MARLINTON, W.Va. — The Pocahontas County Sanitary Landfill, a fixture of local waste management since 1986, is hurtling toward a premature and permanent closure projected for December 2026. While residents may point fingers at current county leadership over skyrocketing fees, an analysis of the landfill’s history reveals that its demise was sealed by a "perfect storm" of failed land negotiations, a surge in construction debris, and insurmountable geographic and financial hurdles.
The fatal blow to the facility was struck in 2017 during a failed attempt to expand its footprint. The Solid Waste Authority (SWA) had historically leased its original 43-acre tract from the Fertig family and sought to purchase an additional 25 adjacent acres from property owner Jody Fertig. Engineering studies confirmed that 10 of these acres were ideal for new landfill cells, capable of gravity-feeding leachate into the existing treatment plant and securing the county’s disposal needs for another 50 years.
However, Jody Fertig passed away in October 2017, and his heirs ultimately refused to sell the land. Stating they lacked the desire or ability to seize the property via eminent domain, the SWA saw its most viable path for expansion permanently vanish.
Meanwhile, the landfill’s existing airspace was being rapidly devoured by a silent culprit: Construction and Demolition (C&D) debris. C&D waste—such as torn-off roofs and demolished decks—is incredibly bulky and difficult to compact, acting as a massive "space eater" in the landfill cells. This depletion was severely accelerated by the catastrophic 2016 floods. The sudden, massive influx of flood-damaged building materials and debris placed an unforeseen burden on the C&D cell, moving the projected closure date forward by several years.
With expansion off the table and existing cells filling up, the SWA explored building an entirely new landfill, but quickly found it to be a geographic and financial impossibility. Large swaths of Pocahontas County consist of federal and state forest lands, such as the Monongahela National Forest, where solid waste facilities are strictly prohibited. Furthermore, the region’s sensitive karst topography—dominated by caves and sinkholes—makes siting a new landfill highly risky without exorbitant engineering costs to protect groundwater.
Even if a suitable site could be found, the economics simply did not work. Modern environmental regulations require expensive petroleum-based composite liners and complex leachate systems, pushing the cost of a new landfill to over $2 million per acre, or more than $10 million in total. Because Pocahontas County generates only about 8,000 tons of municipal solid waste annually, it mathematically lacks the required tonnage to carry the massive debt service for a new facility.
Faced with these insurmountable limitations, the SWA has been forced to abandon the landfill model entirely. As the facility prepares to cap its final cells, the county is now pivoting to a controversial public-private transfer station model, preparing to export its waste—and its waste management future—across county lines.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The former Howes Leather Company operated in Frank, West Virginia, from the early 1900s until 1994 and was once the largest producer of shoe sole leather in the United States. The historical use of traditional vegetable tanning methods utilized tannic acid extracted from tree bark, which over 90 years resulted in extensive subsurface pollution.
The Chemistry of the Contamination Decades of wastewater discharges and lagoon leakages created a "commingled plume" of groundwater pollution. Tannic acid lowers the pH of the water and acts as a chelating agent, meaning it binds with naturally occurring soil metals (such as iron and manganese) and makes them highly soluble and mobile in the groundwater. In addition to these acids, the site is contaminated with heavy metals, PCBs, inorganic contaminants, and volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds (VOCs and SVOCs).
Funding and Regulatory Framework The groundwater remediation is funded by a $497,697 EPA Brownfields Clean-up Grant awarded to the Pocahontas County Commission. The environmental engineering is being managed by the Greenbrier Environmental Group, led by Vice-President and Licensed Remediation Specialist (LRS) Audrey Sampson.
The site has been officially entered into the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection’s (WVDEP) Voluntary Remediation Program (VRP #25011). Because the county did not cause the historical pollution, project managers have advised applying for a Ground Water Protection Act deviation exemption under "innocent owner" status.
The Groundwater Remediation Strategy The remediation process involves several highly technical and legally mandated steps:
- Installation of New Monitoring Wells: The original monitoring wells placed by Howes Leather are either compromised or outdated, so new wells must be drilled in a triangulated pattern. This is critical to determine the exact direction of the groundwater flow and locate the "leading edge" of the plume, ensuring that contaminated "base flow" does not enter the nearby Greenbrier River.
- Mandatory Three-Year Monitoring: The groundwater will be subjected to continuous monitoring for three years. This timeframe is scientifically required to observe seasonal variability, allowing engineers to track "slug loading" (when spring rains flush pollutants through the soil) and concentration spikes that occur during dry summer months when the water is less diluted.
- Targeted Laboratory Analysis: During the "purge and sample" routines, the water will be rigorously tested for Target Analyte List (TAL) metals, Total Organic Carbon (TOC) to measure the organic loads associated with the tannic acid, and changes in pH and conductivity.
- Strict "Clean Fill" Protocols: As the county simultaneously demolishes dilapidated buildings on the site, any fill dirt brought onto the property to grade the land must be chemically analyzed for heavy metals, VOCs, and SVOCs. Introducing untested, contaminated fill dirt could ruin the site's environmental integrity and immediately reset the three-year monitoring clock.
The Ultimate Goal: Industrial Redevelopment The purpose of this extensive remediation is to obtain a Certificate of Completion from the WVDEP, which provides the county with a release of liability. Once the groundwater is verified as stable, the site will be governed by the West Virginia Uniform Environmental Covenant Act (UECA). This will place institutional controls on the property deed, legally prohibiting residential use and the drilling of drinking water wells, while clearing the property to become a safe, shovel-ready industrial park.
____________________________________________________________________________
The "innocent owner" status for the former Howes Tannery site refers to the legal designation recognizing that the Pocahontas County Commission did not cause the historical pollution present on the property.
Because the county acquired the site after the tannery's operations had already contaminated the area, project advisors—specifically the Brownfields Manager and the project's toxicologist—recommended that the county use this status to apply to the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) for a Ground Water Protection Act deviation exemption. This exemption and status protect the county from being held legally responsible for the 90 years of legacy contamination they are currently working to clean up.
_______________________________________________________________________________
The 2016 floods significantly shortened the lifespan of the Pocahontas County Landfill. The disaster generated a massive influx of flood-damaged building materials and debris, which placed an unforeseen and heavy burden specifically on the facility's Construction and Demolition (C&D) cell. Although recovery programs like the Rehabilitation Environmental Action Plan (REAP) and the RISE WV Clearance and Demolition Program helped manage the cleanup, the sheer volume of debris accelerated the landfill's depletion and moved its projected closure date forward by several years.
_______________________________________________________________________________
The Greenbrier Valley Economic Development Corporation (GVEDC) acts as a strategic intermediary in the land transfer process for the new Pocahontas County waste transfer station. Under the SWA's "Option 4" agreement, the Solid Waste Authority (SWA) will sell approximately two acres of its public landfill property to the GVEDC, which will then lease the land to JacMal, LLC (a private company owned by Jacob Meck) to construct the facility.
The GVEDC serves several critical functions in this arrangement:
- Tax Abatement: The primary reason for utilizing the GVEDC is to execute a legal maneuver that shields the transfer station project from property taxes. Using an economic development corporation as an intermediary is a common practice in West Virginia administrative law to facilitate industrial growth through tax abatements and lease-back arrangements. GVEDC representative Ruthanna Beezley emphasized to angry residents that the organization is not involved in SWA's internal decisions, but is simply facilitating this transfer to save the SWA money.
- Legal and Antitrust Protection: By ensuring the transfer station is built on land owned by a public development authority rather than a purely private entity, the SWA is attempting to claim "public" status for the facility. This legal distinction is crucial for defending the SWA's monopolistic "flow control" mandates against potential challenges under the Sherman Antitrust Act and the Dormant Commerce Clause.
- Political and Financial "Cover": The involvement of the GVEDC illustrates a growing reliance on cross-county cooperation. By transferring the land to the GVEDC, the SWA effectively secures the political and financial backing of a larger regional body to help bridge funding gaps and meet modern infrastructure requirements that the small county cannot manage independently.
Despite the financial and legal strategies behind the move, the GVEDC's role in the land transfer has sparked severe public backlash. Residents have heavily criticized the arrangement, viewing the deeding of public land to facilitate a private company's construction project as a "privatization of a public utility" and a betrayal of public trust.
__________________________________________________________________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment