United States Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Civil Rights
Mail Code 120 l A
!200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 26460
Attn: Karen D. Higginbotham, Director
Re: Tallassee Waste Disposal Center, Inc./ Sunflower, Inc.
East Tallassee Alabama, Tallapoosa County
Permit 62-11
EPA OCR file No. 06R-03-R4
Dear Ms. Higginbotham,
The purpose of this letter is to infonn the EPA of the decision by the Alabama
Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) to issue the permit for modification
oftl:ie Tallassee Waste Disposal Center. I received notification vta a letter dated October
20, 2003. Included witn the notice of approval were responses to comments made dtuing
the August 26,2003 public hearing and also additional written comments submitted for
inclusion in the record due by the August 29, 2003 deadline. A copy of this letter is
enclosed.
I submitted to EPA a copy of my written comments to ADEM dated August 29,2003, and
I have been notified an investjgation will be conducted to review the comments for
acceptance as an administrative complaint._
For the purpose of background, the existence of this landfill began in the 1980's. Prior to
the August 26, 2003_date the people of this community
never granted a public
hearing in spite of ongoing public
and complaints. It is our contention that this
hearing was neither early, mel ustve. or or substantive ·value since the process for the '
expansion/modification reached ADEM as earlv as March 2003. (See March 14,2003
letter) As an adjacent landowner [received my first 'information concerning this
expansion Ju.ne 9, 2003 and was given until July 9, 2003 to respond and prepare. This
written notice was the first time I was informed of any activity concerning the Tallassee
Waste Disposal Center. It was oflittle value because a preliminary determination of
renewal application·"':aswritten June 5, 2003 (letter enc}osed}
ADEM's response to comment 3 in the public hearing repon that, "EPA has found no
direct evidence of intentional discrimination in its investigation of ADEM·s permitting
process for municipal solid waste landfills", does not address the concerns of the people

 of the Ashurst Bar/Smith Community by its continued refusal to address the
listed in the June 2003 EPA investigative report. To be clear we are
concerned that based on this EPA report ADEM should "undertake additional and
independent analyses of such impacts during the states permitting phase for a facility if
necessary". It is our contention that because of the many complaints from the community
of the local authority's failure to conduct the site evaluations according to recommended
site factors; ADEM should
an independent analysis and submitted to the
community its findings on
population estimates. safety, and other
fiealth impact issues. Specifically, ADEM's acknowledgement that The Alabama Solid
Wastes Disposal Act required the local authority (Tallapoosa County) to document its
consideration of the site factors is what we were seeking to support our concern as to
whether this was done.
In the many years that the citizens of the Ashurst Bar/ Smith Community have protested
and pursed inclusion to participate in the policy making decisions in the locating or reopening of the landfill in our community a satisfactory response has not been granted to
support any effort by the governing authorities to allow our involvement. As evidence of
the local authority's policy to ignore, in the event of this most recent modification request
the local authority did not notify the community of the decision to authorize the
relocation of a public road. I am particular concerned about the .procedures orthe local
authority since the road's proposed design will to go through the middle of my property,
which is a violation of my rights to have due process in regards to the State seizing my
land.
I am appalled at the continuing attitude and disregard of ADEM toward the
in the investigative report of the US·PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS FOR TITLE VI ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT FILE
NO. 28R-99-R4, YERKWOOD LAND FILL COMPLAINT JUNE 2003. Not only were
the opening statements at the August 26, 2003 public hearing contrary to the report, this
interpretation of limited scope·to techliical issues continues in the written. October 2003
report as well.
Such blatant disregard of these recommendations warrants asking when and how the
environmental policies mandated by our Federal Government are going to be enforced at
the state and local level in Alabama? ADEM sites the Georgia case (Rozar v. Mullis. 85
F.Jd 556) to justify its position, even though the EPA reports supporting documentation
was not supplied in a previous request. Is it EPA's position to allow this trivialization or
indifference to policy recommendations that protect the citizens of this country? What
reasons contribute to the difference in what EPA interprets as the governing authority of
ADEM and what this regulatory agency subscribes as its scope and functions?
It appears site has everything to do with landfill permitting, yet the agency charged to be

the ultimate implementer of Alabama environmental policies will not assume
responsibility for this very critical factor.

2

 Due to ADEM's lack of involvement in site selection, the Tallapoosa County
Commission has allowed four out of five land tills to be situated in majority AfricanAmerican communities. Tallapoosa County is a majority White county, yet the African American population is overwhelm in
baring
burden of having landtills placed in
their neighborhoods. (See
report) It is on this premise that we allege
specific targeting of African -American Communities by landfill owners in Tallapoosa
County and the failure of the Tallapoosa County Commission to properly utilize the v
siting factors required by EPA to make sure that a disparate situation is not caused.
Based on the June 2003 report of EPA to ADEM, this agency is also in violation ofTitle
V[, because in the absence of an adequate siting process the ultimate responsibility for
compliance rests with ADEM
Another point of concern is whether or not ADEM was completely honest and forthright
with the infonnation supplied to the citizens of the Ashurst Bar/Smith Community. The
early documents listed the project as a major modification pennission request (see letter
dated April30,2003 ECE to Jonathan Crosby at ADEM). The US Corp ofEngineers
notice dated June 13,2003 Public notice No. Al03-0 181-R Public notice to fill in
wetlands to expand the use capabilities of the Tallassee Waste Disposal Center included
property outside the existing permitted area. (See the Corp's Notice) The documents
referred to the facility as 200 plus acres yet in other places it is listed as 120 plus acres,
therefore confusing the community'as to the size of the facility and the area included.
Clearly the maps provided by the C9rp included the relocation of Washington Blvd, the
new boundaries bordering the local Church and the most populated area in the
community. Wetlands were to be addressed by the Corp, yet in the ADEM's comment
report we were told that the wetlands were approved August 2002 and were in the
pennitted area. Furthermore if the initial proposed work was changed a clarification
notice should have been addressed to the adjacent property owners specifically
identifying the property involved and the work to be done.
Although technical issues, such as continuous abnonnal methane gas levels for the entire
first year of the reopening, water run-off (compliance issues), the possible contamination
of Gleeden Branch, the trespass of industrial chemicals which traversed the southern
boundary of the landfill to contaminate a drinking water spring, the close proximity of the
landfill to the natural gas line, inadequate roads through a rural neighborhood, the
LOCATION of the new sedimentation pond, and the concern about the Tuscaloosa
Aquifer were addressed to ADEM, these issues were not addressed in the comment
report. So, it is not that ADEM does not address socio-economic issues, the agency
apparently does not address any of the concerns raised by the people who are adversely
impacted.
In summary, my complaint is that the public hearing was a fonnality and not of any
substance since the only statement by ADEM was the opening siatement that addressed
its perceived limited scope to techriical issues only, nor early when in fact a preliminary
letter had been issued in June 2003. Additionally, ADEM's intention seems to be of noncompliance to the recommendations issued in the EPA June 2003 report. It leads me to

3

 sunnise that ADEM continues to ignore EPA's interpretation of tht:: Alabama Solid Waste
Act as not being as restrictive as the agency claims.
It is troubling that this governmental agency that rt::ceives tax funds and is charged to
insure the well being and health of the citizens of this state is resorting to ignoring
mandated policies in regards to maintaining a safe and healthy environment for its fellow
citizens. In Tallapoosa County the African- American Communities should not
overwhelmingly bare the waste disposal burden for the county. More specifically the
Ashurst Bar/Smith Community is baring the burden for the 74 %majority White
communities serviced out of the 19 counties by the Tallassee Waste Disposal center. It is
not by accident that the Ashurst Bar/Smith Community was chosen, for it is an identified
pattern by the Commissioners of Tallapoosa County to select sites in poor Black
communities.
The overall impact of this landfill is the creation of a living envirorunent that is
inhumane which will continue the displacement of people and the ultimately loss of the
land owned by African-Americans since the 1800's. Politicians grant pennits for
industries to locate in low income communities that cause environmental concerns and
injustice issues on the premise that economic gains will be received by the communities
affected. The Ashurst Bar/Smith Community has not received any fmancial or economic
benefits from the Tallassee Waste Disposal Center. The workers are majority White and
are from outside of the community and county. Therefore strengthening our charge of
being left out of all aspects of this project.
The question more importantly is who will enforce TITLE VI or Executive Order 12.898.
Federal Legislations passed to protect targeted groups of citizens such as the population
of the Ashurst Bar/Smith Community in Tallapoosa County, Alabama against disparate
situations when there is overwhelmingly evidence of disregard and discrimination?
Thanks in advance.

cc: Sen. Richard Shelby
Sen. Jeff Sessions
Rep. Mike Rogers

4

 Rep. Artur Davis
Governor Bob Rilt:y
AI. Sen. Hank Sanders
AI. Rep. Ted Little
AI. Rep. Betty Carol Graham
AI. Rep. Yusuf Salaam