Plutonium Found in X-326 Subslab as Site Cleanup Raises Questions About Future Data Center Development

PIKETON, OH — While the X-326 Process Building at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PORTS) has been demolished and its debris buried in an on-site waste dump, recent reports reveal that plutonium and other radioactive contaminants remain in the subslab, which has yet to be removed. Plans for its removal are currently under review, as discussions surface about the site’s future, including the possibility of a data center development.

The subslab—still contaminated with plutonium-238, plutonium-239, americium-241, and uranium isotopes—has not been cleared, pending U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approval. This comes at a pivotal time as Ohio Governor Mike DeWine announced on December 16, 2024, that Amazon Web Services (AWS) plans to build more data centers across Ohio, part of a $10 billion investment.

 

Will PORTS Become a Data Center Site?


The future of the PORTS site has drawn increased attention, with speculation growing about whether one of these new AWS data centers could be built on the land where the X-326 once stood. Plans for redevelopment on portions of the site have already been floated, raising concerns among residents and environmental advocates about the safety of such projects, given the contamination still present in the subslab.

Critics argue that rushing redevelopment while residual contamination remains risks long-term exposure and potential environmental harm. Plutonium, with its half-life of 24,000 years, is not easily mitigated, and its presence in the subslab raises doubts about whether the cleanup process has been thorough enough to allow safe reuse of the land.

 

Demolition and Burial: A Controversial Approach


The X-326 building, a massive structure once central to uranium enrichment operations, has already been demolished. Its debris—containing varying levels of radioactive material—was buried at the On-Site Waste Disposal Facility (OSWDF), a decision that remains controversial among environmental groups and local residents.

While the DOE insists this approach meets federal safety standards, some argue that on-site disposal leaves a toxic legacy that could jeopardize future land use, particularly for large-scale developments like data centers, which require significant infrastructure and workforce presence.

 

Community and Environmental Concerns


Residents near the Portsmouth site are watching closely, expressing skepticism about redevelopment while cleanup remains incomplete. “We’re talking about plutonium still in the ground, and now they’re planning to build on top of it? That’s a recipe for disaster,” said one community member.

The recent discovery of contaminants in the subslab highlights ongoing concerns about transparency, accountability, and the long-term risks posed by nuclear waste. While economic development, like AWS’s proposed data centers, promises jobs and investment, many question whether the benefits outweigh the potential health and environmental hazards.

 

Governor DeWine’s Announcement


Governor DeWine’s December 16 announcement of AWS’s $10 billion investment aims to position Ohio as a leading technology hub. However, the question remains: Could PORTS be one of the chosen sites? With vast land already cleared and industrial infrastructure in place, the site appears ripe for redevelopment—but only if it can meet safety standards.

 

What’s Next?


As plans for subslab removal await EPA approval, local residents and environmental watchdogs are demanding greater transparency regarding both the cleanup process and any future development proposals. The presence of plutonium and other long-lasting radioactive contaminants has reignited debates about whether the PORTS site is truly ready for redevelopment.

With AWS’s data center expansion in motion, the focus now shifts to whether Piketon will play a role in Ohio’s growing technology infrastructure—or whether lingering contamination concerns will halt those ambitions.

For the full report, visit the EPA Ohio Public Portal: edocpub.epa.ohio.gov/publicportal/ViewDocument.aspx?docid=3275152&fbclid=IwY2xjawHNOblleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHRNPeudF1oaBYjhOeAlqKwSsFpgR9S1sCwSfs6t0-6W8neNiwPgwjWKX0w_aem_idkeulxMDC7u68iVKuqf7A

Add comment

Comments

There are no comments yet.