Share This Article
A state environmental inspection of the Baxter County quarry found solid waste that had been partially buried on site and drilling mud dumped without state authorization, according to a complaint evaluation report completed Feb. 24 by the Arkansas Division of Environmental Quality.
The unannounced inspection, conducted Feb. 11 by state Inspector Jason Bolenbaugh, did not find water quality violations at the quarry on County Road 69. No discharge was leaving the site at the time of the visit, and no water samples were collected. But the report documents a series of waste disposal problems and directs County Judge Kevin Litty to take corrective action on multiple fronts.
Despite documenting illegally buried solid waste, unauthorized drilling mud dumping and issuing a list of corrective directives, the report’s non-compliance section checked “No” for items of non-compliance identified. The inspector wrote: “No water quality violations were noted during the evaluation. However, the solid waste identified just south of the tree debris pile must be removed and disposed of properly.”
How the state found buried waste and unauthorized dumping at a county-operated site but concluded there were no items of non-compliance is a question the report does not answer.
Seven months to respond
The inspection was prompted by two complaints filed July 15, 2025. The state did not visit the site until Feb. 11, 2026, nearly seven months later. The report does not explain the delay.
Jim Baker, who lives at 488 County Road 69 adjacent to the quarry, wrote in his complaint that Baxter County “is adding two buildings across from my property and they are disposing road materials, waste water and dumping dirt into this pit that is connected to my pond.” Baker alleged the pond was filled with dirt and chemicals from drilling mud disposal. “He is allowing outside contractors to dump wastewater and dirt as well,” Baker wrote. “The County is allowing this and I am not sure if they are permitted. This needs to be looked at.”
The second complaint came from Betty Evans, who lives within a quarter mile of the old mine. Evans described a broader pattern of problems that the state inspection largely did not address.
“This open mine has been closed for at least 15 years,” Evans wrote. “I understand that it is to be reclaimed to its natural state by law. It has been misused, and the county has allowed illegal dumping and burning there.”
Evans alleged the quarry has standing water entering local water systems and “causing bacteria levels too high to drink the water without chlorination.” She said old electric poles containing chemicals were piled at the site and could leach into groundwater. Her well serves 12 families, she said, and the state required them to install a chlorinator at a cost of $3,700.
“As homeowners we paid the cost,” Evans wrote. “The county did not pay for it.”
The inspection report does not address Evans’ allegation about bacteria levels in her neighborhood’s water supply. It does not address whether the 12 families she described should have had to pay $3,700 out of pocket for a chlorinator that she says was necessitated by quarry operations. And it does not address her assertion that the quarry, closed for at least 15 years by her account, should have been reclaimed to its natural state under state law.
The inspector did not collect water samples during the visit.
What the inspector found
Bolenbaugh conducted the evaluation with Litty, Baxter County Road Department Superintendent Larry Carter and E&E Inspector Jon Vickery present.
At the quarry pit, which is approximately 40 feet deep and filled with water, the inspector found no evidence that drilling mud or wastewater had been released into it. Carter told the inspector the water was clear and that residents fish in the pit for catfish. A single blue hose in the pit is used so the County Road Department can withdraw water into water trucks, according to the report.
“There wasn’t any evidence suggesting wastewater was dumped into the pit that would cause elevated bacteria levels in drinking water,” Bolenbaugh wrote. “There wasn’t any cloudy or dirty water leaving the mine site.”
However, the report confirmed that Black Hills Energy had been allowed by Litty to dump drilling mud from small containment trailers at the site. The mud was not dumped into the pit itself but was placed on the ground approximately 260 feet to the southeast. The dumping area is no longer visible because a large pile of tree debris now sits on top of it.
The drilling mud dumping was stopped in August or September 2025. But Bolenbaugh made clear that the county did not have proper authorization for the activity. “If the County wishes to resume the dumping of drilling mud onto the site, the County must first contact the Division of Environmental Quality, Office of Land Resources to inquire about using the drilling mud as beneficial fill material,” the report states.
“To the south of the tree debris pile was solid waste that had been partially buried,” Bolenbaugh wrote. “Mr. Carter explained that people will dump materials at the quarry. I explained to Judge Litty and Mr. Carter that any solid waste that is dumped at the site must be disposed of at the landfill and not buried in the quarry.”
Litty told the inspector the materials would be removed.
The county allows North Arkansas Electric to bring tree debris to the quarry and pile it for burning. But the inspector noted that tree debris from both the county and the electric cooperative had been placed “around the edge of the fill area” and warned that tree debris “is not considered a beneficial fill material so please ensure it is not buried.” The inspector recommended Litty start a second staging area for tree debris so the existing pile does not keep growing.
The inspector noted the north side of the quarry pit where water would overflow with rising water levels. Any surface water discharge from the quarry “may drain to the south into unnamed tributaries leading to Vickory Creek,” the report states.
Corrective actions
The report directs the county to remove the solid waste and dispose of it at the landfill. Ensure no vegetative debris is buried on site. Contact the DEQ Office of Land Resources before dumping any drilling mud at the site. Monitor stormwater runoff and install stormwater best management practices if turbid water is leaving the quarry or entering waters of the state. Monitor the area used by North Arkansas Electric “to ensure any chemical or petroleum spills are remediated.”
A dispute months in the making
Baker and Evans filed their state complaints in July 2025. A month later, the quarry became a public flashpoint at the county level.
In August 2025, the Baxter County Environmental Committee met for the first time in 12 years after social media posts showing materials burning at the quarry raised alarm among residents. Many initially believed the burning material was debris from the recently demolished El Chico’s restaurant. Litty had previously said the county would use the quarry to dispose of that building material but later received legal advice against it. He did not publicly announce the change in plans.
Baker confronted Litty directly at that meeting about dumping at the quarry. He testified that hydro-excavation trucks also used for septic services had been dumping at the site and that his well water had deteriorated after the dumping began. Litty told the committee he had stopped the hydro-excavation trucks as soon as he learned about them.
Litty also acknowledged at the meeting that unauthorized activities had been taking place at the quarry for years.
“Some things that’s gone on in the past at the quarry, we put a stop to some of it,” Litty said. “I didn’t realize a lot of it was going on because it’s gone on for maybe 15, 20, 25 years.”
Litty presented water test results at the meeting showing the quarry water met safety standards. Baker and another resident said they were conducting independent water tests to verify the county’s findings. The county announced it was investing $15,000 in an electronic gate and key fob system to track who enters and exits the quarry.
The Black Hills Energy drilling mud documented in the state inspection report is a separate issue from the hydro-excavation truck dumping Baker raised at the committee meeting. Litty did not publicly mention the Black Hills Energy drilling mud at that meeting. The state inspection report is the first public documentation of that activity.
Unanswered questions
The state report confirms what residents alleged: unauthorized waste disposal was taking place at the quarry. What remains unanswered is whether those activities contaminated the water supply that Evans says 12 families depend on, whether the county bears any responsibility for the $3,700 those families spent on a chlorinator, and whether the quarry should have been reclaimed years ago under state mining regulations.
The report also does not explain why the state waited nearly seven months to inspect a site where residents alleged active contamination of their drinking water.
