Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Landfill Operations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public raises perimeter, boundary and waste-acceptance questions at Loudon County solid waste meeting
Summary
Residents and commissioners pressed for clarity about perimeter fencing, a mismatch between current property boundaries and the 2022 landfill contract, and whether large demolition loads from Oak Ridge might come to the landfill; staff said TDEC review is needed for special waste and the commission will investigate contract boundaries.
Chair opened the public-comment period and invited remarks from local resident Chris, who described a recent landfill site visit and raised safety and property concerns.
Chris said the first thousand feet of new asphalt looked "great" but added that "your wheel wash wasn't working," which resulted in mud on county roads. He also pressed the commission on perimeter fencing and maintenance, asking whether the commission planned to restore a maintenance program for fencing around the landfill.
Chris told the commission that current property lines and the boundaries written into the 2022 contract with Republic do not match. "Your property boundaries that you own now are not in the last ... of your contract," he said, urging the commission to correct deeds or amend the contract so holdings, contractual obligations and neighbors' parcels align. Chair said the commission would review the discrepancy.
Chris also asked whether demolition debris being removed from Oak Ridge National Laboratory's Beta 1 and Beta 3 structures might be brought to the county landfill. Republic's representative said acceptance would depend on whether material is classified as special waste and whether TDEC has approved it; he added that any unusual loads would have to be evaluated before acceptance.
Republic's representative also told the commission that a TDEC assessment monitoring report the company submitted in January 2025 has been "sitting in review" for roughly a year and a half, delaying formal regulatory feedback on some groundwater monitoring results.
The meeting record shows the commission agreed to look into the contract and boundary questions and confirmed that site plans tied to creek work would pass through TDEC and the local planning office and be available for public review through those channels.
The meeting adjourned after the commission handled routine business and votes (see "Votes at a glance" and related minutes).
