4, 2019 

Sensitive Resource Studies

Natural Resource Assessment for the Proposed EMDF, June 2018

TDEC Comments, November 29, 2018

Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Proposed EMDF, June 17, 2018

Historic Architectural Resource Survey of the Proposed EMDF, July 10, 2018

DOE completed the following technical assessments in accordance with DOE Order 435.1: Radioactive Waste Management and DOE Manual 435.1-1: Radioactive Waste Management Manual. The State of Tennessee will evaluate DOE’s findings to inform the State’s decision on the proposed EMDF landfill and to understand how to minimize possible future risks from the landfill.

EMDF Performance Assessment (PA), April 28, 2020

EMDF Composite Analysis (CA), April 29, 2020

EMDF PA-CA Quality Assurance (QA) Report, April 29, 2020

This Page Last Updated: May 18, 2020 at 10:57 AM