Earthjustice August 2011 Report on Coal Ash Toxicity--"State of Failure"

Despite the Alabama legislature's attempts to appear like they were doing something beneficial for the citizens of Alabama's health and environment, with the passage of SB80, a bill designed to regulate dry coal ash disposal, it's a 'dam' shame the wet coal ash storage ponds, maintained at APCO utility plants around the state, remain unregulated. Was the exclusion of these dams that by accident or by design?

APCO registered twenty-six lobbyists for 2011, according to figures with the Ethics Commission, and they all worked hard on our lawmakers to pass the coal ash bill despite the impassioned outcries from the citizens of Perry County, Alabama. Those citizens have served as a test case of what SB80 will do to our communities, but no one on Goat Hill listened to their pleas--choosing instead to do what they were told to do on behalf of the small army of APCO lobbyists.

Landfills are a toxic soup in and of themselves. Adding coal ash to our landfills and promising that regulations from SB80 will safeguard our communities and groundwater from any untoward effects of that action is hubris personified, with a stench of possible payoffs and corruption wafting from the inception and process of that bill that's hard to ignore.

Our laws and regulations in Alabama were woefully lax on landfill monitoring, inspections and enforcement before this bill, and passing SB80 won't change what's inherently wrong with ADEM--their utter failure to protect the citizens of this state from big polluters and their waste products. Particularly the low income and minority communities where most of these industries and waste dumps are located.

Conspicuously absent from this legislation was any language to tighten controls on the existing wet coal ash ponds, and the problematic dams that surround them, located around Alabama and almost exclusively at the state's electric utility sites.

Wet coal ash storage remains unaffected and practically unmonitored and regulated, with the exception of the Rattlesnake Dam at the APCO Gorgas Plant. The EPA has that site on its radar, and APCO is employing its usual stance of we-would-rather-fight-than-comply to back them off of any future scrutiny, in addition to blocking the release of more detailed data by claiming CBI--confidential business information.

According to the EPA's website the final decision on whether to allow APCO's CBI request  is still in process. 

We noted at last count, the Southern Company, (SOCO) had spent at least *26,670,000 for the combined years of 2009-2010 on lobbying in Washington. Tracking their expenditures in Alabama is made more difficult by the unlimited contributions corporations can inject into Alabama's political system, combined with a non-requirement of lobbyists expenditure reporting.

*page 20 "Leadership We can Live Without" The Real Corporate Social Responsibility Report for Southern Company--May 2011, Green America

It boggles the mind that SOCO and APCO spend so much on lobbying and corporate legal attack dogs, but when they are asked to spend some of their enormous profits to upgrade their plants and reduce the overall risk *(est. to be $9 billion in increased health care costs) to hundreds of thousands of people from their toxic emissions, they complain 'if you make us improve we'll have stick it to the ratepayers' and "compliance costs jobs."

*pg 16 of Green America Report

It's a scare tactic argument that's successful on the masses who simply don't know any better and blindly accept the well-honed propaganda machine messages of these corporate behemoths.

Our state regulatory agency, ADEM, functions more as enabler than regulator by their refusal to enforce strict guidelines on APCO. They have grown dependent on the money they take in from the numerous fees they levy against APCO to operate. On smokestack emissions, ADEM charges APCO between $33-$37.00 per ton. The typical emission total per year is in the range of 180,000 tons, and frequently higher. More emissions equals more money. It's a diabolical arrangement in the best of circumstances.

ADEM also does not require any groundwater monitoring (GWM) at APCO's sites despite the enormity of their coal ash storage ponds and their close proximity to our rivers and groundwater supplies.

Dry coal ash is also stored at their sites in quantities that can only be estimated through aerial satellite photos because no records of any actual measurable amounts are available for public examination. It is entirely possible that no one but APCO really knows.

Alabama Power's Gaston Plant Wilsonville, Alabama. The Coosa River is on the right, one of the two wet coal ash ponds is wider than the river. Additional dry coal ash waste areas are in the immediate foreground.

 The state of Alabama set up ADEM in this manner with huge involvement from the utility giant in writing the rules. They hold onto this archaic arrangement in the same way aided and abetted by like-minded politicians eager to sweep the only thing green about APCO, their monetary influence, into their campaign coffers. This too is a diabolical arrangement that ends in predictable outcomes.

We suspect the utility companies, anticipating future problems from the EPA, sought the passage of SB80 to allow them to clean out their nearing capacity wet storage ponds, dry the waste, and ship it to landfills statewide, in addition to recycling the product for everything from road building to kitchen counter tops:

"This is a classic leap-before-you-look EPA initiative, where health and safety questions get asked only after the fact." Through Freedom of Information Act requests, PEER also recently found that the EPA had allowed the coal industry to edit information regarding coal ash use in products, including promoting "beneficial uses" while downplaying or completely eliminating mention of possible risks.

Burning coal for electricity generates more than 100 million tons of coal waste a year, but about half of that winds its ways back into consumer products, on food crops, or in structure- or road-building materials. Coal ash is routinely mixed into cement, drywall, kitchen counters, and carpet backing, and used in retaining walls and as ground fill. Because it is often laced with arsenic, lead, and other heavy metals, many toxicologists say more research is needed about what we're putting in the ground (and potentially the water supply) and in our homes. But as of now, industry is running wild—and making a pretty penny—possibly at the expense of our health. "We cannot and should not view agricultural lands as suitable waste-disposal sites for industrial or societal pollutants, just because it's cost-effective in the short term."

Earthjustice lays out the existing problems in their latest report appropriately entitled "State of Failure." Tables 2 & 3 (ppgs. 10 & 11) contain data detailing the failure of strict supervision and safeguards that should be required by our state regulatory agencies on coal ash disposal.

Page 14, in the report, labels Alabama the "worst of the worst" when it comes to coal ash disposal:

Alabama represents the worst of the worst when it comes to coal-ash disposal. 

First, Alabama has no laws or regulations on the books to specifically ensure the safety of the state’s coal ash dams.
It is the only state in the country without such laws. 
Because there are no federal laws to ensure dam safety, this essentially means that Alabama dams are completely unregulated. Until 2011, Alabama also completely exempted coal ash disposal in landfills. Consequently, coal ash from its ten coal-fired plants has been dumped mostly in unlined, unregulated, and unmonitored ponds and landfills. Given the historical absence of controls on coal ash disposal, it is outrageous that more than 5 million tons of ash from the Kingston TVA spill was shipped to Alabama for disposal.

State oversight of Alabama’s dangerous dams is also totally missing.

None of the state’s 15 coal ash dams have been subject to state regulatory inspections in the past five years. After inspections by the EPA and TVA contractors in 2009-2010, five of the dams were given poor ratings and two had to make immediate repairs to improve stability. Alabama dams are, on average, the tallest and largest coal ash dams in the 12 most dangerous states. The average height is nearly 7 stories tall (over 66 feet), and the average surface area is greater than 192 acres (about 151 football fields) more than twice the average of coal ash ponds in the other nine states. These large ponds pose high threats—two of Alabama’s dams are high hazard, and 11 are significant hazard dams. Lastly, these ponds are old-the average age of an Alabama coal ash pond is 40 years. According to the EPA, that’s the estimated lifespan, but Alabama utilities have announced no retirement plans.

Alabama’s coal ash ponds disproportionately impact low income communities and communities of color. The EPA statistics show that more than 40 percent of the citizen’s living near coal ash ponds in Alabama is non-white. Also, about 25 percent of nearby residents are below the poverty line, which is more than twice the national average poverty rate of 11.9 percent.

The facts and statistics are a sobering eye-opener into the serious risks that Alabama's governmental agencies and lawmakers stubbornly continue to ignore in favor of big business wants. A grim picture emerges of a system completely devoid of stringent accountability coupled with a total lack of consistent oversight. We, as citizens, have no choice but to live in a "state of failure" when it comes to the protection of our communities from corporate and political Alabama, and it's a risk we should not be forced to accept.

State of Failure

 Subscribe in a reader

"Mudd " Slinging--William Bell vs Bill Mudd

Birmingham Mayor William Bell is on the attack against Birmingham lawyer and business owner William "Bill" Mudd over the Birmingham Barons $60 million dollar Baseball Park project. Bell descended into street thuggery with a direct insult to Mudd that hints at Bell's real feelings about businesses who don't belong (which Mudd does not) to his favorite private cartel--the Birmingham Business Alliance. Their mantra seems to be if you aren't with us, you're against us, and we'll threaten eminent domain as a necessary tactic.

This is a deal about baseball alright--the inside kind.

Mudd's B&A Warehouse would be a perfect segue into the entertainment district that is a part of Bell's, and the BBA's, plan for downtown Birmingham. Perfect unless Mayor Bell and private real estate developers cannot cut a deal with Mudd, who isn't really interested in selling his successful event/venue business to the city of Birmingham just so they can level the building in favor of something else. Mudd would rather have his business incorporated with the ballpark.

But the Mayor refuses to negotiate with Mudd, instead he has Jeffrey Bayer and another private real estate investor, Alan Engel, contact Mudd to 'lightly' pressure him to sell his property. Mudd mentioned he was curious, after those two phone calls, why private real estate investors were calling him instead of the Mayor. It's a great point and we wonder ourselves what the answer is.

Bell then called after the two developers and promised to call Mudd back and discuss the proposal further. It was an empty promise that Bell never intended to keep. What he did instead was ratchet up the specter of eminent domain and embark on strong-arm tactics against Mudd.

It's noteworthy that the BBA isn't living up to its name and supporting Mudd's existing business.

Bell's bully remark on a Fox 6 segment transforms any future meaningful dialogue into a non-productive, mud-slinging pr contest with the first fistful of useless nonsense thrown by the Mayor himself:

Mayor Bell voluntarily pulled the B&A warehouse out of a package of properties that the city will use eminent domain on to assemble the land for the stadium because most of the council wants to continue negotiating with owner Bill Mudd, who says he wants the project built around his property and doesn't want to sell.

Bell says the city will continue negotiating but he thinks this is about one thing: "Money, money, money, money," Bell said.

To which Mudd responded, "I don't want his money, and I don't need it. And it's insulting for me to hear that. And if he wants to come down here, walk across the park and talk about it, I'll tell him that."

Is this the same Mayor who praises economic development and claims to be supportive of all businesses in his not so fair city? The same Mayor who wants to run off Mudd's business in favor of the Negro Baseball Museum, a worthy enough project admittedly, but there's not one word in a 400 page document from the Mayor's office on how it will be paid for.

Taking into account that the notorious Walter Energy sponsored an April 2011 event in conjunction with the city of Birmingham, the Barons baseball team, and the Birmingham Civil Rights Institute, earlier this year for Jackie Robinson Day, is it a stretch to imagine Walter may be involved with the Museum funds?

Would that explain the absence of any information on the funding for the museum, given the recent black eye Walter has gotten for the north Birmingham contamination? Have they offered to fund the project to placate city leaders and the Mayor? Would they contribute to appear racially sensitive after they have allegedly committed terrible transgressions against minority residents in Birmingham?

We'll never know until the Mayor decides to provide information on the funding, but one thing we can count on is that Bell doesn't care about fair and open communications with Mudd and B&A.

His latest salvo against Mudd is reprehensible, irresponsible and unbecoming the office of the Mayor in a city the size of Birmingham. He should be ashamed of himself, but he isn't because he knows the local paper will side with him on the issue.

It didn't take long for that to happen. In a recent Birmingham News editorial the "Our View" ED board claimed Mudd was "wrong" to "hold the city hostage" over the deal. In typical one-sided fashion and probably in anticipation of future advertisement dollars, the News acts as the go-to water boy for Bell's schemes yet again.

Shame on them too.

Mudd was interviewed on WAPI's morning show August 23rd. Judge for yourself who's really holding who hostage: (mp3 sound files)

Mudd Interview Part I

Mudd Interview Part II

Bill Mudd conducted himself as a gentleman in that interview. We certainly cannot say the same for the Mayor of Birmingham.

So Say We The Opinion Board Of The Vincent Alabama Confidential

*photo credit: Bernard Troncale Birmingham News

 Subscribe in a reader

In a League of His Own--Mayor William Bell

Birmingham Mayor William Bell is doing his level best to sidestep any taint from the Walter Energy contamination in north Birmingham by claiming that “until spring of this year he’d never been notified of soil contamination.” Bell’s coziness with the Birmingham Business Alliance (BBA), the entity who lured *Walter Energy away from Tampa where they had been headquartered since the end of WW II, makes us wonder if he’s being truthful about what he knew and when, or slyly covering for the generous corporate campaign and event sponsor at the direction of the BBA.

*entry #243--"I wish they were all this easy," said a beaming Jim Searcy, vice president of business and industry retention at Birmingham Business Alliance.

William Bell has always been a team player, but it's questionable whose team he has been a member of all these years--the one that benefits him or the one that steps up for his constituent's interests. Why isn't he going to bat for his citizens in north Birmingham? All we're hearing from him is excuses of why no one should put the bead on him for any responsibility in the toxic mess.

(On a side note, Walter Energy is up for takeover after their CEO of three months decided to call it quits. Watch for the next corporate owner to be hailed as yet another big bucks entity coming to Birmingham.)
 

In a recent CBS 42 “Deadly Deception” clip, Mayor Bell incredulously claimed that he was not permitted to even communicate with the EPA about the decades-old issue in north Birmingham or anything else EPA related:

“The EPA still had the Mayor of Birmingham, not William Bell, but the Mayor of Birmingham listed as being banned from being able to communicate any form, way shape or form, with the federal government, in particular the EPA.”

What Mr. Bell was referring to, and twisting to suit his purposes, is a move by the federal government in 2009 that came after former Mayor Larry Langford was indicted on bribery and conspiracy charges, which placed him on a federal “Excluded Parties List:”

Birmingham Mayor Larry Langford no longer has the authority to sign federal grant applications or enter into agreements that involve federal money as a result of his indictment on bribery and conspiracy charges.

Langford's name was placed on the federal government's Excluded Parties List -- a list of people and organizations barred from conducting business with federal agencies -- by the Environmental Protection Agency in March. Langford received a notice of the action in late February.

That action by the feds was to prevent Langford from having any more authority over federal grants and monies. It did not mean that Bell was "barred" from communicating with the EPA like he would have everyone believe with his recent statements. Unless he wants us to think that the EPA would not be willing to take a call from him that should have gone something like this:

‘I need help over here in my city Region 4, my residents are sick and dying because of a nearby coal plant. I'm hearing from them every day. We have three schools in the area and I am really worried about the children. Could you please send someone over here to do some testing and let’s see what we have going on over here?’

Bell never made that call and he’s never shown any concern for those residents until CBS 42 pulled back the curtain on the whole deal through their investigative reporting. Has anyone with CBS 42 put two and two together and questioned, among themselves, the validity of what Mayor Bell is now offering as an excuse?

Giving Bell the benefit of the doubt, that he really didn't understand, is not any more comforting because it suggests he isn’t sharp enough to comprehend the 2009 decision. The leader of a large metropolitan area should be quick on their feet in the critical thinking department and possess an ability to fully understand the detail and meaning of any federal actions directed at his city.

Blaming his inaction on Larry Langford's misdeeds is a lame ploy. And Bell knows it. He's a savvy political player who's well-versed in the game of misinformation and distraction.

We think he's playing the ‘I didn’t know’ card for political duck and cover in a publicly embarrassing situation while following the scripting of certain corporate interest coaches.

Much like the Birmingham News, who won't break themselves of the habit of protecting Walter Energy's misdeeds by continuing to use words like "voluntary cleanup," in addition to allowing Walter to continue the incessant parroting of their "good neighbor" and 'not our fault' nonsense.

We also find it ironic that Walter Energy teamed up with the Birmingham Barons and the Birmingham Civil Rights Institute for Jackie Robinson Day earlier this year. The Mayor has an on and off reputation for favoritism to minority rights and figures when it seems to suit his own agenda, financial interests and publicity stroking.

It’s a proclivity he often forgets when it comes to the Big Mules and the BBA’s pie-in-the-sky ideas. He’s way too caught up in his chameleon-like changeability of ‘I’m for my people until someone else has an economic scheme that will bring in the money and elevate my importance.’ Luring the Barons to Birmingham is high on Bell's list of importance.

With the Robinson tribute he got the trifecta--he appears (albeit selectively) racially sensitive, Walter Energy grateful and Birmingham Barons bone-throwing all rolled into one. But what has he done for those north Birmingham residents who have been suffering for years so far? Absolutely nothing, because there's no glory in it for him, and he knows he'll get a sackful of angry corporate cats (aka Walter Energy and the BBA) if he gets too involved with the little people.

It's a shame really, because he could have had his own Robinsonesque moment, if only he'd managed to call up enough courage to get on the right team just once in his long and often controversial political career.

Jackie Robinson’s contribution to baseball and his people deserved to have that honor in April, we won’t disagree with that, but of all the sponsors who could have been approached for the event the city chose Walter Energy. The same company who is the number one alleged suspect primarily responsible for the toxic poisoning in the minority neighborhoods of Collegeville and Harriman Park since 1989.

What would Jackie Robinson have said about that choice?

He would have called it what it is: foul ball.

 Subscribe in a reader

Hell No--We Won't Go

The purpose of this site is to expose corruption and injustice in forms that affect the lives of many. Sprinkled in-between is strong opinion on matters of public interest, in addition to stories that the owners of this site feel are important to offer to our wide, global audience of readers.

We exist to level the playing field and to try and fill the void that the mainstream media cannot or will not report on for a myriad of reasons: laziness, conflicts of political and advertiser interests, a lack of time and workforce power, and sometimes the deliberate suppression of information the public should know about.

This site has been successful in its purpose if our readership and traffic are indicators of the popularity of truth-telling.

But someone is really upset with us, enough to make threats that wade into the area of a federal crime. They want us to shut up, go away and stop talking about what we cover. Maybe they are uncomfortable with having their misdeeds on the worldwide web for a mass audience to peer into. Maybe they're just too accustomed to getting away with 'it' as a matter of the accepted norm.

They shouldn't be, but that's what the state media has allowed them to do for years--operate right out in the open without harsh examination no matter how much they do to the regular folks. Or the environment. We think that's wrong on so many fronts it's hard to know where to end that miles long list of egregious, and sometimes criminal behavior.

'Let's lean on Max and his gang a little harder so they'll be quiet.'

We've upset the usual suspects with some of our reporting and commentary. We've upset some in the media who sit on lofty perches and sneer down on bloggers as ankle biters outside the realm of "serious journalism." How dare anyone have an opinion, and dare to write about it, unless they are reporter with a mainstream media outlet.

We dare to.

And we'll continue to do it.

As long as there is corruption and injustice to write about it, we'll write about it.

No amount of threats or pressure will silence what we have committed to do in the name of exposing wrongs.

Would you expect any less from us our readers?

What say you to those who hide behind anonymous threats of "homes are so fragile....you're debt is now due and payable isn't it?"

Doesn't it sound similar to the the old capos who would send their henchmen into a place of business, in an attempt to intimidate a reluctant-to-being-shaken-down owner: "You have such a beautiful store here, it would be a shame to have it burn to the ground."

Yes, it kind of does sound somewhat similar. The intent is clear.

And to them we say: not just 'no' but hell no, we won't go.

 Subscribe in a reader

CBS 42 "Deadly Deception" Documentary August 9, 2011--9:00PM CST

From the leaders in environmental news we can use, CBS 42, Sherri Jackson and Ken Lass bring us full circle with the pervasive contamination in north Birmingham and beyond in their upcoming summation documentary on "Deadly Deception."

In what should be a contender for a well-deserved RTNDA Edward R. Murrow Award, this groundbreaking series from CBS 42 proves that one state media organization understands the concept of being unafraid and bold.

For decades the minority population in the Collegeville area of Birmingham have been the victims of toxic secrets, secrets that have cost them not only their health, but many have lost their lives for nothing more than just trying to live their lives. It didn't have to happen to them. The state knew the risks. The EPA knew the risks. Many people in positions of authority knew the risks. The citizens directly affected by the contamination were willfully kept in the dark while the profits poured into everyone else's pockets. 

It's happening all over Alabama: a flippant attitude of "better dead than unprofitable" permeates the economic development platform of this state. Jobs and profits trump clean air, clean water and the rights of citizens to exist in communities with a reasonable expectation that they will be safe from exposures that can kill them.

Years have passed, and many Alabamians are just now learning their right to live safely in their neighborhoods has been taken away from them by corporate Alabama. Compounding the tragedy is the fact that it's taken death after senseless death for these people to find out what they have been living with.

Why has it taken this long and why did so many have to die? How many more will?

Don't we have a Dr. "in charge of Alabama now" sitting in the Governor's mansion? Has he cast aside his Hippocratic Oath in favor of a monetary oath owed to his BARD benefactors and similar corporate campaign contributors? The same question stands for our lawmakers: where do their true loyalties lie?

There must be an end to this "deadly deception" and the paying to pollute mindset before any more lives are lost, communities are irreversibly ruined and more schoolchildren are sickened from the complete lack of responsibility by those charged with supposedly keeping us all safe. 

Anything less is not just a "troubling situation"--it's a fatal vision.



CBS 42 Deadly Deception Documentary-1

 Subscribe in a reader

EMC Hearing Officer's Report on Sheperd's Bend Coal Mine Allowing NPDES Permit Despite Legal Challenge From BWRK and Others

The following document is the record from the hearing on July 20, 2011 regarding the Shepherd's Bend Mine Permit. Black Warrior Riverkeeper issued a subsequent press release in response to the decision on July 22, 2011.

There is a lot to be troubled about concerning the decision of the EMC Hearing Officer, James F. Hampton, who's been a judge, a Special Assistant Attorney General for the State of Alabama and a hearing officer in the BARD Motion to Intervene regarding SWMA. Mr. Hampton has quite a long pedigree as a state inclined legal eagle and his conclusion about this controversial mine permit is not unexpected, but it is disappointing.

Page 7 Item 10 is also disappointing and allows a lot of wiggle room for what ADEM may or may not do if issuing this permit becomes problematic. The chances are high, if the history of mine discharge in Alabama is any indicator, that there will be problems and plenty of them:

"Permit does not contain limitations on chlorides, sulfide, total dissolved solids or aluminum, which are commonly associated with acid mine drainage. Under this permit, ADEM may modify the terms of the permit, if, in the future, it is shown to ADEM's satisfaction that the permit is not protective of water quality."

EMC Docket No 09-04-2011 07 20 Report of Hearing Officer

 Subscribe in a reader

"Capitol City Plume"--Fifty City Block Toxic Underground Plume in Montgomery, Alabama

This story has a compelling similarity to the Walter Coke contamination in north Birmingham--state and federal environmental officials have known about the contamination for decades and have been slow to act in cleaning up the area, while development has proceeded at a fast clip. A statewide pattern seems to be finally making its way onto the public radar revealing Alabama to be systemically and dangerously contaminated.

There's a tradeoff cost in human health and life that doesn't seem to figure into our governmental and business leader's plans. We cannot seem to count on EPA Region 4 for help either--they too seem to be carrying the water for the developers and getting into the *PR business outside of their environmental and public safety watchdog purview.

*(linked further on down in article on the phrase "revitalization of downtown Montgomery")

How many other areas in Alabama is the deadly deception going on unbeknownst to the potentially-vulnerable-to-exposure general public? And why?  Here's a list for Alabama from the Center For Public Integrity National Priority sites. Five Alabama sites are on the "Most Dangerous Superfunds Sites" list. The Capital City Plume, according to the census figures from 2000, was affecting a population of 209,615.

News story July 26, 2011 Associated Press via Al.com state wire:

The Environmental Protection Agency has identified the Montgomery Advertiser as one of the entities that may have caused the plume when operating at its former location.

County Commission Chairman Elton Dean said he remains confident that the county did due diligence before purchasing the old newspaper building and turning it into the county's main building after renovations.

News story by Ben Flanagan Al.com September 28, 2010: "Montgomery Commission tests air quality of county building":

"During a search for the source of the problem, a black, sooty substance was discovered in several isolated areas on the original concrete structure, according to a press release. A sample of that substance was collected on Sept. 3 and sent to Sutherland Environmental Company, Inc., where it was analyzed for 58 volatile organic compounds. Fifty-five of the compounds were not detected but small concentrations of *three compounds were detected." *note that the substances are not identified.

Region 4 Superfund

The Capitol City Plume site is located in downtown Montgomery, Alabama. The contaminated ground water plume is believed to exist throughout the downtown area. In September 1993, the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) began investigating a report of Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) soil contamination at the Retirement Systems of Alabama (RSA) Energy Plant site at the corner of Monroe Street and McDonough Street.

After 17 months of investigative work, ADEM came to the conclusion that there are a minimum of 6 ground water plumes contaminated with PCE and benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene (BTEX). The site covers an area from Alabama Street (south) to Pollard Street (north) and Court Street (west) to Union Street (east). 

In 1993, soil containing PCE was excavated during construction of the RSA Tower. The soil was removed and disposed of properly. The discovery of the PCE in the soil prompted ADEM to conduct a preliminary assessment of the area near the RSA Tower. The preliminary assessment performed by ADEM concluded that ground water was contaminated with PCE and BTEX.

Field work for the RI/FS began in March 2000 and was completed in 2003. Soil samples and ground water samples have been collected to delineate the areal extent of the contamination plumes. Analytical results from the ground water indicate that the shallow aquifer in the Montgomery downtown area is contaminated with PCE, BTEX, TCE (Trichloroethylene), and metals. 

Installation of 16 new monitoring wells and 16 temporary wells has been completed. The City has removed and plugged two shallow drinking water wells at the Court Street Pump Station but continues to pump drinking water from deep wells.
The City of Montgomery has implemented a moratorium on well drilling in the vicinity of the site (downtown area). Beginning in May 2006, the City began monitoring the ground water contamination through monitoring wells. Monitoring will continue for five years. The City will be sending the ground water monitoring data to ADEM and EPA Region 4.
The City of Montgomery has also been working with EPA in implementing a voluntary phytoremediation effort in the ground water plume to reduce risk to human health and the environment.

A supplemental remedial investigation took place in stages from August 2008 to the present. *Sample results have identified sources of contamination and the time at which the contamination was discharged to the environment.

*Please note the above sentence which states that there are "identified sources of contamination" while this linked narrative from May 11, 2000 cites only "potential sources" generally identified without a specific business name as "a chemical wholesaler, airport maintenance shops, airport fueling areas, an auto repair shop and a dry cleaner."

Site investigation activities are being led primarily by EPA and the United States Geological Survey.

From August 2-5, 2011, EPA and USGS representatives will conduct field sampling activities to further delineate the groundwater contamination as well as to assess if vapor intrusion is taking place in an existing Montgomery County building.

Who's making the decision to "move forward with privately-funded activities" instead of applying for Superfund monies to clean up this massive twenty year old contamination?

On August 1, 2011, EPA will meet with representatives of two potentially-responsible parties identified in a Site remedial investigation, Alabama Department of Environmental Management, City of Montgomery, USGS, and Montgomery Water Works representatives to discuss moving forward with privately-funded activities related to Site characterization and remediation. 

Alabama could have applied for the $600,000,000 made available for Superfund cleanup from the 2009 Stimulus Funds but they did not make any applications for a percent of the available money in this area: (but they did in many other areas for federal handouts)

Hazardous Substances Superfund - (Alabama will not be receiving stimulus funds for this program)

(National Appropriation: $600,000,000)

Description: This program provides additional funding to the Environmental Protection Agency for the Superfund Remedial Program. This program allows states to enter in competitive agreements with the EPA to conduct certain remedial actions at Superfund sites and receive a credit from the government for 90 percent of eligible expenses.

John Archibald, of the Birmingham News, in one of his recent columns offered this statement about Alabama's rampant pollution and economic development mindset: "That's traditional Alabama values again: better dead than unprofitable." EPA Region 4 seems to go along with that idea, especially since they knew about the CC Plume, in the following statements on the *revitalization of downtown Montgomery and the importance of 'sticking to the plan':

Capitol City Ground Water PlumeGround water in western portions of downtown Montgomery, Alabama, is contaminated with trichloroethylene (TCE) and perchloroethylene (PCE), chemicals commonly used in dry cleaning and cleaning of machine parts. Work to assess the ground water contamination and develop the site’s cleanup plan is currently ongoing. The City of Montgomery is working closely with EPA to facilitate the site’s cleanup. Downtown Montgomery remains open for business during the site’s ground water cleanup. Land uses include retail districts, neighborhoods, parks, offices and industrial areas. The revitalization of Montgomery’s downtown is a major community priority. The area is recognized as the “heart of the city.” Recent redevelopment projects include the Montgomery Biscuits minor league baseball stadium, retail centers, downtown apartments and restaurants.

Have our business leaders, politicians, economic developers and state agencies simply lost their minds from the effects of all the pollution or are they just out to eliminate the undesirable elements of Alabama's communities? The location of the Capital City Plume seems to negate the latter, because a large portion of the businesses and developments in the affected area are housing some of our state elites, primarily in the RSA Tower Complex of Montgomery, located in the toxic zone.

So what other possibility does that leave us as to why Alabama continues to labor under the delusion of their favorite hackney-eyed, overused phrase of describing economic development as "world class?" There's nothing blue ribbon or superior about any development that comes with a staggering cost of health to a large segment of people.

Unless Archibald's right--"better dead than unprofitable."

Or maybe it's something else entirely consisting of the usual BARD suspects and their webs of deceit.

Maybe it's a combination of the two strengthened by the political pay to play system our legislators have grown ridiculously accustomed to.

Whatever the reasons, the citizens of this state deserve truth, accountability and transparency with information that directly affects the quality of their lives and not the same old deadly deceptions of business as usual.

 Subscribe in a reader

AlterNet--"Banning Corporate Personhood: How Communities Are Taking the Law Back from Big Companies"

In an article by Sabrina Artel, republished on AlterNet, Ben Price of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund explains how communities can fight corporate power with a new legal weapon: Home Rule.

The audio link below is a stellar presentation by Mr. Price, who's addressing the pros and cons of Home Rule in NY, and how it may allow for better oversight in the process of natural gas drilling aka fracing or fracking. However, his points on Corporate Personhood, and the need for more local control in issues that profoundly impact communities, is universal and compelling information for everyone to consider.

He's on the right path, but there's another component that we believe should be incorporated for Home Rule to function effectively--strong citizen involvement.

PODCAST

We agree with Mr. Price in theory, but if corporations and their lobbyists can influence legislation on a state and federal level, they'll also find ways to influence easily persuadable and sometimes corruptible local governments, particularly the ones that are strapped for funds and jobs.

The two biggest disadvantages of Home Rule are:

---The ability of a municipality to increase revenue through taxes and bond issuance

---The ability to exert local control over decision making with limited or no oversight and the absence of certain procedural limitations

Both of these situations can lead to financial disaster for a community if the decision makers are not intellectually equipped to understand the ramifications of their decisions. It's not commonplace for most municipalities, especially smaller ones, to count among their local government members individuals who have a strong economic and financial background. In fact, most local governmental bodies in Alabama are made up of average citizens who's education level does not exceed high school.

In communities where there are officials with a higher education degree, the problem persists of a lack of economic and financial expertise, in conjunction with the ability to look down the road and envision potential long-range consequences. These communities frequently place the fate of their development plans into the hands of county officials. The agenda of a county government differs from local government and they'll always operate in the best interest of county revenue potential first and foremost, without fair consideration for local community impacts such as:

---Environmental impacts on the quality of life, including air and water quality

---Potential long-term impact on the alteration of the surrounding lands and how it will affect future generations

---The shifting of the community political power base to corporatism instead of populism

---Opening the door to non-community based special interests to write and direct local zoning laws and regulations

Readers of our site can recall numerous stories we've posted that serve as compelling examples of how the theory of Home Rule can be abused by a less than transparent local governmental body. Alabama as a whole is replete with instances of local governmental bad decision making, violations of the Open Meeting Act, adopting zoning laws that are against the wishes of the community as a whole, and a general tin-ear stance when it comes to listening to the will of the people.

Far too often decisions are made by less than one percent of the local community's collective population, yet the impact of those decisions are felt by all. Large industrial and invasive projects should never be approved without full community involvement from start to finish. Citizens need to be able to fully evaluate the impacts of potential projects with unbiased information sources and not be bombarded with the propaganda of PR representatives who are only in it for profit.

Local officials encourage this kind of bad behavior and misinformation campaigns because they know they don't have to let the the process be fair. Alabama's Open Meeting Laws are weak and full of loopholes which further enable secrecy about discussions between officials and potential businesses looking to set up shop in the local area.

More often than not, the community is kept in the dark until it's too late to mount effective opposition to a project they do not want. The more controversial a project is the higher the level of secrecy of any precursory information about the plan.

We think a better solution would be to allow citizens to vote on zoning ordinances and proposed projects in their communities in conjunction with Home Rule. By applying stronger citizen involvement in the process of local decision making, the local government has to answer to a deeper layer of the community's wants and desires, and it removes the inclination of local officials to run rough-shod over their citizens' voices.

There are states that have adopted citizen involvement (through voting) in zoning ordinance changes and implementation. We'd like to see Alabama become more responsive to the value of populist government and allow her people to have more of a voice in their communities.

Currently, after years of stripping away citizen power, many Alabamians have simply given up fighting City Hall and Montgomery. They've become dejected and beaten down after years of being ignored by the decision makers at state and local levels and have lost their will to fight. There's been a massive slide in the balance scale of who has the most rights and the loudest voice from the people to corporations.

Corporate America and the political machine intended this result. They've taken this method to the national level and gained Personhood status thanks to the Supreme Court. Mr Price says "as individuals we don't get exemptions from the law that our neighbors (meaning corporations) do." He's right in that assessment, but we don't believe Home Rule is the solution in absence of populist governmental bodies.

Much like corporate America, local government for the most part, will not police itself and tends to operate under the assumption that election to office means they no longer have to listen to their constituents. A fifedom of sorts is created and it becomes a push pull between the interests of a few versus the interests of many--democracy is thwarted and in its place a dictatorship arises.

Home Rule is a worthy debate and idea. Let's go the extra mile and add real teeth to the discussion by giving citizens a stronger voice in what happens to their communities through voting on what they want their community to become--a vibrant and thriving place to call home or a sacrifice zone.

Taking back the law from big business is only half of the problem. Reinstating citizen power and giving the people a mighty voice in the process is the key to a successful and lasting sustainable solution.

So Say We The Opinion Board Of The Vincent Alabama Confidential

 Subscribe in a reader

CBS 42 Reports on the Jim Walter North River Mine Coal Slurry Spill and the First Round of Water Quality Tests

*Updated pictures of spill entering Lake Tuscaloosa BWRK July 28, 2011

CBS 42 continues their out-in-front of the pack environmental coverage of Walter Energy (WE) this time it's Fayette County and not north Birmingham.

The initial water testing results of the North River following WE's Jim Walter North River Steam Mine coal slurry spill are in, and as predicted, they aren't good.

The effects of the slurry spill don't resemble a benign event like the one described by Jim Walter spokesman Dennis Hall as nothing more serious than "mud and rocks after a heavy rain." Something much more ominous is revealed through this testing and raising suspicions of deliberate attempts to downplay the event.

Test results show:

---Levels of increased arsenic are being detected anywhere from a minimum of 3X to as high as 34X the limit of EPA levels

---Lead levels are coming at 3X EPA limits 

---Suspension of solids are registering at 4-5X EPA limits

---Turbidity is running at 8-12X higher than the water quality range limit 

Black Warrior Riverkeeper is conducting additional testing and will release their results soon. ASMC's Randall Johnson seems to be laying the groundwork for other direction finger-pointing by claiming that the elevated levels of toxins and pollutants are above and below the area of the spill. Maybe someone should remind him of the drifting nature of water columns.

 Subscribe in a reader

Black Warrior Riverkeeper "Remains Hopeful" Despite Hearing Officer's Decision on Sheperd's Bend Mine NPDES Permit

      PRESS RELEASE JULY 22, 2011

Contact:

Nelson Brooke, Riverkeeper, Black Warrior Riverkeeper: (205) 458-0095
Gil Rogers, Senior Attorney, Southern Environmental Law Center: (678) 891-0410

Shepherd Bend Mine Receives Favorable Recommendation

Birmingham – Yesterday, an administrative Hearing Officer recommended that the state Environmental Management Commission (“EMC”) uphold a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) wastewater discharge permit previously issued to Shepherd Bend Mine by the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (“ADEM”).  Black Warrior Riverkeeper is disappointed by the Hearing Officer’s report, which we believe is not in the public interest.

Now, the Hearing Officer’s report must go before the EMC on August 19, 2011, and the EMC must decide whether to adopt the Hearing Officer’s recommendations.  The EMC can make an independent determination about the adequacy of the Hearing Officer’s findings.  Southern Environmental Law Center’s (SELC) Managing Attorney in Alabama, Keith Johnston, states “I hope the EMC thoroughly considers the ramifications of issuing this permit.  It affects not only the Mulberry Fork, but 200,000 people who rely on the Mulberry Fork for a drinking water supply.”  

If the EMC chooses to adopt the Hearing Officer’s recommendations, Black Warrior Riverkeeper, together with the SELC, will appeal that decision.  Black Warrior Riverkeeper Nelson Brooke adds, “It is a shame that the Hearing Officer failed to understand that this coal mine permit is weak and will allow unacceptable levels of pollution to harm the river and drinking water for people in the greater Birmingham area.  We will continue to fight this permit until justice is served.” 

Black Warrior Riverkeeper and SELC first challenged ADEM’s  issuance of permit because, even if Shepherd Bend Mine strictly adheres to the terms of its NPDES permit, the permit will allow the mine to discharge a variety of pollutants—iron, manganese, total suspended solids, total dissolved solids, sulfates and chlorides—into Birmingham-area drinking water.

Black Warrior Riverkeeper supplied expert testimony in the permit challenge about how the discharge of these pollutants would harm drinking water. Moreover, the Birmingham Water Works Board (“BWWB”) has offered detailed information as to how the allowed discharge from the mine will introduce pollutants and sediment into the source water, leading to increased treatment costs (typically passed on to customers) and possible health risks.  The mine site is located on a bend of the Mulberry Fork approximately 800 feet across the river and upstream of a BWWB drinking water intake on the Mulberry Fork of the Black Warrior River which serves 200,000 area citizens.   

Despite these compelling facts, the Hearing Officer, while expressing reservations, found that “there is not a preponderance of evidence that the permit in question authorizes discharges of pollutants which, upon discharge, will cause or contribute to a detectable contravention of state water quality standards.”  According to the Director of SELC’s Georgia and Alabama offices, David Pope, “this decision is completely detached from the evidence presented, none of which the Hearing Officer’s report references.” 

Black Warrior Riverkeeper’s Executive Director, Charles Scribner states “No matter what, we remain hopeful that the UA System, a majority land owner at Shepherd Bend, will not lease their land for mining so close to a major Birmingham drinking water intake.”

# # #

Black Warrior Riverkeeper encourages citizens to continue sharing their views about the Shepherd Bend Mine proposal with Dr. Robert E. Witt, President, University of Alabama, (205) 348-5100

Black Warrior Riverkeeper (www.blackwarriorriver.org) is a citizen-based nonprofit environmental advocacy organization whose mission is to protect and restore the Black Warrior River and its tributaries.  The Southern Environmental Law Center (www.SouthernEnvironment.org) is a regional conservation organization using the power of the law to protect the health and environment of the Southeast (Virginia, Tennessee, North and South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama).  For more information contact Black Warrior Riverkeeper Nelson Brooke at 205-458-0095 or Gil Rogers, Senior Attorney, Southern Environmental Law Center, 678-891-0410.     

 Subscribe in a reader