Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environmental Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parent urges district to pause Flint Hill occupancy and order independent chemical risk study over nearby Silfab facility
Summary
Amanda Heilinger, a clinical scientist and parent, told the Fort Mill School District board she and other families face an "impossible decision" about sending children to Flint Hill Elementary because of a proposed Silfab facility nearby that she said would store hazardous chemicals. She asked the district to commission an independent environmental assessment and to halt school filings or occupancy if risks are confirmed.
Amanda Heilinger, a clinical scientist and parent, urged the Fort Mill School District board to commission an immediate independent environmental risk assessment for a proposed Silfab facility near Flint Hill Elementary and to halt school occupancy or construction if the review finds threats to student safety.
“My name is Amanda Heilinger. I live at 1151 Gower Street, Fort Mill, South Carolina,” Heilinger said during public participation, identifying herself as a mother and a scientist. She told trustees the Silfab facility, as described, would store and use chemicals including anhydrous ammonia, hydrochloric acid, hydrofluoric acid and silane. “Silane, for example, is pyrophoric, meaning it ignites on contact with air,” she said, warning that a leak could put Flint Hill students “first in the blast zone” and asked the board to act rather than “just hope for the best.”
Heilinger asked the district to take three steps: (1) immediately commission an independent third‑party environmental assessment to evaluate health and safety risks posed by Silfab; (2) if the assessment confirms risks to student safety, halt filings or occupancy of Flint Hill Elementary and related construction until Silfab is relocated to an appropriately zoned industrial site; and (3) join parents and community members in advocating to relocate Silfab away from schools and neighborhoods. “No parent should have to choose between their child’s education and their child’s safety,” she said.
The board did not offer a substantive response on the record during the public comment segment captured in the transcript; staff later proceeded with planned agenda items. Heilinger also referenced EPA guidance recommending a technical risk assessment when industrial facilities are located within 0.25 miles of a school and said parents were being told to accept the risk or uproot their families.
Next steps recorded in the meeting minutes: Heilinger’s comments were taken during public participation; the transcript does not show a board motion or staff commitment to commission the requested assessment during this meeting. The board will consider staff reports and agenda items later in the meeting; any formal direction to staff or contract decisions would be recorded in future board actions.
