-------
  £
i'l
pa
W w
go
CU .-H
II
w •+*
el
j
<
S
w
$
S
u
i
g
  £

        i
        §
        w
        i



           >n ,5
           *— t \o
           o -!
           9 -r
           2 §
           o »
           «
           o
           U

           1
                        I
                        8s 41
at
is
sed
u

t
ed
ip
el
p
a
Optional
litate
igned
de
ed
«o-
A
                       D-
                       I
                             o
                             s
                             cs
                                 o
    |

    Z
                               -
                             >;
                             < 0
                        72

-------
managed, either additional panels would need to be placed, or soil cover would
have to be made available at the working face and placed onto areas that remain
exposed, after  placement of the panel.   This use of soil  cover  would not only
require additional time and labor, but would also consume landfill capacity.

      Working  Face Preparation—  The preparation of the working face prior to
placement of the panel and the care taken in placement of the panel can have a
significant impacts on the effective life of a panel.   Consequently, operators
should ensure  that the working face  is properly compacted to provide a smooth
surface, and that protruding objects which could damage panels are eliminated.
In addition, during  placement ,of panels, measures should be  taken to prevent
unnecessary stress on the material and minimize snagging while dragging the panel
across the working face.

      Panel Placement—  Most geosynthetic cover materials are placed onto the
working face either manually or using landfill equipment,  such as compactors or
dozers^ although  specially  designed and fabricated equipment is  used at some
sites.

      Manual placement is usually restricted to placement of light-weight and/or
small panels which can be deployed by lifting or dragging  the panel with a two-
to three-person crew.  However,  placement  of panels  in this manner often will
requires  crews  to  walk  across the  working face while dragging the  panel,  a
procedure that increases both risk of  injury and exposure to the waste.

      To place panels using landfill  equipment, both corners of the  leading edge
of the panel are typically attached to the blades of the equipment using chains,
ropes,  or nylon straps.  The corners are  attached as high on the blades as
possible, and  the blades are  lifted during placement to reduce drag as the panel
is towed  across the working  face.   By wrapping a smooth round object (e.g.,
discarded ball or  smooth rock) in the  corner of the fabric, securing the strap
around  it, and then  attaching the strap to the equipment  instead of puncturing
the panel to attach  the strap, a  more  durable connection that is less prone to
tearing  can be provided.   Alternatively,  some  sites  use a steel bar  or rod
inserted  into  pockets sewn along the leading edge to reduce localized stress on
the panel.  This bar or rod is then attached to landfill equipment to facilitate
dragging  of the panel across the  working face.   Once  placed,  a   ground  crew
normally  assists  in making  final adjustments to the  panel to ensure that the
working face is completely covered,  and to place anchoring to secure the panel
over the  wastes.

      At some  sites, specially designed and fabricated equipment, e.g., rollers,
lifting bar, or hydraulic reel, is used to facilitate the placement of panels and
extend  their effective life.  When using rollers, panels  are attached to a 25-
to 30-ft  (7.6- to 9.1-m)  roller, usually fabricated from sections of conduit,
which can then be placed onto a custom-fabricated skid. The skid  is dragged to
the edge of the working face  by landfill equipment, where the roller is detached
from the  skid  and the panel unrolled down the working  face.  Use of rollers has
been demonstrated  to not only  extend the effective life of panels, but also to
reduce  difficulties encountered in  panel  placement during  windy  weather
conditions.  The use of a lifting bar and hydraulic reel, currently used to place
specific  geosynthetic products,  is discussed in  subsequent sections.

      Anchoring—  Panels are routinely anchored after placement to prevent them
from  being blown  off  the working  face  and exposing  the  wastes.   Typically,
discarded tires or sandbags, which can be stockpiled near  the working face, are
placed  along the edges and across the panel at intervals ranging from 20 to 30
ft  (6.1 to 9.1 m), depending both on the weight of  the material and anticipated
wind  conditions.    Some sites, prefer  to  place  soil  on  the  edges as  a more
effective and  efficient method for  securing  the  panel, particularly if soil is
routinely used to cover any exposed areas of wastes remaining along the edges of
the panel after placement.
                                       73

-------
      Panel Retrieval— Panels are normally removed from the working face prior
to the  start  of the next operating  day.   Hence, the  necessary personnel and
equipment have to be available, and  sufficient time must be allowed,  for this
activity to be performed prior to  the arrival  and disposal of waste  at the
working  face.   This may  require  modification  of  the work schedule  for site
personnel. Furthermore, depending  on the season of the  year and operating hours
at the  site, panel retrieval may  have to be performed while it is still dark,
thereby increasing the risk of accidents or injury.

      Retrieval  is  accomplished by  reversal  of the procedures  used  to place
panels.  Anchoring materials are first removed and  stockpiled near the working
face.  If soil was used to secure the edges, particular care must be taken not
to tear the panel upon retrieval.   Panels are then  removed, either manually or
using  landfill equipment, by pulling them  back over themselves  to  minimize
snagging.  They  are then  stored near the working face for subsequent  use.  If
skid-mounted rollers were used, the  panel is rolled back to the skid which is
then dragged to an area adjacent to  the working  face.

      Panel Disposal—  Panels are typically reused until they are no longer able
to serve as effective daily cover due to physical deterioration  of the material,
tearing  and  punctures  during placement and retrieval,  and climatic  stresses
imposed by rain,  wind and freezing  temperatures.  Such panels are either disposed
of within the landfill or used for other purposes at the  site.  Disposal within
the landfill is reportedly accomplished by either tearing and shredding the panel
with  landfill  equipment while the panel  is  still  in place, or by retrieving,
folding,  and  then burying along  with other waste.   Such disposal practices,
however, may  result  in subsequent operational  problems,  as the buried panels
create barriers which can impede the controlled movement  of  leachates and gases
within  the landfill.  Alternatively, panels that are no longer useful as daily
cover  have reportedly  been used for  reinforcing  roadbeds,  lining  drainage
channels, and  controlling erosion of side slopes.

Climatic Considerations—

      Rain—   The impact of rain varies with the composition of the particular
geosynthetic  material.    Although the use  of geosynthetic products  need not
necessarily be restricted during rain events,  nonwoven  materials can absorb
moisture  and  become heavier  and  more  difficult to handle.   Water repellant
materials are  not affected by rain events.

      Wind—  The impact of wind on the placement of  panels onto the  working face
is primarily  dependent upon the weight of the material and size of the panel.
For example,  a large,  light-weight panel  will  be more  difficult to place under
windy conditions than a smaller and/or heavier panel.  The method used to place
a  panel,  whether manually, towed with landfill equipment  or  rolled  onto the
working face,  also influences the potential  impact of wind during placement.
Specific  impacts of wind  on placement of  the various products  are presented in
the  following sections.   The impact of  wind subsequent  to placement,  such as
panels  being blown off the working face,  is  primarily  dependent  upon proper
anchoring of  the panels.  When properly  anchored, panels  have  been reported to
withstand winds  of 50 mph (80 km/hr).

       Freezing Temperatures—  Although freezing  temperatures alone  do not
restrict the  use of  geosynthetics,  if the panel has absorbed moisture, as can
occur with nonwoven materials, it   can  freeze and adhere  to  portions  of the
underlying waste if  placed onto the  working face prior to freezing conditions.
Similarly, the panel can  freeze onto itself or the  underlying  soil if freezing
conditions  develop while the panel is  stored.    Under  such  conditions, the
retrieval or placement of  the panel will be more difficult and time-consuming and
will  increase the likelihood  of damage to the panel.   The impact of freezing
conditions on geosynthetic materials that are water repellant and do not absorb
moisture is less significant.  However, moisture trapped between the working face
and  a panel can,  on  occasion, cause  it  to freeze to portions of  the underlying
                                       74

-------
  durlna  fra^ncT    f-**   removal more  difficult.   Panels also become slippery
  !™?;Lf 4-     ,9,. conditlons<  and extra  caution must  be used when  crews are
  required to  walk on  the panels during placement or retrieval of anchoring.
           a--  in order to  prevent damage or possible loss,  geosynthetic
                ^? .rs. ~
.          -4,-. Ti^n/
  retrieval without removal  of snow also  increase thl likelihood of tearlna and
  destroyxng the panel due to the additional weight imparted by the  snow!  with f
  heavy snowfall, removal of snow may be impractical.  This can result in the loss
        P     or necessitate the use of an alternative working face until thl snow
            aiValternat:LVe,, working face is not available, the buried panel may
 Operational Considerations—


        %£^S^-J^£?tt* P^d-°ver the^working face, geosynthetic
                                                                      may s

                                                                      «
 particularly if constructed of light-weight material.       P^operxy  anchored,

 faf.   Blowi"5 Lf^ter and od°r Control— As long as the dimensions of the workina
 face are controlled so that the panel (s) will completely cover the workina £ ace
 titt^    ter " effectively Controlled.   Aesthetically,  several user? nSSd
 that these cover systems looked better and  provided  a more sightly ajjearance
 than BOO.! cover, S1nce there are fewer objects protruding from the working facl?
                   o^^he
  on        c°nducted, by RUSMAR,  Inc.  (22) ,  geosynthetics can provide tffecive
 control of odors and other emissions, although the effectiveness varies
 different products.  Results indicated that Airspace Saver™ and ' Griff oSn
 as  effective as foam in the control  of  odor (99% or greater), while the odor
 control efficiency provided by FabriSoil® was 82%, baled on samples collected
 both  immediately after  placement and the following morning dThr later)    Is
 with  the foam,  methane  control efficiencies of 100% were also reportld lor all
 three products  immediately after placement,  but these decreased  P          '
specific organic  compounds were not performed on these saples.
while   h       ,re9ardl.ess ,°f the  control  of odor and other emissions provided
while the  panels are in place on the working  face,  upon retrieval  of t>ane\a
particularly when the panels had been left in place for  several ^ days, thSre iln
«LairS ?n* °-f  °d.°r.S °r °ther emissions that were previously contained^ by thS
panel   (This is similar to what can occur when soil daily cover is scraned fl-om
a working face prior to the  start  of  the next operating  day ° as is JJacticed 5?
some sites to conserve landfill capacity and soil.)             is practiced at


and 8elf-eJSn^laBMnir"  Alth^ugh some geosynthetics are rated as nonflammable
ana sej.f extinguishing, or  are available with a  f ire-ret ardant  finish   e cr
AStoleuSt?b?.C°^IER' materf als currently being used as  alternative daA'y cov^r
are combustible.  However, moisture absorbed by nonwoven materials during use can
                                      75

-------
                                                                                          1
reduce •their combustibility.  Also, the placement of panels onto the working face
can reduce the transfer of atmospheric oxygen to the wastes, the effectiveness
of which is dependent on the permeability of the particular material.  Moreover,
since panels are typically removed prior to placement of wastes during the next
operation day, they do not provide a  fire barrier  within the landfill.

      Minimization of Moisture Infiltration—  Many geosynthetic materials are
water-resistant  and,  when properly placed onto  the  working face without gaps
between panels if multiple panels are used,  effectively shed rainwater, prevent
infiltration  into the wastes,  and thereby  help to reduce the generation of
leachate.   Although nonwoven materials initially  absorb moisture during rain
events, similar to soil cover, they are also able  to subsequently shed water from
the working  face,  depending  on the intensity of the rain event.   Furthermore,
moisture absorbed by these materials can evaporate without infiltration into the
landfill.

      Leachate and Gas Movement—  Since panels are removed before  the start of
the next  operating day,  leachate and gas movement within the landfill is not
curtailed, as no restrictive barriers remain within the  landfill.

4.3.2  Airspace Saver" and COVERTECH  C-440.

      Airspace Saver™ Daily Cover, manufactured  by Wire  Rope Specialist, Baton
Rouge, LA,  and COVERTECH C-440, manufactured  by COVERTECH Fabricating, Inc..,
Rexale, Ontario, Canada, are very similar cover materials as both manufacturers
use the same fabric, FABRENE®, and incorporate a nylon web strapping system which
supports the fabric (13, 50).  Both systems are also  designed for long-term use
(12 to 18  mo)  as daily covers.  Airspace Saver™ has  been used at sites in 13
States, principally  in  the  Southeastern United States, and has been available
since 1989.  COVERTECH C-440  has  been  used at several sites in the United States
and Canada and has been available  since 1990.   Because of the similarities in
fabrication, use, and performance,  both of these cover systems will  be presented
together in this section.

Material—                                                         ,
      These alternative daily cover systems  both  consist of a woven fabric of
high—density polyethylene tapes, i.e., threads, coated on both sides with a low-
density polyethylene.  Panels are fabricated by heat  welding sections of fabric
together, and then reinforcing the fabric by sewing high tensile strength nylon
web straps over the heat welds (which are at 12-ft  (3.7-m)  intervals), at right
angles to the heat welds (also  at 12-ft (3.7-m) "intervals), as well  as along the
edges of the  panel (13,  50).   Steel "D" rings are attached to the ends of the
straps to facilitate lifting or dragging of the panel as it is placed or removed
from the working face.  According to  the manufacturer, COVERTECH C-440 differs
from Airspace Saver™ Daily Cover by using strapping on both sides of the fabric,
and different fabrication and sewing  techniques  to attach the  strapping system
to the fabric.

      These cover systems are unique among the various other geosynthetic cover
systems currently available,  since  a strapping system has been incorporated into
the design to decrease stress on the fabric and increase the panel's longevity.
(Wire Rope Specialists has indicated that a patent is pending for their Airspace
Saver™* Strapping System.  (50))   The fabric, which  weighs 9.0 oz/yd  (305 g/m2),
without strapping, is also very  durable and water  resistant.

      Although  also  available  in various customized  sizes, the standard size
panel is 48 by 50 ft  (14.6 by 15.3 m)  and can cover  an area of 2,400  ft2 (223 m2}.
 This size has been determined  to be the most practical for handling by landfill
personnel and equipment.  Typically,  several of  these panels are used to covesr
a working face.
                                       76

-------
Placement and Retrieval of Panels—
      These panels are usually deployed by lifting or dragging the panel, either
manually or  with landfill equipment  (compactors  or dozers),  onto the working
face-  When multiple panels  are used,  as  is  typically the  case for these cover
systems, individual panels are sequentially placed and overlapped approximately
2 to 3 ft (O.6 to 0.9 m) until the entire working face is covered.  A crew of two
to three (minimum of two) can manually place a single 48 by 50 ft (14.6 by 15..3
m) panel within 5 to 10 min  (AS-l(C-8)).  Landfill equipment is usually used for
larger-sized panels.  Placement of panels to  cover a 100 by 100 ft (30.5 by 30.5
m) working face  using  such equipment  averages  20 to 30 min.

      Alternative Methods of Placement—   Other innovative methods for placement
of these panels,  using either a custom-designed lifting bar in conjunction with
a trackhoe  excavator or  a  skid-mounted roller, are reportedly  being  used at
several landfills (AS-l(C-S),  AS-2(C-8),  CT-l(C-ll)).

      At  sites   using  the custom-designed lifting  bar in  conjunction with a
trackhoe excavator,  a 50-ft  (15.3-m)  spreader bar  with hooks spaced at 12-ft
(3.7-m)  intervals,  which align with  the  strapping  system, is attached to the
trackhoe's bucket.   The  bar  is placed perpendicular  to  the lifting  arm and
attached with retaining pins to the bucket -  a  five-minute procedure.  Next, the
"D" rings along the edges of opposite ends of  a  panel are simultaneously attached
to the spreader  bar.  Several panels can be attached to the lifting bar in this
manner.  The trackhoe then lifts the bar and panels until they have cleared the
ground  and  are  hanging  vertically  from the lifting  bar  (Figure 23),  and
transports them to  the working face.   Once the trackhoe has  maneuvered to the
correct position at the working face, the lifting bar is lowered (Figure 24), one
edge of a panel is detached,  the trackhoe  extends the section by backing up, and
when fully extended, ,the other edge of the panel is detached and placed onto the
working face  (Figure 25). This procedure is repeated to place  additional panels
as may  be  required to cover  the working  face.  Using this method, a trackhoe
operator, assisted by a two-person ground crew which  guides the operator, unhooks
the panels,  and  makes final adjustments once the  panels  are placed onto the
working face, can cover  a 10,000  ft   (930 m)  working face  (Figure 26)  in less
than 3O min (AS-2(C-8)).   One user reported placing 12, 48 by 50 ft (14.6 by 15,3
m) Airspace  Saver™  panels in 1 to  1.25 hr (AS-l(C-8)).

      Coordination  between the equipment  operator and ground  crew is necessary
to efficiently  use this  procedure and minimize risks  of  accidents,  since it
requiress  that personnel  walk on  the  working  face in  close  proximity to the
spreader bar while  it is being moved.  This method can also  be used without a
ground  crew, but would require more time  since  the  operator  would  have to
dismount the trackhoe to unhook and  adjust each of the panels.  By using this
method to lift,  transport, and place the panels onto the working  face, wear and
tear on the  panel that would otherwise occur if they were  dragged onto and off
the working  face are  greatly reduced,  thereby  extending  the useful life of the
panels.,

      Another site reported using a skid-mounted roller to place 25 by 50 ft (7,.6
by 15.3 m) COVERTECH  C-440 panels  (CT-1(C-ll)).  Using  this method, panels are
attached and rolled onto a 25-ft (7.6-m) roller which is then placed on a custorn-
fabricated  skid  to tow the  roller to and from the working face,  placing and
retrieving the panel(s) as previously discussed.  It usually requires a two-man
crew approximately  30  min to cover a  50 by 50  ft  (15.3 by  15.3 m) working face
using two skid-mounted rollers, including both the placement and anchoring of the
panels..

      Anchoring of  Panels—   Once panels are  placed, regardless of the method
used, they are typically anchored by placing sand bags  or tires on the edges at
15- to 20-ft (4.6- to 6.1-m)  intervals.  It will usually require a two- to three-
person crew  approximately 15 to 20 min to place anchoring  onto a 100 by 100 i:t
(30.5 by 30.5 m) working  face (AS-l(C-S)).   Because of the additional time and


                                       77

-------
 Figure 23.   Lifting bar,  attached to excavator bucket,
             being used to place  48 by 50 ft  (14.6 by
             15.3  m) Airspace Saver™ panel. (Can also be
             used  to place COVERTECH C-440 panels.)
Figure 24.  Leading edge  of panel being  lowered  onto
            working  face  by  excavator equipped  with
            lifting bar.
                          78

-------
Figure  25.   Trailing edge of panel being detached from
             lifting bar  after  extension over working
             face.
Figure 26.  A  10,00 ft2  (930m2)  working  face  covered
            with panels placed using lifting bar.
                          79

-------
personnel required,  anchoring  is used at some sites only if winds in excess of
20 mph {[32 km/hr)  are expected.                                    :

      To eliminate the  need  to anchor panels  once  they are  placed  onto the
working face, some sites have modified the fabrication of panels by adding a 5/8-
in. (l.<5-cm) chain in the  seam around the entire edge of the panel ;(AS-l(C-8),
AS-2(C-8)).  This modification has been demonstrated to be effective in anchoring
the edges of panels and preventing  them from being blown off the working  face at
winds of 35  mph (56 km/hr).   The  additional weight  of  the panels,  due to the
addition of the  chain,  does not significantly affect  handling of the panels.

      Retrieval—    Retrieval of  the  panels,  whether  placed  manually,  with
landfill equipment,  or  with a  skid-mounted roller, is accomplished by reversal
of the procedures  used to place the panel.   If the  trackhoe  with lifting bar is
used, the trackhoe maneuvers  the  spreader  bar to permit- attachment of the "D"
rings on one edge of a panel,  lifts and draws the panel back, and lowers  the bar
again to permit  attachment of  the  "D" rings on  the opposite edge of the panel.
This procedure is  repeated with the other panels.   Once  all  panels are removed,
the trackhoe maneuvers  to a storage area near the working face and lowers the
lifting bar  (with panels still attached).  The bar  is  then detached from the
trackhoe's  bucket, making  the trackhoe  available to perform other functions
during the  operating day.   If the skid-mounted roller is  used,  the panel is
reattached to the  roller,  rolled back to the skid and then  attached.  The skid
is  then . towed  to  an  area  adjacent  to  the working   face.    Application
considerations  are  summarized in   Tables  9A and  9B for Airspace  Saver1" and
COVERTECH C-440,  respectively.

Climatic Considerations—
      Climatic conditions that may  impact the use of these cover systems are snow
or windy conditions.  The  significance of any potential impacts due to  snow or
wind are also dependent upon the size of the panels and method of placement used.

      Although normally not used when snow is predicted, for reasons previously
presented, because of the thickness and durability of the fabric, there  appears
to be  less  risk of  puncturing ,or  tearing  this  fabric (as compared to thinner
materials) if snow is to be manually removed.   Nonetheless, snow removal would
still be a time-consuming and  labor-intensive task.  A site  that uses a  lifting
bar and trackhoe to place  and retrieve panels reported that with a 2- to 3-in.
(5— to 7.6—cm)  snowfall, snow was  removed by attaching the  spreader bar to one
end of a 48 by  50  ft (14.6 by 15.3 m) panel and gradually lifting the panel to
allow the snow to slide off the panels, thereby eliminating the need to manually
remove the snow (AS-2(C-8)).

      Because of the heavier  9 oz/yd2 (305 g/m2) weight and  smaller 48 by 50 ft
(14.6  by 15.3  m)  size of panels  typically used,  wind  does  not  impact the
placement of these products as much as similar conditions may affect other cover
systems  consisting of  larger,  lighter-weight panels.   These panels have been
placed manually, with landfill equipment, and by using a trackhoe with  lifting
bar, at winds of 20 mph (32 km/hr)  (AS-l(C-S)).

      Neither rain nor freezing conditions were  reported to adversely impact the
use of these cover systems. Since  the.material is water-resistant, rainwater is
shed  and not  adsorbed  by  the material.   Cold or freezing  weather  was  also
reported not to noticeably affect the flexibility of the material or inhibit its
placement and removal under such conditions.  Climatic considerations related to
the  use  of these  products are summarized in Tables  10A and 10B  for Airspace
Saver1" and COVERTECH C-440, respectively.

Performance—
      Based  on  user  experience, the  overall performance of  both these cover
systems as alternative  daily cover  has been very satisfactory.   Users expressed
particular satisfaction with the panel durability, which permitted continuous use
                                       80

-------
under various climatic conditions for long periods of time.  One site located in
South Carolina reported using Airspace Saver"1 panels an average of 10 to 12 mo
(AS-l(C--S)), and the manufacturer has indicated that some panels have lasted over
18 mo. Similarly, COVKRTECH C-440's manufacturer indicated an average panel life
of up to  1 yr, and reported that one site  in Ontario has already used a panel for
14 mo (CT-M(C-ll).

      These cover systems are able to meet established  criteria for daily cover
at the sites where they are currently being used. Operational considerations for
both products are summarized in Table 11A. By completely covering the wastes and
being very  resistant  to punctures  and  tears,  access  to  insects,  birds and
animalsf   and  blowing litter are effectively controlled.   Although burrowing
animals could attempt to gain access to the waste along the edges of panels, the
material  is reportedly too  heavy for this to be of major concern, particularly
if the panel  has been modified with a chain sewn  into the edges to secure the
panel. Because the material  is impermeable, odors are also effectively contained
(22).  At one site,  it was reported that after the panels had been left in place
for several days and  then removed, a more intense odor was noted (AS-2(C-8)).
However,,  it was emphasized that these odors occurred only for a brief period upon
removal of the panels, were restricted to the immediate area of the working face,
and emanated  from the working face and not the panels.   (It was also noted that
this  effect was  not much different than was observed when daily soil cover is
scraped  from  the working face prior to  the start of the next operating day.)
Because the material  is water-proof,  it  effectively  sheds rainwater.

Cost—
      The costs  related to the  use of these cover systems  include the  cost of
the panels, cost of any modifications, e.g., chain sewn in the edge, and cost of
any ancillary equipment that may be used to  facilitate  placement and removal of
the panels.  These costs are summarized in Table 12A and 12B for Airspace Saver1"
and COVERTECH C-440,  respectively.

4.3.3  Aqua-Shed"              ;

      Aqua-Shed™, marketed by Aqua-Shed Manufacturing Corporation, Florence, SC,
consists  of a poly vinyl chloride  (PVC)  with an  adhesive on one side, to enable
the panel to  adhere to'wastes.   According to the manufacturer,  the product can
be used as both  daily  and  intermediate cover.  Aqua-Shed™ has been used at a site
in Hawaii for daily cover since January  1992.                      I

Material—
      The cover  system consists of 6-mil  (0.15-mm) PVC panels coated on one side
with  a  polybutene  emulsion.    The  material  is  also  available  without  this
adhesive.   This product was developed to provide  a durable,  long-lasting and
waterproof  cover system for use as a daily and intermediate cover.  Different
size  panels,  18  by  30 ft  (5.5 by 9.1 m), 18  by 60  ft (5.5  by 18.3 m), and 24 by
60 ft (7.3 by 18.3 m) , able to cover areas of 500 ft  (46 m ), 1000 ft (93 m ) and
1,400 ft2 (130 m2),  respectively, are available from the manufacturer (3).  These
are  shipped  and stored in  air-tight packages  (to  prevent  the adhesive from
drying) until applied to the working face. A patent for this product is pending.

Placement and Retrieval—     ,                                   :
       Because  of  their smaller size and adhesive coating, placement of these
panels differs from other geosynthetic products.  The  panels are applied manually
by a two- to three-person crew that unrolls or  unfolds the panels and places them
onto  the  waste as overlapping shingles until the entire working face is covered.
The manufacturer has  indicated that after placement, the  crew  should walk over
the  panels to ensure their adhesion to the wastes.   Hence, crew exposure is
greater than would likely occur with other geosynthetic cover systems,  since with
other products  there is no  requirement to walk on the panels  after placement.
In  addition,  anchoring,  such as tires,  is being used at the site in Hawaii to
hold  down edges  and overlapped areas. Time required for placement and anchoring
                                       81

-------
of pcinels is estimated to range from 5 to 10 rain per panel, depending on size and
wind conditions.  Unlike other geosynthetic products, Aqua-Shed™, when used with
the adhesive coating, is not removed from the working face prior to the placement
of wastes the next operating day.  Application considerations  are summarized in
Table; 9A.

Impact of Climatic Conditions—
      With the exception of high  winds, climatic conditions do  not significantly
impact the use of this material.  High winds makes placement of  these panels more
difficult, requiring additional  personnel to extend and place the panels.   The
adhesive coating on one side of the panel contributes to difficulties in handling
and placement of  the panel under such conditions.                :

      Hot or cold temperatures reportedly do not impact the use of this product.
Aqua-Shed™ has been continuously  used in hot weather for more than 10 mo (AQ-1(C-
9)).   In addition,  there  were  no difficulties  reported with  the  use of  the
product during a field demonstration conducted under freezing conditions (AQ-2(C-
9)).  Climatic considerations related to the use of Aqua-Shed™  are summarized in
Tables 10A.

Performance—
      Aqua-Shed™ has been used at one site since January 1992,  and is considered
by the user to be an effective alternative daily cover which meets  established
critesria.  Although the site currently using Aqua-Shed™ primarily employed the
material as daily cover, according to the manufacturer, the panels can remain as
an effective cover for up to 3 mo.  Operational considerations  are summarized in
Table 11A.

      The material, although thin, is durable enough to prevent puncturing and
tearing by animals.   During a field demonstration,  a steel-wheeled compactor was
unable to puncture the panels  (AQ-2(C-9)).  In addition,  since  the panels adhere
to the wastes or to other panels  where overlapped,  bird and animal access to the
waste along edges is effectively controlled.   At the site using Aqua-Shed™,  it
was noted that scavenging by animals had been reduced since the  use of Aqua-Shed™
was initiated  (AQ-l(C-9)).

      Since individual panels are relatively small, ranging from  500 to 1,40O ft2
(46 to 130 m),  multiple, overlapping panels  are used until the entire working
face is  covered,  thereby effectively curtailing blowing  litter.   It was  also
reported that  odor emissions  had decreased in areas of the site covered with
Aqua-Shed™  (AQ-1).    Since these  panels  are not  removed  prior to  the  next
operating day, there  is no sudden release  of odor that has been  reported to occur
at some sites when panels  are removed from the  working face on the succeeding
day.                         ,

      Aqua-Shed™, although reported to be  nonflammable and self-extinguishing
(3), is combustible,  as are other geosynthetics.  The site  currently using Ac[ua-
Shed™ experienced a  landfill  fire and,  although it was noted that Aqua-Shed™
would smolder  in those areas where the  fire  reached the surface,  it was not
considered to contribute ,to the spread of the fire (AQ-l(C-9)).  However, beceiuse
of the low oxygen transmission rate of the material,  it is able to effectively
curtail transfer of oxygen to the working  face.   These  panels are not removed
from the working face prior to the placement of wastes onto the working  face the
next operating day, but, because  Aqua-Shed™ is combustible, it will not provide
an  effective barrier  to  the  spread  of fire within the landfill,  with the
exception of possibly reducing the access of  oxygen.

      Although Aqua-Shed™ can reduce infiltration of rainwater into the landfill,
it may impede leachate and  gas movement.  The waterproof panels can effectively
shed rainwater from the working face.  However, because multiple small panels are
used, care must be taken when placing panels so that they are properly overlapped
to prevent rainwater from  seeping into the wastes  through gaps between panels.

                                      82

-------
 By leaving the panels in place, unless a deliberate effort is made to destroy the
 o Zr'itiolSfl'1?      Placement of  wastes onto  the working  face on  subsequent

 movement within the  cells.                    *   may
 Costs—                      ;

 R»uai -TvK l°S* °f Aqua-Shed« panels are summarized in Table 12A.  At the site in
 X£niV   ! "  C?£rently ,USing Aqua-Shed- Panels, costs for both  material and
 labor  to  place  the panels  onto the  working face, which  are  provided by  a
 contractor, averages $0.20/ft2 ($2.15/m2)  (AQ-l(C-9)).   it should be noted that
 S^T^/JS*,*?1*, SitS ,rfnged from $S.OO-10.00/yd3  ($10.46-13.08/m3),  i.e.,
 $0.15-0.19/ft  ($1.61-2.05/m2) of working face, not including labor  or equipment
 costs.    Hence,  operational cost  savings were  still  obtained  by using  1-his
 product, even though the panels  are not reused at the site  (AQ-l(C-9)).
 4.3.4  CORMIER.
 P,.^,  CORMIER geosynthetic  cover materials,  manufactured by  Cormier  Textile
 Products, Inc.,  Sanford,  ME,  consists of high-density polyethylene, which  is
 woven  reinforced  and coated.   It  is currently  being used at several  sites
 located in the Northeastern United States.
 Material —

 nuHo^-IV0^3^8 °f th*iS material  are  recommended for use as alternative cover
 material by the  manufacturer (12); WP-640,  a 4.3 oz/yd2 (146 g/m2) material,
 cross-woven with 8 x  9  yarns/in,  (approximately 3x3 yarns/cm) , and WP-1440, a
 5.2 oz./yd  (176 g/m ) material, cross-woven with 12 x 12 yarns/in, (approximately
 llLih?JnS£Cm)' -Thre  materials are thin< lightweight, UV-resistant, and highly
 SnSni »  ,?<-   "V*"86"1^ temperatures.   The cross-woven yarn  improves the
 tensile and tear  strength  of the material and prevents punctures and tears from
 SDlTGclCi.l.nC'
      Panels  for  use  as  alternative  daily  cover  are  fabricated
     _                 e   as  aernave   ay  cover  are  fabricated  by  the
manVfaC^u5er ^° the desired sizes.   Typical sizes of panels used are 6O. by ISO

heat- ealiL If ^ Z*,!*****1*?*** (22'9 by 45'? m) '  These are f^icated by
S?«2^ aling °* "-ft (4.6-m) wide sections.   Custom  detailing,  consisting of
reinforcement of panel  corners,  is  usually  also provided.

Placement  and Retrieval —
*«>„.• Becaufe the material is relatively lightweight, even the large size panels
fabricated from this material are not  very  heavy;  a 60 by  150  ft (18 3 bv 45 7
m)  panel  of  WP-640 weighs approximately  150  Ib  (68  kg),  and can be  easily
                                                          ,
unrollsrthea^ P1laCe? ma"uailv. by a three- to four-person crew that unfolds  or
unrolls the panel and extends it over the working face.   Placement of  the panel
by a crew in  this  manner requires  approximately 15 to 20 min.  Alternatively,

             °an      a
                                                              .                ,
   c                        USin9  landfi11 equipment,  e.g.,  compactor or dozer
face   ShL  m^hoH6  i^hS  C,fVer  b-y .drivin9  across °* adjacent to the  working
face.  This  method,  although requiring approximately the same amount of time,
reduces the  number of personnel required and exposure to the  working face.

      A1lternative Met_hod of Placement—  To facilitate  the handling and placement
           OI  "ser at a fP*cial waste (sludge and flyash)  landfill designed and
                                  reel to deploy and recover the panel (CM-lt[C-
an
                                                                             he
,->•> Q K      ^              the: middle section of one edge  of the 75 by 150 ft
i!!,*?  y 45K?  m)  Panel iS attached to the reel,  and  hydraulic hoses from the
reel's gear box are connected to the hydraulic lines of the  excavator to operate
                                      83

-------
            Figure 27.
Hydraulically operated reel  used  to place
and retrieve 75 by 150 ft (22.9 by 45.7 m)
CORMIER panel.
the reel.  The panel is then folded into thirds along its  length,: and retracted
onto the reel by using hydraulically-driven gears.  The reel is then transported
to the working face by the excavator.   Once in position, usually at the top of
the working face, a crew holds the end of the panel which is then  unrolled aa the
excavator backs down the slope (Figure 28).  After  the panel is  extended to its
required  length,  the overlapping sections are  manually  unfolded and extended
(Figure  29).   According  to the  operator,  use of  this  reel system  not  only
facilitates the placement and retrieval of the cover, but  also decreases wear of
the cover, thereby extending its useful  life (CM-l(C-lO)).

      Anchoring—  Once  extended over the working  face,  because of its  light
weight,  the  panel is  held  in place by sandbags  or  other  anchoring  that  are
typically placed at 20-ft (6.1-m)  intervals along the edges of the panel as well
as across the entire panel in a grid pattern.  Approximately 30 to 40 sandbags
are used to secure  a 75 by  100  ft (22.9 by  45.7 m) panel, with additional
sandbags or other anchoring used if high winds are anticipated  (CM-l(C-lO)).

      Retrieval— To  retrieve the  panel,  the  placement procedure is reversed.
Once the sandbags or  other  anchoring  are removed,  the panels  are retrieved by
pulling them back over themselves to prevent snagging onto the waste, rolling or
folding, and then storing near the working face for subsequent use.  Using the
hydraulically-operated reel, once anchoring is removed, the panel is folded into
thirds along its length and rolled back onto the reel with  the assistance of the
hydraulically-driven  gear box  (Figure 30).   Application  considerations  are
summarized in Table 9A.
                                      84

-------
Figure 28.  Panel  being  unrolled  from  reel  during
            placement onto ash/sludge working face.
Figure 29.  Manual extension of panel over working face
            after unrolling from reel.
                          85

-------
            Figure 30.
Retrieval of panel by use of hydraulically
operated reel.
Impact of Climatic Conditions—                                   '
      Wind and snow are the only conditions that may significantly impact the use
of this alternative cover material., Rain and  cold or  hot temperatures do not
curtail its use.

      The combined effect of the relatively light weight of the material, and the
large size of panels that are typically used, contribute to increased difficulty
in placement  of the panel  during windy conditions.   Placement of  the  cover
becomes more difficult at wind! speeds of 8 to 10 mph (12.9 to 16.1 km/hr), and
will require  the  use  of  additional personnel to extend  and  secure the panel.
Although an infrequent occurrence at the site using this cover material, higher
wind  speeds or  gusty winds  may  prevent  use.   Windy  conditions  will  also
necessitate additional time and effort to properly secure the cover so that it
will not be blown off  the working face.  This may involve the placement of soil
on the edge of the cover to prevent wind from getting underneath and lifting the
cover, or placement of additional sandbags along the edges at smaller intervals.

      According to  the manufacturer,  another  effect of wind  that  primarily
impacts the long-term effectiveness of this material,  as well as other similar
lightweight  materials,  occurs when winds  blow  across  the  top of  the  cover
following placement and anchoring,  causing areas between anchoring to be lifted
and to "flutter".  Such "fluttering" purportedly will result in the gradual loss
of strength of the material over extended periods of use, e.g., > 6 mo (CM-M(C-
10)).  However,  this has not been indicated to be of significant concern at sites
using this or similar materials to date.

      Neither  rain nor  freezing conditions adversely  impact the use  of  this
material.   The material  is waterproof and rainwater  is readily shed  and not
absorbed.   The material  also maintains  its  flexibility in  cold weather, and
                                      86

-------
placement and recovery of the panel are not affected by  such  conditions.
Panels were easily deployed and remained flexible even at temperatures as low as
-15°F  (~16°C), (CM-l(C-lO)).  However,  to prevent the possible loss or damage to
the panel,   its  use  when  snow  is  forecast  is not  recommended.   Climatic
considerations related to the use of CORMIER are summarized in Table 10A.

Performance—
      CORMIER cover materials have  been used  as  alternative daily cover at
several locations in the  Northeastern United States for approximately two years,
and its overall performance has been considered satisfactory.  Users expressed
particular satisfaction with the ease of deployment,  due both to its light weight
and flexibility, and its relatively long effective  life.  The panels were used
under all climatic conditions, with the exception of high winds or  possibility
of snowfall.  Because of  its smooth texture and cross-woven yarns, the material
does  not readily  snag  or  puncture.    If  punctured,  the  material  resists
development of long tears, because of the very closely-spaced,  cross-woven yarins
that reinforce the material.

      The manufacturer of the material indicated that the average effective life
for this material was 2 to 3 mo.  One user, operating a  special waste landfill
and employing the previously-described reel system,  has used a  75 by 150 ft (22.9
by 45.7  m)  panel for more  than  six  months and  anticipates  an additional  six
months  of effective  life  (CM-l(C-lO)).   This  long  effective  life at  this
particular site was  partially attributed to  the smoother working face that is
created by sludge and flyash disposal as compared to municipal solid waste,   and
use of the reel system, which reduced wear and tear on the material.

      The material meets  established criteria for daily cover at the  sites using
this  product.    It is  considered  particularly  effective  with  respect  to
controlling  odors   and   moisture  infiltration  (CM-l(C-lO)).     Operational
considerations are summarized in Table 11A.  Once placed, the material completely
covers  all   wastes,  effectively  controlling  access  to  insects,  birds,   and
burrowing animals,  which are unable  to penetrate  or tear the  material,   and
blowing litter.  It was also noted that birds do not land on  the material (CR-
M(C-10) ).. Odors and other emissions are contained and rainwater effectively shed
due to the impermeability of the material.   The smooth surface also  minimizes
adherence of soil or wastes, e.g., sludges, which could otherwise add weight to
the material and make handling more difficult (CR-l(C-lO)).   In addition,  the
material  is  available   with  a  fire-retardant  finish  and,  because  of   its
impermeability, will prevent the transfer of atmospheric oxygen when  placed onto
the working face (CR-M(C-IO)).

Costs—
      Costs related to the use of CORMIER include the cost of panels and the cost
of any ancillary equipment that may be used to facilitate placement of panels.
These costs are summarized in Table 12A.

4.3.5  FabriSoil®

      FabriSoil®, manufactured by Phillips Fibers Corporation, Greenville,  SC,
is  nonwoven  polypropylene  material,   specifically   engineered  to  satisfy
alternative daily cover material requirements.  It has  been available as a daily
cover since 1988,  and is being used at approximately  50 sites located throughout
the United States.

Material—
      FabriSoil® is composed of a 6 oz/yd2 (203 g/m2),  nonwoven material made from
needle-punched polypropylene fibers, and is heat-sealed to provide a lightweight
material  whose  elongation  characteristics make it resistant to tearing  arid
punctures (4,  35).   It  is also  claimed that  FabriSoil®  has a  low moisture
adsorption capacity and is resistant  to microbial attack.


                                      87

-------
      Panels are fabricated to site-specific requirements by sewing sections of
fabric together.  The manufacturer recommends that panels be made 5 to 10 ft (1.5
to 3.0 m)  larger than the  dimensions of the working  face to ensure  complete
coverage of the waste.   Typical panel sizes are 100 by 100 ft (30.5 by  30.5 m),
although smaller, 30 by 50 ft (9.1 by 15.3 m)  panels, are also used.  The maximum
recommended size  is 150 by  150 ft (45.7 by 45.7 m).  Sleeves  can  be sewn along
the edges of panels to permit steel rods or bars to be  inserted into the sleeve
along the leading edge, thereby facilitating placement of panels.

Placement and Retrieval—
      FabriSoil®, as with other large geosynthetic panels previously discussed,
is placed over the working face by lifting or dragging the panel either  manually
or with landfill equipment.  Because the size of panels typically used are 10,000
ft2 (930 m2) or greater, two pieces of landfill equipment,  in conjunction with a
crew, are usually used  to place the panel  (35).  For larger panels, greater than
14,000 ft2 (1,300 m),  use of three pieces of equipment  is recommended.   Smaller
panels, 1,500 to  2,500 ft2 (139 to 232 m2), usually do not require any  landfill
equipment and are placed manually  by  a two- to three-person crew.   Time  required
to place  a 100 by 100 ft  (30.5 by 30.5 m) panel  averages 15 to 30 min,  with
additional time required to place any anchoring  (FS-1(C-12)).

      The manufacturer indicated that at some sites using narrower, 30-  to 50-ft
(9.1- to 15.3-m) wide panels,  steel rods are inserted into the sleeve sewn along
the leading edge of the panel, and then the rod is attached to landfill equipment
with rope or chain to tow the panel across the working  face.   The rods are
usually left in place  to hold down the  edge of the panel  on windy days.

      Users of FabriSoil® indicated that the material is routinely anchored after
placement to prevent it  from being blown  off the working  face and exposing the
waste.  Discarded tires, placed at 20-  to 30-ft  (6.1- to  9.1-m) intervals, are
typically  used  for  this purpose (4).   Placement  of anchoring averages  an
additional 15 to  20 min  for a .two- to three-person crew.   Some sites used soil
to secure the edges of  the panel,  especially if soil was routinely used  to cover
any exposed areas remaining  along the edges of the panel after placement  (FS-1(C-
12)).  It was acknowledged,  however,  that  if soil was placed on the edges, there
was an increased  likelihood that panels could be torn,  thereby decreasing their
effective  life.

      As with other gee-synthetics, FabriSoil® panels are retrieved;by reversing
the procedures  used to place the  panel.  If soil  is used  to  secure the edges,
removal of excessive soil  with landfill equipment may be  necessary before the
panels can be removed, thereby extending  the retrieval time and increasing the
risk of damage to the panels.  Application considerations are summarized  in Table
9B.               •            -

Climatic  Considerations—
      Climatic conditions that have the most significant impact on both the use
and effective  life of  FabriSoil®  are rainfall, freezing temperatures and wind.
Although able to shed water during moderate and heavy rainfall, several operators
have indicated that FabriSoil® absorbs  moisture during rain events and becomes
heavier,  making it difficult to maneuver and  more susceptible to  tearing and
punctures  (FS-1(C-12), FS-2(C-'12)).  In addition, when wet, soils tend to adhere
to the fabric, further adding to its weight and difficulty in handling. It was
also noted, however, that additional weight due to moisture could be an advantage
under windy  conditions,  since the panel  would  not be as  susceptible to being
blown from the working face during placement, and may require less anchoring to
keep in place.                ,                                    :

      When freezing conditions exist, the placement and retrieval  of FabriSoil®
may also become more difficult and time-consuming,  and the effective life of the
panel may be reduced.   Under such conditions, any moisture that  may have been
previously absorbed by the panel may cause the panel to freeze to the underlying

                                       88

-------
waste or onto itself and underlying soil during storage (FS-1(C-12),  FS-2(C-12)).
Attempts to retrieve or move panels under these  conditions will not only be more
difficult, but will also  increase the likelihood of tearing the panel.   As with
other geosynthetic  products, its use is not recommended when snow Is predicted.

      Although dependent  on the size of panel used,  windy  conditions will make
placement  of  panels more difficult and  time-consuming, requiring  both  greater
care and possibly additional personnel.   Operators at one  site that uses a 100
by 100 ft  (30.5 by  30.5 m) panel reported increased difficulties in placing the
panel with winds in  excess of 15 mph (24 km/hr).  Climatic considerations  related
to the use of FabriSoil®  are summarized in Table  10B.

Performance—
      The manufacturer has  indicated an average effective life of FabriSoil® of
2 wk  (4,  35).   This has been  substantiated  at sites  using the product under
varying climatic  conditions. ; The operator at one site,  who has used FabriSoil®
for approximately 5 yr, reported an average of 15 to 20 days use per panel, with
some panels lasting up to 30 days  (FS-2(C-12)). Other  operators have reported
the effective life  of panels ranging from 7 to 30 days under  similar climatic
conditions (FS-1(C-12)).

      Operators of  sites  that have been using FabriSoil® have  expressed  general
satisfaction  with  the  performance of  the material and its  ability  to  meet
established  criteria for daily cover,   including  control  of  vectors,   blowing
litter and odors, and reducing infiltration.   Operational considerations are
summarized  in Table  11A.   Since  the  material is  sufficiently resistant  to
puncturing and tearing, birds and  animals are deterred  from attempting  to claw
or  peck through the  panel, and  blowing  litter  is  effectively   controlled.
FabriSoil®  has  also  been demonstrated  to be  effective in  controlling odors
emanating from the working face (22), as previously discussed  in Section 4.3.1.
Users have also indicated that odors are effectively contained by the FabriSoil®
cover.   One  site reported  that on those occasions  when particularly  odorous
wastes,  e.g., produce and  other food wastes,  were  received  and  subsequently
covered with  FabriSoil®,  that odor was effectively controlled  (FS-1(C-12)).  It
was  also  noted  that  when  the panels  were  subsequently  removed, equipment
operators and the crew were briefly exposed to  a release of strong odor, which
quickly dissipated in the immediate area of the working face.   (Such occurrences
are not considered unique  to FabriSoil®, since similar releases of odor have also
been reported with  other  types  of  geosynthetic  covers.)

      Results of a  flammability test  designed to  identify  highly flammable
characteristics  of  textiles,   conducted  by Phillips   Fiber   Corporation  on
FabriSoil®,   indicated  that  FabriSoil®  did not  have any  unusual  burning
characteristics, and does not rapidly promulgate  a flame across its surface (35).
Furthermore,  moisture absorbed by the panel during rain events will  decrease its
potential combustibility.

      Depending on the intensity of rain events,  FabriSoil® is able to shed water
from the working  face,  thereby  minimizing infiltration  into the landfill.   in
addition, moisture  absorbed by  the panel  can evaporate and not be available  to
infiltrate into the landfill.

Costs-—
      Costs related to the use of FabriSoil® include the cost of panels and the
cost of  any  ancillary equipment that  may be used to facilitate placement  of
panels.  Panel costs are  summarized in Table 12A.                    I

4.3.6  Griffolvn®

      Griffolyn® geosynthetic cover materials, manufactured by Reef Industries,
Inc., Houston, TX,  consist  of  low-density polyethylene  reinforced with high-
strength nylon cord. According to the manufacturer, the materials have been used
since 1990 at several sites  in Arkansas.


                                      89

-------
      Materials—
            Although several types of this material are available, ranging in thickness
      from  6 to  14 mil (0.15  to 0.36 mm),  Griffolyn® TX-1200 is most frequently used
      as an alternative daily cover because of its light weight, flexibility, and high
      strength (41). TX-1200  is a three-ply, linear low-density polyethylene copolymer
      and nylon yarn laminate.  The nylon reinforcing, which provides uniform loading
      resistance in  all directions, and also resists the elongation  of tears due to
      punctures, is  placed in a diamond pattern with  48 yarns/ft2 (517 yarns/m2) and is
      suspended in a permanently flexible adhesive media to allow fiber slippage.  This
      material is also  UV-stabilized,  cold-crack resistant, and waterproof to withstand
      extended exposure to  various climatic conditions.

            Panels for use as  daily cover are fabricated by the manufacturer to desired
      sizes up to 200  by 200  ft (61 by 61  m).  Typical  panels are  50 by 100 ft (15.3
      by 30.5 m) , with edges sewn and grommets inserted.  Other customized detailing,
      such  as sleeves  along edges  to facilitate  insertion of steel bars,  can also be
      provided.

      Placement and  Retrieval—
            Because  the material is relatively light weight  (a  50  by 100  ft (15.3 by
      30.5 m) panel  weighs  approximately 170  Ib  (77  kg)), and flexible, these panels
      are typically  placed  manually by a two-person  crew, by unfolding the panel and
      extending it over the working face.   At  the sites using these  panels,  the size
      of the working face is restricted to 30 by 80 ft (9.1 by 24..4 m), which not only
      ensures that a 50 by 100 ft (15.3 by  30.5 m) panel will totally  cover the waste,
      but also reduces the need for the crew to walk on the working  face while placing
      the panel, thereby reducing the risk of injury and exposure to the waste (GF-1(C-
      13)).  Placement of a panel by a two-person crew averages 20  min.  Although the
      panel can  also  be placed by  landfill  equipment towing the panel  across  the
      working face, this was determined to  be unnecessary by site operators, as manual
      placement was  considered  both simpler and  less time-consuming.

            Once the panel is  extended over the working face, tires  or other anchoring
      material are placed along all the edges of the panel  to prevent it  from being
      blown or lifted off the  working face.  At one site, it was reported that the crew
      routinely placed anchors  at  5-ft (1.5-m) intervals  along the edges,  since this
      had been demonstrated to  prevent the blowing or lifting of the panel, even at
      winds of  50  mph  (80  km/hr).   Placement of anchors in this  manner  reportedly
      requires a two-person crew 25 min to  complete  (GF-1(C-13)).      ;

            To retrieve the panels, tires  or  other  anchoring are  first  removed  and
      returned to the stockpile area.  The panel is then removed from  the working face
      by pulling it  back over itself  to prevent snagging, folding  it, and  storing it
      near  the  working  face  for  subsequent  use.   Application considerations  are
      summarized in  Table 9B.      ;

      Impact of Climatic  Conditions—
            Wind is  the only  climatic  conditions that  is reported to significantly
      impact use of this material.   Rain, freezing temperatures, or  hot weather do not
      curtail its use,  since the material is waterproof,  cold-crack  resistant, and UV-
      stabilized, and  designed  for extended exposure to adverse weather conditions.

            As with other lightweight materials, such as CORMIER, windy conditions can
      make placement of the panels more difficult, requiring additional labor and time.
      However, the  relative impact of  wind is also  dependent upon the size of  the
      panels used, i.e., the larger the panel,  the more  difficult it is to handle.  A
      site using  50  by  100 ft  (15.3 by 30.5  m)  panels did not indicate  wind as a
      significant problem during placement of panels  if  a  sufficiently large crew was
      available and proper care was taken during deployment and placement of the panels
\
                                            90

-------
      As with other geosynthetics, to prevent possible loss or damage, the panels
should not be used if snow is predicted.  However, removal of snow from panels
has been accomplished at some sites following a light, less than 2-in. (5-cm),
snowfall (GF-1(C-13)).   Removal of the snow was  apparently simplified by the
smooth finish of material which allowed the  snow to easily slide off the panel.
Freezing of the material to underlying wastes during cold weather has not been
reported as a problem.   However,  freezing conditions  were also not a frequent
occurrence  at these  sites.   Climatic  considerations related  to the  use of
Griffolyn® are summarized in Table 10B.

Performance—
      Griffolyn© cover materials have been used as alternative daily cover for
more than 2 yr at several sites in Arkansas, and the overall performance has been
satisfactory. Users  expressed particular satisfaction with the ease of deploying
and retrieving panels.  Their light weight,  flexibility, and durability reduces
snagging and puncturing  of the  panels,  which  helps extend the effective life.
When punctured, the  cross-webbed nylon reinforcing prevented the extension of
tears.  Such  punctures  and tears were also  repaired by using special patching
tape available  from the manufacturer,  which  purportedly further  extends the
effective life of the panels.  One  site was reported using the same panel for 10
mo, while another  site had used a panel for over 2 yr (GF-1(C-13)).

      Users  also  considered  the  material  as  being  effective  in  meeting
established criteria for daily cover and exceeding soil cover in certain aspect S3,
such as odor control and minimizing infiltration.  Operational considerations are
summarized  in Table  11B.  Since the nylon reinforcing prevents punctures from
being extended, vector access to the wastes and blowing litter are effectively
controlled.   Moreover,  the material  is relatively impervious, odors and other
emissions are contained  (22), and rainwater is effective shed from the working
face as long as  the cover remains  in place.   As with other  cover systems,
although Griffolyn®  panels  prevent the transfer of atmospheric  oxygen to the
working face, the  material is combustible.

Costs—
      The cost of Griffolyn® panels are summarized in Table  12B.  Because these
panels  are usually manually placed, use  of ancillary  equipment to facilitate
placement has not  been reported at sites  currently using this product.

4.3.7 Polvfelt

      Polyfelt  XOOlO-Daily  Coverfelt  is  a  nonwoven  polypropylene  fabric
manufactured by Polyfelt, Inc.,  Evergreen, AL.  This material has been available
since  1990,  and is currently being used  at approximately 30 landfills in the
Midwestern  United  States.

Mater icils—
      Polyfelt X0010 consists of spun-bonded, continuous filament, needle-punched
polypropylene (37).  The 8 oz/yd  (271 g/m ) nonwoven fabric is highly durable and
has been thermally treated to reduce its permeability and provide for a smoother
finish..  Fabricated panels  are available in various  customized sizes  to meet
site-specific requirements.  Typical panels are 100 by  100 ft (30.5 by 30.5 m),
although smaller,  20 by  60 ft  (6.1 by 18.3 m) panels are also used.

Placement  and Retrieval—
      As with other geosynthetics materials,  these panels can be manually placed,
by using landfill equipment to tow the panel  across the working face, or by using
skid-mounted rollers to roll panels onto the working face.  At one site, 100 by
100  ft  (30.5  by -30.5 m) panels were placed with compactors  in 30 min (PF-2(C-
14)).   The  operator  at  another  site indicated that 20 by 60 ft (6.1 by 18.3 m)
panels  were placed onto  a 20,000 to 23,000 ft2 (1,860  to 2,140 m ) working face
using multiple  skid-mounted rollers.  The rollers were fabricated on-site from
20-ft  (6.1-m) sections of 24-in. (61-cm) diameter  conduit.  Panels are attached
                                      91

-------
to the conduit with 2 by 4 in. (5 by 10 cm)  lumber.  A compactor tows the skids
to the top edge  of  the working face and a four-person crew unrolls the panels
down the  slope.   Approximately 30 to 40 min are required to cover the working
face.  Application considerations are  summarized in Table 9C.

Climatic Considerations—
      Rain,  freezing conditions, and  wind  reportedly can impact  the  use and
effective life of Polyfelt.  Although the material absorbs moisture during rain
events, making it heavier  and more difficult to handle and place (PF-1(C-14)),
it apparently does not absorb as much moisture  as some other nonwoven materials
(PF-2(C-14)).  During wet,  freezing conditions, problems with panels freezing to
the underlying waste  and subsequent difficulties in removal of the panels were
reported  (PF-1(C-14),  PF-2(C-14)).  With winds greater than 20 mph (32 km/hr),
difficulties in placing 100 by 100 ft  (30.5 by 30.5 m)  panels were also reported
(PF-2(C-14)).  However, the use of rollers permitted the placement of smaller,
20 by 60  ft  (6.1 by 18.3  m)  panels  at winds in excess of 30 mph (40 km/hr) at
another  site  (PF-1(C-14)).   Climatic  considerations related  to  the  use of
Polyfelt are summarized in Table  IOC.

Performance—
      Polyfelt has been used at various sites in the Midwestern United States for
up to 3 yr.  According to the manufacturer,  panels have been reported to last 6
to 9 mo.   The longer effective life of Polyfelt, compared to some other nonwoven
materials, was attributed to the continuous  filament used in the fabrication of
the panels  to  increase its durability and  reduces  moisture retention.    The
operator of one site, who places panels with rollers,  indicated an average of 20
to 30 uses per  panel with some panels lasting 3 to 4 mo (PF-1(C-14)) 1 At another
site, panels placed with  compactors were reported to last more than  3 mo if
proper care was taken during placement and retrieval of panels (PF-2(C-14)).  One
operator indicated that Polyfelt lasted longer than other nonwoven materials theit
were previously used at the site when used under similar climatic and operational
conditions (PF-2(C-14)).

      Operators of sites using Polyfelt indicated general satisfaction with the
material and its ability to meet established criteria for daily cover (PF-1(C-
14), PF-2(C-14)).  Operational considerations related to the use of Polyfelt are
summarized  in  Table  11B.    The material was  considered to  be effective eit
controlling bird and  animal access and blowing litter when properly applied to
cover the. working face.  Odors were also reported to be effectively contained.
Its ability to  shed water from the working  face during rain events was considered
comparable to that of  soil cover  (PF-1(C-14)).

Costs—
      Costs related to the use,of Polyfelt include the costs of the panels and
any ancillary  equipment that  may be used  to  facilitate their placement  arid
retrieval.  These costs are summarized in Table 12C.

4.3.8  SaniCover™

      SaniCover™, marketed by Fluid Systems, Inc.,  Cincinnati, OH,  consists of
both polypropylene woven  (SaniCover™  250) and  nonwoven  {SaniCover™ 150) cover
materials, fabricated from materials which are manufactured by Amoco Fabrics and
Fibers, Co., Atlanta, GA.   SaniCover™ has been available  since  1991  and is
currently being used at various sites throughout the United States.  Other sites
purchase the Amoco  fabric directly from distributors and fabricate their  own
panels.                                                            :

Materials—
      Although both SaniCover™  150  (a.k.a.,  Amoco 9298)  and SaniCover™  250
(a.k.a., Amoco 2006)  are made from 100% polypropylene, and weigh 6 oz/yd2 (203
g/m ), they differ with regard to their physical properties and performance under
various climatic and operational conditions  (20).  SaniCover™ 150 consists of a
                                      92

-------
nonwoven, needle-punched fabric whose elongation characteristics reduce tearing
and puncturing.   SaniCover™ 250 consists of a woven,  water repellent fabric,
making this material better suited for rainy climates.

      SaniCover™ panels are custom-fabricated by  sewing sections of the Amoco
fabric: to site-specific requirements.   Panels typically range from 75 by 80 ft
(22.9 by 24.4 m) to 100 by 100 ft (30.5 by 30.5 m),  although larger panels, e.g.,
75 by 15.0 ft (22.9 by 45.7 m),  are also used at some sites  (SC-2(C-15)).  These
panels may also have pockets added along the edge, i.e., a hem sewn along an edge
of  fabric,  which allows  the  insertion  of  steel bars or rods  to facilitate
placement of the panel.
                                                                 i
      Operators at some sites have indicated a preference to purchase large rolls
of the material and either fabricate their own panels by sewing sections together
to construct a larger panel on  site, or to use several  smaller panels by cutting
sections directly from rolls of fabric without further  fabrication  (SC-3(C-15),
SC-4(C-15)).

Placement and Retrieval—
      As is typical for most covers, both of  these materials  can be placed over
the working face by lifting and dragging  the  panels either manually or by using
landfill equipment.  Because of the size  of panels typically  used at landfills,
e.g., 6,000 to 11,000 ft2  (557  to  1023 m2), they are usually placed  by  using two
pieces of landfill equipment in conjunction with a crew.  Placement  of  panels in
this manner averages  15 to  20  min, with additional time required to anchor the
panels.  Operators at one site reported using smaller panels  (1,000 to 1,200 ft
(93 to  111 m2)  consisting of sections cut directly from rolls of fabric, which
are then manually placed  onto the working face  by a six- to eight-person crew
(SC-4(C-15)).

      There is some variation  in  practices related to  anchoring of the panels,
based  on the type of  material used and climatic conditions.   At sites using
SaniCover™ 250, panels are routinely anchored, since even light winds of  5 to 10
mph (8 to 16 km/hr) are able to lift and blow the panel off the working face  (SC-
1(C-15)).  Because it  is water-repellant,  SaniCover™ 250 does not retain moisture
and  hence remains  relatively lightweight  even  with continued  use, thereby
necessitating anchoring.  At sites using SaniCover™ ISO (nonwoven material), use
of  anchoring varied with  climatic conditions, e.g., probability of rain and/or
high winds.  Since SaniCover™  150 tends to absorb moisture and becomes heavier
with  use,  at some sites,  anchoring of the panel  was  not  considered  necessary
unless  winds in excess of 20 mph  (32 km/hr) were expected  (SC-3(C-15)).

       Anchoring is usually performed by placing discarded tires or sandbags both
around the perimeter  of the panel,  and onto the panel  at  20- to 30-ft (6.1- to
9.1-m)  intervals.  This typically requires a two- to three-person crew 10 to 15
min to  accomplish  (SC-l(C-lS)).   Alternatively, at  some  sites,  panels are
anchored by placing soil on one or more edges of the panel (SC-2(C-15)).  Use of
soil  for anchoring in this manner is normally performed in conjunction with
placement of soil cover onto areas of the working face that remain exposed after
placement  of the  panels,  i.e., the size  of the working face  is larger than the
panel.

       Retrieval of a  SaniCover™ panel  is performed in  a manner similar to that
used  with  other covers, which is  essentially the reverse  of  the procedure used
to  place the panels.   Anchoring,  if used, is removed  first.  The panel is then
removed,  either manually  or  with landfill  equipment  by  pulling it back over
itself to minimize snagging and tears, and storing it  near the  working face for
subsequent use.   Application considerations  are summarized in Table 9C.

Impact of  Climatic Conditions—
      Climatic  conditions  reported to impact the use and longevity of SaniCover™
as  an alternative daily cover include rainfall, freezing  conditions, and high
winds.

                                       93

-------
       The impact of rainfall differs  between  SaniCover™  150  and 250.  Because
 SaniCover™ 250 is water-repellant, it does not absorb moisture and, hence, its
 use is not curtailed  by rainfall.  Operators of  several  sites,  however, have
 reported that SaniCover™ 150 absorbs  moisture and becomes heavier durina rain
 events (SC-l(C-lS), SC-2(C-15), SC-3(C-15)).  Soil was also reported to adhere
 m?^f.re    y  t0 the fabric  under such  conditions.  This makes the material more
 difficult to maneuver  and  more susceptible to punctures  and tearing,  thereby
 decreasing its effective life.                                                *

       When freezing conditions exist,  if SaniCover 150™ has absorbed moisture
 it can freeze to portions of the  underlying waste, or  to  the soil if freezing
 conditions develop while the panel is stored  near the  working face durina the
 operating day (SC-l(C-lS), SC-2(C-15)).  Under such conditions; the retrieval or
 placement of  the panel will be difficult and time-consuming,  and will increase
 the likelihood of tearing of the fabric.

       The impact of freezing conditions on SaniCover™ 250, which does not absorb
 moisture,  is  reported to be less significant.   One  site, however, indicated that
 moisture trapped between the working face and the cover would occasionally freeze
 ^o^P?5bi?ns °f the underlVina waste, making removal of the panel more difficult
 (SC-l(C-lS)). These occurrences are not  considered to be unique to this product,
 but would be expected  to occur with  most  such  cover materials under  similar
 conditions.   Also, as with other geosynthetic cover materials, the use of these
 materials  (SaniCover™  150 and 250) is  not recommended when snow is predicted.

       Operators  at  one site indicated that light,  5 mph (8 km/hr)  winds  could
 actually  facilitate placement of panels by slightly lifting the panels  if  the
 leading edge  was oriented into  the wind  as  the panel was being placed onto  the
 working face.  Winds greater than  25 mph (40 km/hr), however,  made placement of
 panels more difficult  and required more labor and time to accomplish (SC-2fC-
 15)).  Despite the additional labor and time that may be required, smaller panels
 have been  successfully  placed at winds of 30 mph (48 km/hr) at some sites (SC-
 4(C-15)).    Climatic  considerations   related  to  the  use  of  SaniCover™  are
 summarized in Table  IOC.

 Performance—
       SaniCover™ has been satisfactorily  used as an  alternative daily cover under
 various climatic conditions  at  landfills located throughout the United states
 The manufacturer indicates  that panels can be effectively used for 30 days 'or
 ?°r!!;.,At Sites located in the Northeastern United  States, which typically used
 landfill equipment to place SaniCover™  150 and 250 panels,  the  effective life of
 panels averaged 20 days, with some panels lasting up to  30 days (SC-l(C-lS)   SC-
 2{C-15).  At these sites,  the most  significant factors influencing the effective
 life  of panels  were  operator  care  taken in the placement  of  the panels,
 smoothness of the working face by compaction and removal of protruding objects
 and climatic  conditions such as snow, rain,  freezing  temperatures, and wind
 These  users  also  indicated  that  rain  and  freezing  conditions  had a  more
 significant impact on SaniCover™ 150 than SaniCover™ 250,  since they made this
 material more susceptible to tearing.  In drier, warmer climates, SaniCover™ 150
 was reported  to  have a much longer effective life.  At a  site located  in the
 Southwestern United States, 15 by  75 ft  (4.6 by 22.9 m) manually-placed panels
 were reported to last 4 to 5 mp  (SC-4(C-15)).  Another site in the Southeastern
 United  States reported  using SaniCover™  150  panels  an  average  of  4  mo  by
 repairing tears on site  (SC-3(C-15)).                                        *

      Users have  expressed  general satisfaction  with the  performance of both
materials (SaniCover™ 150 and SaniCover™  250) and their ability to meet criteria
 established for daily cover.  Operational considerations  are summarized in Table
 ilB.  Eloth materials are sufficiently durable to  curtail puncturing or tearina
by animals or birds, thereby preventing their access to the wastes.  They also
effectively control blowing litter.  Although  both SaniCover™  150  and 250 are
permeable and hence allow venting of gases and vapors,  they are reported to be
                                      94

-------
effective at controlling odors emanating from the working face (SC-2(C-15), SC-
3(C-15)).  The operator of one site  indicated that SaniCover"1 150 became odorous
with extended use (> 20 days), particularly if the fabric was moist, but this was
only noticeable  in very close proximity to the fabric and did not affect the
material's  ability to.suppress odors emanating from the working  face  (SC-2(C-
15)).  Because it is water repellant, SaniCover1" 250  is considered more effective
in shedding water  from the working face and,  hence, is recommended for use  in
areas where the occurrence of rain events is more frequent.  SaniCover™ 150 will
initially absorb water during rain events,  similar to  soil  cover.    However,
depending upon the intensity of the rain event, it will subsequently shed water
from the working face (SC-l(C-lS), SC-2(C-15)).  Furthermore,  moisture  absorbed
by SaniCover1" 150 can be evaporated and thereby not infiltrate into the landfill.
Although  both materials  are  combustible,  the likelihood  of  combustion   is
considered to be less for SaniCover" 150 when it has  been exposed to rainfall and
has absorbed moisture.

Costs—
      Costs related to the use of this product include the cost of panels and the
cost of any ancillary equipment that may be used to facilitate their placement.
The cost of  fabricated SaniCover1" ISO and 250 panels  are summarized in Table l.'2C.

4.3.9  Typar®

      Typar®  Geotextiles,  manufactured by Reemay,  Inc.  and marketed by Exxon
Chemical, both from Old Hickory,  TN, consist  of a group of  nonwoven, thermally-
spunbonded  polypropylene  fabrics,  which have  various road  construction  and
landfill  applications.   Selected  types  of  this   product  have been  used   as
alternative daily  cover at approximately 30  landfills located throughout the
United States since  1990.

Materials—                                                       !
      This material is being used as a daily  cover because  of  its  light weight,
high tensile strength, tear and puncture resistance, and low moisture-absorptive
capacity (17).  Typar® Style 3601, a 6 oz/yd2  (203 g/m2)  fabric, has been used  at
most of the sites to  date.  According to the manufacturer, a  lighter-weight,, 4
oz/yd  (136 g/m )  material, Typar® Style 3401, although currently not widely used,
has similar properties and  is also  able to be an effective daily cover.

      Fabricated panels are available from the manufacturer in a standard size
of 46 by 100 ft (14.0 by  30.5 m), although larger-sized panels, up to 200 by 200
ft (61 by 61 m), can  be fabricated  to meet site-specific requirements.  Straps
can also be  added  at 10-  to 15-ft  (3.0- to 4.6-m)  intervals  to facilitcite
handling  of panels.   Alternatively,  sites   can obtain rolls  of fabric  and
fabricate panels on-site using portable sewing machines (46).

Placement and Retrieval—                                        •
      As with other geosynthetics, these panels can be placed either manually or
by using landfill equipment to lift and tow the panels  across  the working face.
The-manufacturer indicated  that a panel  can  be placed  manually by a three-  to
four-person crew within 15 to 20 minutes.  At one site a panel  was placed within
10 min using one  compactor and a two- to three-person crew (TP-1(C-16)).  Because
of their relatively light weight of  4 to 6 oz/yd2 (136 to 180 g/m2),  anchoring is
typically used with these panels.   This may require an additional  10 to 20 min
to accomplish.

      Skid-mounted rollers have also been used at another site  to facilitate the
placement of panels (TP-2(C-16)).  Sections of 3-ft (0/9-m) diameter conduit were
used to fabricate 30-ft (9.1-m) long rollers which were then placed on skids  to
allow towing to  and  from the  working  face.   The site uses  two such rollers  to
place 30 by  50 ft (9.1 by 15.31m) panels.  To place the  panels, one  edge remains
anchored to the skid while the  conduit  is  rolled across the working  face.
Placement of panels in this manner is normally accomplished by  a three- to four-
person crew in 15 to  25 min, including anchoring of the panels with sandbags.

                                      95                          ;

-------
      Panels  are retrieved  similarly  to the  other  geosynthetics previously
discussed  by removing  anchoring and  pulling the  panel  back over  itself to
minimisse snagging.  Panels placed by using rollers are retrieved by rolling the
conduit section, with panel  attached,  back up to  the  skid.  Depending upon the
slope of the working face, this may be more difficult and require additional time
and  labor  than the initial  placement of the panel.   Use  of  rollers has been
demonstrated to extend the effective  life of  panels (TP-2(C-16)).  Application
considerations are  summarized in Table 9C.

Climatic Considerations—
      V/ind  and freezing  rain are reportedly the only climatic conditions that
adversely impact use of this material.  Operators have reported  encountering more
difficultly in placing panels under windy conditions  (TP-1(C-16),  TP-2(C-16)),
although panels were placed  at  winds exceeding 40 mph (64 km/hr).  Additional
labor and  more  time were retired under such conditions.   At one site, which
normally used a compactor in conjunction with  a crew to place the panels, it was
determined that the panel was easier  to control if placed manually under windy
conditions (TP-1(C-16)).  Freezing rain was also reported to occasionally affect
placement or retrieval of panels due to the added  weight.   At  a site located in
Illinois, where snow and freezing temperatures can be  a frequent occurrence, an
alterneitive working face was used if  the panel could not  be  retrieved due to
these conditions (TP-2(C-16)).

      Bain  reportedly does  not significantly  impact on  the use of  Typar®.
Although the material absorbs some moisture during rain events, because of its
low water-absorptive capacity {maximum of 50% by weight), the weight of the panel
does  not  increase  enough  to  significantly  impact  handling,  placement  and
retrieval of panels (TP-1(C-16), TP-2(C-16)).  Climatic considerations related
to the use of Typar® are summarized in Table  IOC.

Performance—                 •
      Typar® has been used at some sites for over 2 yr.   Operators have expressed
particular  satisfaction with  the ease of deployment  and durability  of  the
material.  A site in Colorado averaged 50 uses  (approximately 2 mo) from a 100
by 125 ft  (3O.5 by  38.1  m)  panel before  it required replacement (TP-1(C-16)).
Operators at other sites  have reported panels remaining effective as a cover for
at least 2 mo and even longer if  on-site repairs are made (46).  The operator of
the site that used  skid-mounted  rollers to place and retrieve 30 by 50 ft (9.1
by 15.3 m)  panels  indicated that  panels could  last 8 to 10 mo (TP-2(C-16)).  Use
of rollers  and  care taken by personnel,  both in  working  face preparation and
panel placement,  were considered to  be the primary  reasons  for  the  extended
effective life of these panels.

      Overall, Typar® was considered to be effective at meeting the established
criteria for daily  cover.   Operational considerations are summarized in Table
11B.  Although access to vectors is effectively controlled  by the panel, at the
site where  panels  were used for long periods of  time, e.g.,  8 to 10  mo,  the
panels reportedly became odorous and attracted insects (TP-2(C-16)).   This was
primarily attributed to  the  length of time that these panels  were being used,
since at other sites where panels were not used as long, e.g., an average of  2
mo, insect problems were not reported.   This  is not considered to be  unique to
this product,  as  users of other geosynthetic materials have  reported  similar
problems with extended use of panels (SC-2(C-16)).   It  was also noted that these
panels remained effective in controlling odors emanating from the working face
throughout their effective life.  The panels are not waterproof  and may initially
absorb some moisture during  a rain event.  However, depending on the  intensity
of the rain event,  the material  will  shed rainwater from  the  working  face and
reduce infiltration into the landfill.   Operators considered Typar® to be much
more effective than soil in minimizing moisture infiltration (TP-1(C-16)).

Costs—
      Costs related to the use of Typar®  include the cost of the panels and of
any ancillary equipment that may be used to facilitate their placement.   These
costs aire summarized in Table 12C.


                              i         96

-------
                                    SECTION 5

                              INDIGENOUS MATERIALS
                               i

 = K v, A y.arietv.0f indigenous materials are currently used as ADCMs, including;
 ash-based materials, shredded ;automobile components and tires, digested sludq4
 and  sludge-derived  products,  dredged  material,  foundry  sand,  petroleum-
 ™™a™Ln  ?  soils,  and shredded green waste.   Unlike commercially available
 ADCMs, each of these materials can vary significantly with respect to physical
 and chemical characteristics and composition, depending on its particular source.
 In  addition,  suitability  and  acceptability  are  dependent  on  site-specific
 climatxc and operational conditions and regulatory retirements. Hence, only k<=y
 factors and considerations  related to the use and performance of these materials
 are presented in this section.                                       i«ai.«siieixs

 5.1  GENERAL  CONSIDERATIONS

       Many indigenous materials are locally generated waste products that have
 been disposed of in landfills prior to being approved for use as  ADCMs.   To be
 acceptable as  ADCMs,  most of  these  materials have  been  physically  and/or
 chemically modified {i.e., shredded, dried,  blended with soil or conditioned wil-h
 lime),  or require  evaluation   for  the  presence  of  potentially  hazardous
 constituents  (e.g., heavy metals) prior to use.

       The direct benefits  of  using indigenous materials as ADCMs  can include
 savings in landfill capacity and soil costs, and the additional tipping fees from
 receiving these materials at the  landfill.  Although indigenous materials  are
 ;fvpi~.  ly aPPlied at the same (°r greater)  thickness than soil cover, savings in
 landfill capacity can still  be attained, since many of these same materials would
 otherwise occupy space within the landfill as  a waste material, not as a daily
 coyer.   Therefore,  by using what was  previously considered a waste material  as
 daily cover, the need for a 6-in.  (15-cm) soil cover may be eliminated and that
 equivalent landfill capacity is  correspondingly saved.    In addition, both the
 soil that would  otherwise be required for daily cover and costs  associated with
 soil excavation  and movement are also saved.  Furthermore, many landfills  charqie
 a  tipping fee,  although usually  at  a  reduced  rate, for  accepting the waste
 material that may be used as  an  indigenous  ADCM  at  the  landfill.   The economic
 feasibility of using an indigenous material as an ADCM  may also be enhanced by
 offsetting equipment and operational costs  that may  be associated with these
 materials,  e.gj, shredder to  shred tires.

       The feasibility of using an indigenous material as an ADCM also depends on
 local  availability  in sufficient  quantities on a regular and continuous basis.
 If these  conditions are not met,  the necessary  capital investment and operating
 costs, additional analytical requirements,  or other costs associated with their
use  may not be  operationally  or economically justifiable.  As with soil and
 commercially available alternative cover materials, working face preparation and
 care taken in placing  the cover material are important  factors that impact the
 acceptability and effectiveness of indigenous  daily cover materials
                                      97

-------
 Mrt<=4.  .ln.manv resPects,  indigenous  cover materials are  similar to soil  cover.
 Most  indigenous materials are transported to and applied onto the working  =Jce
 in a  similar manner as soil, i.e., trucks are used  to transport the material to
 the  working  face  and dozers  are  used  to  spread it onto  the workingft ice
 Indigenous  materials  are also  applied at approximately  the  s^e ™ in   uf cmi
 ££5l?U ^  S°*  'I  Climatic ^nditions  can also impact the Se of  indigenous
 moS *•«*•  it *imilaf man"e.r'  For Cample, rain makes many indigenous matir als
 ^onHit^        ° aPPly at£ increases infiltration potential,  while dry and w ndl
 conditions  can cause  problems  with  the generation  of dust.   Furthermore  nianv
 indigenous  materials, such as contaminated soils and foundry sand, arTselected
 principally because their composition and performance characterTstics as  a dailv
 cover are  similar  to that  of  soil.   However,   some indigenous ma?erillsaisJ
 ™^V°ntaf ?antn ^hSt COXild be leached bv "^wat^  a9nd  thereby  affect thl
 a^E  ?   nV  leachate and its subsequent disposition,  although the impact of
 such  leachate  contaminants  on  landfill stabilization would probably be minor
 Climatic and  operational considerations  related to currently used  indigenous
 materials are  summarized in Tables 13A and 13B,  and 14A  and  14B?respective?y?

 5.2   CURRENTLY USED INDIGENOUS  MATERIALS
 5.2.1  Ash-based Materials
                         ^^^^
                                    such as heavy metals, prior to use is

       Moisture content affects both the workability and performance of ash-ba<3ed

 sx^V-"-^^^^^^^^
 S?J«r^r"°^^^^^^
 nancii-Lng and problems with the generation of dust have been reported (39, iM-lfC-
 »?Jt>:*-    r      materials are not considered combustible  unless they contain
 significant amounts  of  partially  burned  materials (39).    Theirab^litvtS
 minimize infiltration is dependent upon the materials with which they are blende?
 and compaction provided  during placement.                        Y     mended
 5.2.2 Automobile Recycling Fluff

       Automobile recycling fluff consists of shredded, nonmetallic:(e.g., fo=un
       r,  plastic) automobile parts f391.  Howew^.  because these materials can be
reired
                              and monitoring for such constituents are usulll?


fi»ff Raf^d°?v "Ot significantly affect the workability of automobile recycling
fluff  since it is a relatively permeable material and many of its constituent!
Sin   readily absorb moisture.  It is, however, not very effective at shedding
w!th T£ f use ^C°0nfseSff1yvmo.is1ture infiltration into the landfill can.increasl
witn  1-he  use  of  this material.   Because  the  material contains  combustible
components, such as foams and plastics, their f lammability may increase ^derdrj
f ™ *i     ^i9h^er comP°nents such as foam are also more prone to being blown
from the working face under dry, windy conditions.                       oiown

5.2.3  Dredged Materials

                     tediments from  lakes  or rivers  as ADCMs  has also  been
          f-o                                                          so   een
uni-o   «( I'*.   )>'  **?*****"* to dredging, the bottom sediments are stored for
up  to  48 hr,  depending on  the composition  of the  sediment  and  climatic
                              i
                                      98

-------
8 "3 8
8 -C s
31
4gs
Climatic
II Condition
8
8
CO
,
s
6
8
8
CO
1
.a
a
No const
(Freezing
Temperatures/
Snow
g I
EJ 1
1
n 1
S I
CO
IHot Weather/
Sunlight
99

-------
100

-------
101

-------
w /5*
5 *
•< T3
2,3
CO
8
  CO
 a
            in
            •3 S
              1
                          c g || .

                        SB1! Mi
                        J5* 2 "3. 3 5 &
                        •*s  S Z, so
                        ra g S'.a •» -
                        ^ 6 «M '8 ^
                        •< •! o
                                     CO
                                         I

                                         1
                                         2
                                         •3
                                                 II
                                                 iJ
                                                 4P e

                                           II §
                                           •i .g «>
                                           ill

                                                       §
                                                       1

                                                       1
    II
    a «
    o >>
    •il
                                                        .1
CO ^
J5 CO
N-
5 «»
ii
Q g

11
35
*^ w
|C_4 O
O &
H §
-------
conditions.  This allows the material to dry and facilitate subsequent placement
onto the working face, and also enables a reduction in odors  (39).  Since bottom
sediments can be contaminated with pollutants such as herbicides and pesticides,
analysis of sediment samples is necessary before it  can be accepted for use as
an ADCM (39).

      Once dried and accepted, dredged materials are placed onto the working face
similar to soil cover.   If the sediment is not properly dried, or if used during
rain events, difficulties in the workability of the material can be  encountered.
Under dry, windy conditions, dust problems can also  be encountered (39).

5.2.4  Foundry Sand                          -

      Certain types of  sand resulting from discarded casting dies  at foundries
is  permitted  for  use   at  several  landfills  (39,   IM-3(C-17),   IM-4(C-17)).
Depending upon the metals used for casting,  their concentrations in the foundry
sand, and the binding agent used to maintain form  during  casting,  analysis for
potential hazardous constituents  is  usually conducted to screen foundry sands
prior to their acceptance as a daily cover  (39).

      Foundry sand has  a similar composition as a  sandy soil.   Hence, moisture
content does  not have a significant impact on  its workability, and it can be
applied without difficulty during rain events  (IM-6(C-17)).  It is,  however, not
as effective  as  other less permeable soils  at shedding water from the working
face, and can allow infiltration to enter the  landfill.   In addition, during
heavy rains,  foundry sand is susceptible to erosion  (39).  Consequently, it is
not used on external slopes (IM-6(C-17)).  During dry, windy conditions, problems
with increased dust generation have also been reported (39, IM-3(C-17), IM-6(C-
17)).                                            -

5.2.5  Green Waste/Compost

      Green waste,  such as tree  trimmings,  grass clippings and garden wastes,
shredded into particles of 3 in.  (7.5 cm) and smaller, usually by a  tub grinder,
is also used  as ADCM (8,  24).  Since green waste is  difficult to handle and to
compact, significant  landfill  capacity savings are  obtained by shredding the
material and  reducing its volume before using it as  daily cover.   In addition,
soil that would otherwise be used  as cover is preserved (8).   These  savings, and
the  fees  charged for accepting green  wastes can  offset  the additional costs
incurred during processing prior to use as a daily cover.

      Green waste  is  being used  as  an ADCM during  dry  weather conditions at
landfills located in Los Angles County, CA  (8, 24).   A 12-in.  (30-cm) layer of
noncomposted, shredded green waste has been  demonstrated to meet cover criteria
related to controlling  vectors, litter and odors.  Because the  material is not
effective at  shedding water from  the working face, it is only used during dry
weather and may not be  suitable for areas with frequent rainfall.

      With  regard  to  fire retardation,  although  green waste  is  combustible,
moisture retention averaging 40% and shreddeding and compaction tend to reduce
oxygen transfer to the working face and the  possibility of fire.  No incidences
of  fires  accountable  to the  use of green  waste as  cover material  have been
reported (8).

      The use of composted green waste,  either by itself or after being blended
with soils or wood wastes, has also been reported (39). However, the additional
operational costs, both  in compost equipment  and labor, and other more beneficial
uses for composted green waste, may limit its use as daily cover (8,  IM-4(C-17)).
                                      103
-------
5.2.6  Petroleum-contaminated Soils

      Petroleum-contaminated soils, which may result from excavation of leaking
underground storage tanks (USTs), have also been permitted for use as an ADCM at
several  landfills  (39,  IM-7(C-17)).    Since  petroleum-based  products  are
biodegradable, use of petroleum-contaminated  soil does not present a significant
environmental  risk,   as  these products  can be  degraded within  the  landfill
environment.  However, because the types and  concentration of  contaminants will
vary  depending  on source,  analyses  are routinely  required  to  demonstrate
acceptability as a daily cover material.

      With the  exception of being contaminated  with  petroleum products,  such
soils are  used and  perform similar  to  conventional  soil cover.   Some sites
reportedly store the contaminated soils on-site prior to use to encourage release
of volatile contaminants (IM-7(C-17)).

5.2.7  Shredded Tires

      Since the  disposal of ftires is being  banned by an increasing number of
regulatory agencies,  landfills have determined that stockpiling tires, shredding
them at periodic  intervals,  and  using the resultant material as an ADCM is an
economically feasible and acceptable  alternative for both disposing of tires and
providing daily  cover (IM-7(C-17)).   The  tipping  fees  received for accepting
tires, volume  reductions obtained  by shredding  the  tires,  and  soil  savings
resulting from using  shredded tires  as a cover material offset the processing
costs incurred in shredding the  tires  (IM-2(C-17)).  When properly placed as a
6-in. (15-cm)  layer, shredded tires are effective at controlling vectors, litter,
dust and odors.  Shredded tires  are reportedly easier to handle and place onto
the working  face under  adverse  climatic conditions,  e.g.,  rain  and  freezing
temperatures, than soil (IM-2(C-17)).  However, because the resultant cover does
not readily compact and is permeable, it is  not effective at  shedding moisture
from the working face and moisture infiltration into the  landfill  can increase.
Shredded tires  are also  combustible.   Moreover,  an increased  occurrence  of
vehicular tire punctures from fragments of the  steel reinforcing from the waste
tires can also become an operational  concern  unless proper traffic controls are
established (IM-7(C-17)).

5.2.8  Sludges and Sludge-derived Products

      Sludge  and 'sludge-derived products are  both  currently being  used  as
alternative materials for daily cover at landfills. Digested  sewage sludge has
been successfully  used at landfills  as  an ADCM,  resulting  in both increased
landfill capacity if the sludge would otherwise be disposed in the  landfill, and
soil savings.   When  dried,  sludge can  be applied without difficultly as  an
effective cover.  During heavy rains, however, the material becomes difficult to
handle and drive across with.landfill equipment.  Odor problems have also been
reported with the use of sludges  (IM-5(C-17)).

      To improve workability and  reduce odors, sludges have been mixed with soil
or compost at several landfills  (39).  Alternatively,  sludges  can  be treated by
chemical fixation processes  using various  additives such as lime, cement  kiln
dust, fly ash and silicates to produce a suitable soil-like material for daily
cover and  other uses, while reducing environmental  and operational  concerns
associated with disposal of  sludges  (9,  39,  48,  IM-4(C-17)).   The use of  such
sludge-derived products (SDPs) as ADCMs offers opportunities for environmentally
sound disposal of sewage sludges, while also meeting daily cover requirements.
Several  technologies for  transforming sludges  into  usable  agricultural  and
construction  products,  including  landfill  cover  material,  are presently
available.  Typical  of such technologies are the  N-VIRO process  and  CHEMPIX®
process (9, 32, 48).
                                      104
-------
       The N-VIRO process,  formally called "Advanced Alkaline Stabilization with
Subsequent Accelerated Drying (ASSAD)", is a pasteurization and chemical fixation
process,  patented by N-VIRO Energy Systems Limited, Toledo, OH.  In this process,
dewatered sludge is blended with alkaline additives  (lime and cement kiln dust)
The  blended mixture is  then cured  for at  least  12 hr,  during which  time the
product temperature is maintained above 22°F (50°C).   To further dry the mixture,
it is  subsequently aerated and windrowed for 3 to  12 days, depending on climatic
conditions and its end use,  while maintaining a pH of 12. The  process destroys
pathogens,  reduces sludge odors, and immobilizes heavy metals.  It has also been
approved  by the U.S.  EPA as an acceptable  Process  to Further  Reduce  Pathogens
(PFRP).  The resultant soil-like product can be used  as a soil conditioner, other
agricultural purposes  and  landfill  cover (32, 48).

       CHEMFIX® is a proprietary chemical fixation process patented by ChemFix
Technologies,  Inc., Ventura,  CA, to  stabilize municipal  sewage  sludges and
industrial wastes (9).  This process uses soluble silicates and  silicate setting
agents? which are blended with the sludges or wastes  to produce  a chemically and
physically stable solid material.   NATURITE®,  which is  the end product that
results from the treatment of municipal sewage sludge with the CHEMFIX® process,
is suitable for use as  daily landfill cover.   The high pH and alkalinity of
NATURITE® also results in  effective destruction of  pathogens, which classifies
the CHEMFIX® process as  a  PFRP.

       To  treat sludges with these or  similar fixation  processes requires the
construction  of  sludge  processing  and  curing  facilities,  possibly  at  a
significant  capital investment.   SDPs must  be  cured  and  dried to  a proper
moisture  content (approximately 60%)  to  avoid workability problems during 1:he
placement of the material onto the  working face  (IM-4).   When  at the proper
moisture  content, SDPs are reportedly lighter and  easier to spread than soil
(26).  SDPs are usually applied at a 6-in. (15-cm)  layer  to provide a cover that
effectively controls vectors and blowing litter.  Release of  ammonia-like odors,
although  usually restricted  to the  working  face,  has been reported when these
materials are initially placed onto the working  face (26).   To  both  improve
workability and reduce odor problems, SDPs are blended 1:1 with  natural soils at
some sites (49).  During  dry  and windy conditions,  problems with dust generation
have been reported when  SDPs were used as daily cover (IM-4(C-l7)).
                                     105
-------
                                   SECTION 6

              SITE OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS OF USING
                     ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS AS DAILY COVER


      The  feasibility of  alternative  materials  for daily  cover is generally
determined by operational,  performance and economic comparisons with soil and its
availability.  These comparisons may include; impacts on landfill capacity, cover
requirements,  operational costs,  cover material  application considerations,
effectiveness   and  duration,   impact  of   climatic   conditions,   potential
environmental  impacts,  and  other site-specific requirements  and operational
considerations.  This section summarizes key  characteristics and features that
should be considered in determining the feasibility of using ADCMs.

6.1  IMPACT ON LANDFILL CAPACITY

      The potential savings  in landfill capacity  has  been identified by most
landfill owners/operators  as the most important reason for using alternative
cover materials.   Not only can ADCMs  extend the useful life of landfills, but
they  will  also  allow additional revenues  due  to space  savings  that would
otherwise not be possible.  Moreover,  such  savings are independent of the type
of  alternative cover material selected.   The  structural integrity  of most
commercially available ADCMs is either destroyed by the placement of wastes the
next operating day, as is the case of foams and spray-ons, or the ADCM is removed
prior to  the placement  of wastes, e.g.,  geosynthetics.   Consequently,  they
effectively occupy negligible landfill  space.  Although indigenous materials are
typically applied  at a  similar thickness as  soil  cover, i.e.,  6 in.  (15 cm),
these materials  would otherwise  occupy space within  the  landfill as waste.
Hence, by being  used as a cover  material instead,  space they would otherwise
occupy is saved.

      Landfill capacity savings directly depend on  the  frequency of alternative
material use as a daily cover in  lieu of soil.  Although this is influenced by
climatic conditions, it  is  also dependent  on other  factors  including  the
availability of alternative materials or their constituents, the condition and
longevity  of material,  and  the  reliability of  the  application  equipment.
Moreover, the value of any saved capacity is  directly related to the tipping fees
for waste disposal  at the  site.

6.2  IMPACT ON SOIL REQUIREMENTS

      Use of alternative cover materials decreases requirements for soil as daily
cover, resulting in the conservation of on-site soils or cost savings  if daily
cover  is  acquired   from  an  off-site  location.    Furthermore, equipment  and
personnel costs associated with the movement and placement of soil  cover will
also decrease.

      Although site-specific evaluations may indicate that any savings  realized
by decreasing soil  cover may not be very significant or may even be negated by
the costs associated with using an ADCM, there are additional, less tangible but
possibly more •significant benefits,  particularly  if  soil cover material  is
                                     106
-------

 acquired off-site.   Decreased  soil  requirements  will  also result  in  less
 vehicular traffic, wear and tear on roads (both off-site and on-site), noise, and
 dust generation.  This can favorably impact environmental quality and relations
 with the community  in the vicinity  of  the  landfill.

 6.3  OPERATIONAL  COST CONSIDERATIONS

       Determination of potential savings in operational costs associated with the
 use of an alternative cover material is usually made  by  comparison  of  its  cost
 with that of using soil as a daily cover at  the specific site.  Consequently, the
 cost of soil cover at the  particular  site is an important determinant of any
 potential cost  savings.

       In general, operational  cost  savings  are realized  when  geosynthetics are
 used.  Geosynthetics  are reused,  hence, the effective  daily cover material  cost
 is low;  less than $0.01/ft ($0.11/m2)  per  day.  They  also usually require  less
 time,  equipment and/or personnel to apply  than soil cover.  However, potential
 operational  cost  savings  associated with  the use of geosynthetic  panels  are
 greatly  dependent on  the number of times a particular  panel is reused.  This is
 influenced by climatic conditions, working face preparation and care taken during
 the placement and retrieval of panels.  Instances have been reported where panels
 were destroyed  after as  little as  one or  two uses,  such  as  when panels  were
 frozen to the working face, buried by snow,  or  damaged beyond  repair during
 placement or retrieval.   This  can significantly increase the operational costs
 associated with the use of these cover systems.                   '

       The possibility for operational  costs savings associated with the use of
 foams  and spray-ons is more dependent on the cost of soil cover  at  the particular
 site.   For  illustrative  purposes,  if soil costs,  including  equipment  costs
 associated with the  movement  and  placement  of  soil  cover,  are greater  than
 $3.50/yd ($4.58/m),  i.e.,  $0.065/ft2 ($0.70/m2) for a 6-in. (15-cm)  thick  soil
 layer,  savings  can be realized when foam  or spray-ons  are used, based  on an
 average foam or  spray-on cost of $0.06/ft2 ($0.65/m2), including both material and
 amortized application equipment  costs.  This, however,  does  not consider any
potential site-specific  costs  related to  the use of these products,  such as
 storage  facilities, equipment maintenance,  utilities,  etc.

       It must also be recognized that any potential operational cost savings are
not nearly as significant as  the  savings  that can be realized  by  conserving
landfill  capacity.    Consequently,   these potential  savings are  usually  not a
determining factor  in the selection of a particular ADCM for  a site, as  other
considerations, such as its ease of  application and effectiveness under varying
operational and climatic conditions, may be more important than operational cost
savings.

6.4  APPLICATION CONSIDERATIONS

       Ease of application  is an important operational factor associated with the
use of ADCMs.  As discussed in previous sections,  application  and placement of
ADCMs  can often be  accomplished with less  equipment and  personnel and  in less
time than may otherwise  be required if  a  soil cover was  used.   This can be
particularly significant  for sites where adverse weather conditions,  e.g., rain
or freezing  temperatures, can impact  the  placement of  soil  cover  to a  much
greater  extent  than  such conditions  will  affect the use  of certain ADCMs.
Moreover, since less time  may be required to apply  or place  daily cover, wastes
can continue to be  received at the landfill for a longer period of  time than
could otherwise be permitted.  This can allow greater quantities of wastes  to be
disposesd on a daily basis, increasing service and  revenues.

      There can also be greater flexibility related  to the actual placement of
daily  coyer when  using ADCMs.   At  landfills  with a large working  face,  e.g,


                                     107
-------
 greater than 20,000 ft2 (1,860 m2), it  is  possible  to begin the application of
 daily cover to one area while continuing to receive wastes in another area of the
 working face.    This may  be  especially  feasible  when using  self-propelled
 application equipment, since application of the cover material does not require
 the use of any landfill equipment and  can be accomplished without interfering
 *i   ,J:,®  unloading  and  compaction of   wastes  in  other  areas.    Increased
 flexibility is also  possible when placing or retrieving  geosynthetic panels.
 Based on the availability of equipment  and personnel at a site,  some sites may
 use several pieces of landfill equipment  and all  available personnel to place,
 anchor, and subsequently retrieve panels  in  a relatively short period of time
 Other  sites,  based  on  their  particular   operational   considerations  and
 requirements,  may use  only  a  small  crew  to  manually  place  the  panels
 Alternatively,  some sites may use specially  designed  and  fabricated ancillary
 equipment,  such as a  lifting bar, reel or roller,  to facilitate panel placement
 and retrieval.                                                  e -.     *

 6.5  EFFECTIVENESS AS DAILY  COVER

       Although most ADCMs are able to meet established operational and regulat-ory
 criteria for daily cover, distinctions do exist  among the various  ADCMs  with
 regard to  their   ability  to  control  odors  and  fire,  or  minimize  moisture
 infiltration  under various climatic and operational conditions.   In addition,
 site-specific circumstances  can impact  or  influence the  relative importance of
 specific operational  criteria.   For.example,  for  a  site  that is  highly visible
 from nearby roads, the  ability  of  an  alternative  cover  material to  prevent
 blowing litter and provide an .orderly and  aesthetically pleasing  appearance may
 be  an important criterium.  Similarly, for a  site  located relatively close to a
 residential  community, odor and  dust control may be of paramount  importance.
 Furthermore, with few exceptions (e.g., California),  performance-based standards
 for evaluating the effectiveness of daily  cover have  not  been  established.
 Consequently, the  determination of effectiveness  of  an alternative material is
 often based on  relatively  subjective  judgement  by both site  operators  and
 regulators, i.e., comparing the alternative materials'  effectiveness to that of
 6  in.  (15  cm)  of  compacted soil.   These factors  can  not  only  influence  a
 determination of the effectiveness of  an ADCM in meeting established criteria at
 a particular site, but also  make  comparisons  of ADCMs difficult.

       Key features of  and distinctions among ADCMs in meeting various operational
 criteria for daily cover and  areas where further evaluation of these criteria  is
 warranted are presented below.             .                          .•.j-i-etid. is

 6.5.1  Access. Blowing Litter and Odor Control

       All ADCMs identified during this investigation are  able  to control access
 to vectors, blowing litter and odors.  However, their effectiveness is greatly
 dependent  on  the  proper  application or placement  of the  cover to  ensure a
 complete and continuous cover over the  working face.  Because of the "sticky"
 consistency of nonhardening  foams,  and  of hardening foams  and spray-ons when
 initially applied,, they readily adhere to the  wastes, preventing blowing litter
 and discouraging birds from landing and animals from digging.  In addition, flies
 and other insects  become trapped upon contact.  Hardening foams  and spray-ons
 subsequently  form  a  resilient  cover that prevents access  to the  wastes by
 vectors. Geosynthetics completely cover the wastes, thereby preventing blowing
 litter.  They are also designed to  be  tear-  and puncture-resistant,  thereby
denying  access  to vectors,  e.g.,  pecking  and tearing  by birds and animals.
 Indigenous  materials  also effectively  control blowing  litter and  access to
vectors if placed onto the working face at a sufficient thickness and consistency
to completely contain and cover the wastes.                      ;

      Although it is generally acknowledged  that ADCMs, like soil cover, are able
to contain  odors emanating from the working face, the  actual  effectiveness in
controlling odors and other emissions is  difficult  to  assess.  Determinations of


                                     108
-------
 the effectiveness of ADCMs in controlling odors and other emissions are usually
 based  on  subjective  judgement.   Moreover,  only  limited  studies  have been
 performed  to determine  the  effectiveness of  various foams,  spray-ons,  and
 geosynthetics  in providing  such control  (21, 22,  38).    Therefore, further
 evaluations to better quantify the effectiveness of various ADCMs in controlling
 odor and other emissions  from  the working  face  may be warranted.  However!
 investigations initially should be performed to determine the  actual requirements
 for such controls,  based on health, environmental  and aesthetic considerations.
 Once these requirements are determined, performance standards for odor and of her
 selected emissions  could be established.  Furthermore, it must be recognized that
 limits for any specific levels of odors or other emissions from the working face
 at landfills may be difficult, since the release of odors and  other emissions are
 not necessarily limited to this area.

 6.5.2  Fire Control

       The  ability  of  daily cover to lessen the  risk  and  spread  of fires  is
 primarily dependent on the combustibility of the material and  how effectively the
 movement of  atmospheric oxygen to the working face can be controlled.   The
 ability of a cover material to provide a barrier to the movement of  fires within
 landfill cells is also  one criterium for daily cover.   The combustibility  of
 ADCMs varies among the different products:  some ADCMs are noncombustible, e o
 nonhardening foams; some contain combustible constituents, e.g., spray-ons  but
 are  applied  as an   aqueous  slurry/emulsion  which  greatly  reduces  their
 combustibility;   and   other  products,  although  combustible,   are  rated  as
 nonflammable and self-extinguishing,  e.g.,  SaniFoam™, Aqua-Shed1".  In addition
 their effectiveness in controlling movement of atmospheric oxygen to the working
 face and thereby support combustion is dependent on proper application to ensure
 complete and continuous coverage, e.g., foam and spray-ons,  or the permeability
 of the  material, e.g.,  geosynthetics and indigenous materials.   Furthermore
 since foams and spray-ons are mechanically destroyed by subsequent placement of
 wastes,  and geosynthetics  are removed from the working face each  day  little
 barrier  to  the  spread of  fires  within  the landfill  is provided when  these
 materials are used  as daily cover and then destroyed or removed.   Combustible
 indigenous  materials  also do not  form any barrier  to the  spread of fire   while
 noncombustible indigenous materials can form a barrier that is comparable to that
 provided by soil  cover.

      Since  some ADCMs  are  combustible,  the development  of  combustibility
 standards for daily cover materials may be warranted to ensure  that the use of
 alternative materials does not result  in an increased risk of fires at landfills
 Combustibility standards  for daily cover materials, however,  must recognize the
 relative significance  of the combustibility of the  cover material  in comparison
 to other procedures  and controls that  are typically  instituted by  landfill
 operators to prevent fires from occurring, such as routine checks for "hot"  locids
 and quickly extinguishing fires if they do occur.   Furthermore, the  requirement
 ,  r^Hy cover to be able to Provide a barrier to  the spread of fires within a
 landfill  should be assessed both in consideration of other operational benefits
 that can be realized by not having such intervening layers within the  landfill
 such  as  more  effective  leachate and gas management,  as well as  the actual
 effectiveness  of  such  a barrier,  e.g., a  6-in.  (15-cm) layer  of soil, to the
 spread of fires.

 6.5.3  Minimization of Moisture Infiltration
                                                                  j
 wi  Jc°1reduce the infiltration of moisture into  the  landfill,  ADCMs must be
 able to  shed rainwater  from the working face.  With the exception of nonhardening
 foams and certain indigenous materials, such as shredded tires and green waste!
ADCMs are able to reduce infiltration.  Their effectiveness, however, depends on
proper application of the cover to obtain complete and continuous coverage,  as
 in the case of hardening foams and spray-ons, or the  composition of the material,
 in the case of geosynthetics and indigenous materials.  Moreover, the importance


                                     109
-------
  placed on an ADCM's ability to minimize infiltration should be based on site

  IwteSCanSdn«fnftS:i10*8'  includi.n9  Choice of  leachate  management  and control
  systems and rainfall frequency,  intensity and duration.

  6.5.4   Leachate and Gas Control


        The  use  of  commercially  available  ADCMs  enhances   leachate  and  «««
  management  by not creating  intervening layers within the lanafSf that  coSd
  otherwise impede controlled movement.   Materials  like  foams and spray-ons "~
  mechanically destroyed  by  subsequent placement of wastes, wherels geolynSe
  are removed from the working face. When an indigenous material is^sed^as  d
                                                                             t


 to distribute moisture throughout the  landfill  and to  a«elera?e^S^mlc?obial
 degradation  of  wastes, elimination of intervening layers will significant
 employed, and the  type of
 desired and/or required.

 6.5.5  Dust Control
       Use of foams,  spray-ons and geosynthetics  all  significantlv reduce t-h
                   ^^
 (e.g., shredded tires) during or subsequent to placement onto8 the wlrking^fa""!?

6.6  DURATION OF COVER                                            ;


      Another consideration in determining the  feasibility of an alternative

r^lvaclvir  1Theh?mPeri°d °f,tlr fc?at the material wiliyremain effective Is
«*   vCv/S? t  , Jw  importance to be placed on the duration, or effective life
of an ADCM should be assessed in consideration  of both operational  and regulatory

          *'*^£^^~^^^*^^ requirements  may ^e ^S
                                          ot  time and under what conditions a
  rnlrL                       °    me an  "nder what conditons  a
particular alternative material may actually be used as a daily cover,  regardless

lace!"    g    XS ^^ t0 remaln 6f fSCtiVe aS a COVer once aPPlied to'the9woS!ng
                 °f ^e ^ foamS and sPraY-°ns can remain as effective cover
  nH   •           particular  product,  thickness  of  application  and climatic
conditions.  These times can range from 15 hr up to 7 days  for nonhardenina and

                 "* £tO- m°re than a week fc° -veral months Ior°spra?onsg( lee
^ =  A<11t^°?gh ^ Ien9th of time th*t a geosynthetic can be used as an effective
cover will depend on the composition of the material, of greater  significance is
flcenUtheerca°re t^SS H^ th^material  i- P^ced  and removed fro* the ^working

s^te: ^T^e^^et^^^^^^^

                 STS'JS*^ S°me Pr°dUCt
                                     110
-------
 6.7  IMPACT OF CLIMATIC CONDITIONS

       Climatic  conditions  also  need to  be  considered  in  determining  the
 feasibility of using an ADCM at a specific site.  Of particular interest to site
 operators is the potential impact of various conditions of rainfall, temperature
 and wind on how often the alternative material can be used as daily cover,  the
 ability to  apply  or place,  destroy or  remove  the  cover material,  and  its
 subsequent effectiveness if reused as a daily cover under such conditions.

 6.7.1  Foams and Sprav-ons                              '

       Rain and wind can impact on the application  of  foams and  spray-ons (See
 Tables 2 and 6).   Moderate  to heavy rain can  wash out  nonhardening foams  and
 hardening foams, and spray-ons also cannot be applied during such rain events.
 Howevesr, hardening foams and spray-ons can withstand moderate and heavy rain and
 remain effective as a daily  cover  once they harden, which usually occurs within
 1  to 2  hrs.   Although high winds may impact on the  application of foams  and
 spray-ons,  operational adjustments can usually be  made  to  compensate  for this
 effect. Once applied, foams and spray-ons adhere to the wastes and are not prone
 to being blown off the working face.

 6.7.2  Geosynthetics

       Wind is  the predominant  climatic  condition  that affects the  use  and
 placement of geosynthetics, although rain and freezing conditions may also impact
 the use of certain materials, e.g.,  nonwoven materials.   In addition,  although
 it does not impact the effectiveness  as a daily cover, the  possibility of snow
 may significantly affect  the useful  life of geosynthetics  (See Tables  10A,  10B
 and IOC).                                                         '

       Wind affects both the placement of panels and requirements,  for anchoring.
 Under windy conditions, more  time  and additional labor may be required  to place
 the panels, due to increased  difficulties  in handling and  anchoring panels. With
 very high winds, it may be unsafe and  impractical to attempt to use geosynthetic
 panels.                                                           >

       Although   rain  will  not  significantly   impact  the effectiveness  of
 geosynthetics as a daily cover, i.e, they are not deteriorated by rain events and
 reduce infiltration by shedding water from the working face, some products,  e.g.,
 nonwoven materials, absorb moisture,  become heavier and are more difficult to
 handle under  such conditions.  Due to their increased weight, such panels are
 also  more prone to snag and  tear,  decreasing  their  useful life.

       With some geosynthetics, difficulties in handling, placement and retrieval
may be encountered during  freezing conditions. Products that may absorb moisture
 can freeze either together or onto the soil while being stored near the working
 face.   Panels can  also freeze to the working  face if the material has absorbed
moisture or if there is a high moisture content in the  wastes being covered and
 freezing conditions develop  after  the  panel has been placed. Attempting to use
or  retrieve panels under  these conditions will not only require  more time and
effort,  but will also increase the  risk of damage to the panel.  To prevent loss
or  damage to panels,  many   sites  prefer not  to  use panels if  there  is  a
possibility of  snow.

6.7.3   Indigenous Materials

      Rain and freezing temperatures are the predominant climatic conditions that
impact the use  and  performance of  indigenous materials,  although these  impacts
will vary based on the physical characteristics  of the  material (See Tables 13A
and 13B).   Such conditions can cause  operational problems related  to  loading,
transport and placement onto the working face, e.g.,  the  material's moisture
content  may be  too  high to permit  proper handling or,  if frozen,  it  cannot  be


                                      111
-------
excavated or spread onto the working face.   Depending upon the  permeability of
the  material, moisture may  also  infiltrate into the  landfill, e.g.,  shredded
tires.   Under dry weather conditions,  dust generation may be of concern with
soil-like materials,  or the  risk of  fire may  increase if the  material is
combustible,  e.g.,  green waste.

6.7.4   Operational  Alternatives during Adverse Climatic Conditions

      When ADCMs are not able to be used due to  adverse climatic conditions, most
sites revert to using soil cover.  This practice, however, negates some principal
benefits  associated with the use of alternative materials, such as  savings in
landfill  capacity and elimination  of barriers which can impede effective  leachate
and  gas management.   As discussed above,  climatic  impacts differ among various
types of  ADCMs.   For example, while foams and spray-ons may not be  able to be
applied during heavy rainfall, various geosynthetics  could effectively be used
under such conditions.  Alternatively, whereas the use of geosynthetics may not
be feasible under freezing conditions or the possibility of snow, foams or spray-
ons  can be effectively used.  Hence,  landfill  operators should consider the
operational  and economic feasibility  of  using different types of alternative
materials under  various climatic  conditions in order to maximize the  benefits
associated with  the use of these  materials.

6.8  POTENTIAL IMPACT ON LEACHATES AND LANDFILL ENVIRONMENT

      Although foam and  spray-on covers are  mechanically destroyed with the
placement of  wastes on  subsequent  days,  these  materials remain within the
landfill  and their leachable  constituents may affect the composition of leachates
and  their subsequent treatment,  or otherwise  impact the  landfill environment.
Constituents  leached from indigenous materials  used as daily cover can similarly
affect  leachate  composition or  impact the  landfill environment.    Although
analytical methodologies, such as  the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
(TCLP), can be used to assess the  potential for leaching toxic constituents from
these materials, such procedures are primarily intended to determine the presence
of  and to characterize hazardous materials and  not to  assess  the  long-term
impacts on leachates and the  landfill environment.  Because natural processes of
stabilization within the landfill  normally occur over an extended period  of time,
and  many  alternative  cover , materials  have been  available  and  used for  a
relatively short period of  time, potential  long-term impacts  of constituents
leached from alternative cover materials on leachates, landfill stabilization and
the  environment,  although generally considered to be  minimal,  may need  to be
established.

6.9  SITE REQUIREMENTS  AND OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

      Site requirements  and operational considerations  that  may impact  the
feasibility  of using an  ADCM at  a specific site  include the  availability of
alternative  materials  or their  constituents,  requirements  for  application
equipment, availability of storage facilities and utilities at the site,  working
face preparation, and personnel considerations.

6.9.1   Availability  of  Materials

      Both foam and  spray-on  ADCMs involve the use of specially formulated liquid
concentrates  or dry  materials provided by the manufacturer of the product.   To
effectively  and  efficiently  use the  product as an daily cover,  site  operators
must ensure  that the manufacturer can  provide  sufficient quantities of  the
materials on  a regular  and continuing basis.

      Geosynthetic panels are usually  fabricated to site-specific requirements
by the  manufacturer, although some sites purchase the material  and  fabricate
their own panels on  site. To ensure uninterrupted use of panels as daily cover,
there must be a sufficient number of panels available at the site so that  damaged
or destroyed panels  can be readily replaced.


                                     112
-------
       The feasibility of using indigenous materials as daily cover depends on the
 local availability of sufficient quantities of material on a regular basis.  This
 is particularly  important to justify  any capital  investments  and  additional
 operational costs that may be associated with the use of the indigenous material,
 e.g., shredder.

 6.9.2  Ecruipment Requirements

       Foams  and  spray-ons  are  applied  to the working  face using  equipment
 specifically designed by the manufacturer for the application of that particular
 product.  Site operators must not only consider  the capital investment necessary
 to acquire this  equipment,  but  also requirements  for routine maintenance  and
 specialized maintenance and repairs  by the manufacturer, during the  life of the
 equipment. Because many products have been available for only a relatively short
 period of time (2-3 yr), limited  information is available on amortized costs of
 application equipment and  maintenance and operational costs associated with the
 use of such equipment over an extended period of time.  Moreover,  operators must
 consider the operational,  regulatory and economic implications and consequences
 associated with  the  unavailability  of  equipment  due to  breakdown  or  routine
 maintenance requirements.

       Geosynthetic panels are typically  placed manually  or by using  standard
 landfill equipment already available at  the  site.  Hence,  the acquisition  of
 specicilized application equipment is usually not required.  Although  some  sites
 have  designed and fabricated ancillary equipment such as lifting bars,  reels  and
 rollers to facilitate placement  and  retrieval of panels,  use of  such equipment
 is optional.   Furthermore, the cost of such equipment,  which averages  $1,000-
 2,000, is significantly less than the cost of equipment  required  to apply  foams
 or spray-on products.

       Indigenous  materials are usually  transported to the landfill  and placed
 onto  the working  face with equipment  similar to that used to  transport and place
 soil  cover,  e.g., trucks and dozers.  However,  with some  indigenous materials,
 special equipment (i.e., a  shredder) may be required on-site to process materiails
 such  as tires and green waste prior  to use  as an ADCM.

 6-9.3  Availability of Storage Facilities and Utilities

       The materials used in the formulation of foams or spray-ons may have shelf-
 life  and/or storage temperature restrictions, requiring an appropriate storage
 facility.  Since  these products are  applied with specially designed  equipment,
 appropriate storage facilities may also be required for this equipment during
 cold  weather,  unless  the equipment is freeze-protected or properly serviced to
 permit outside storage. Also, since  most of these products are diluted or mixed
 with  water prior  to use, a pressurized water source or water tank/truck must be
 available on-site.

       Geosynthetic  panels do not require any storage facilities since they are
 usually  stored near  the working face.    Also,  on-site  storage  facilities  or
 utilities are usually not  required for  indigenous  materials,  unless  these are
 required for special equipment to process certain materials prior to use as daily
 cover.                        >

 6.9.4 Working Face Preparation

       Working  face  preparation prior to the application  of daily cover affects
the amount  of material needed to  provide effective cover, the  time and effort
required to place the  cover, and costs,  regardless of the  cover material used.
However,  the  importance of a  smooth, well-compacted working face is  usually
greater  for alternative materials, and  can  significantly  affect  both  material
cost  and application time.
                                     113
-------
      Foams can provide an effective cover at thicknesses of as little as 2 to
3  in.  (5  to 7.5 cm).   However,  if additional foam must  be applied to ensure
proper coverage of the waste because the working face is not smooth or compacted,
its cost and the time required to apply the cover will be increased.

      When using spray-ons, which are applied as a relatively thin layer compared
to foams, the smoothness of the working face is of even greater importance.  If
the working face is not  smooth or well compacted,  the total exposed surface area
of wastes that must be covered increases significantly.  This directly affects
the amount  of slurry/emulsion that must  be applied to the working face and,
consequently, its  costs.   The time required to apply  an  effective cover will
similarly increase due to both the need to  cover a larger total surface area, and
the necessity to reposition the  application equipment to ensure that "shadows"
are effectively covered.

      Although  working  face  preparation  has a  lesser impact  on the use  of
geosynthetics,  it  can affect; both the  time required to place panels  and the
duration or effective life of the panel. When placed on the working face, panels
will effectively cover  the wastes  regardless  of  its smoothness or compaction.
However, a smooth working face will result in less snagging and tearing of the
panel, thereby reducing the time required  to place and retrieve panels and also
extending their useful life.

6.9.5  Personnel Considerations

      Landfill  operators  must also consider  the  operational skills that  are
required to properly prepare and apply alternative cover materials, as well as
possible occupational health and  safety concerns that may be  associated with the
use of these materials or their constituents.  Since foam or spray-on application
equipment is specifically designed for these products, site managers must ensure
that equipment operators are provided adequate training and possess  the necessary
skills to properly and safely.operate the equipment and effectively apply cover
material.  In addition, because the materials used in the formulation of foams
and spray-ons are not normally used at landfills,  it may be necessary to provide
special training to ensure that personnel are familiar with proper procedures for
handling these materials and/or to provide personal equipment, e.g., gloves and
goggles. ' Also,  the placement of  geosynthetic panels usually requires personnel
to walk across the working face in order to place panels or to provide anchoring.
This increases  exposure to the wastes  and  the  risk of injury.   Furthermore,
during the retrieval of panels from the working face,  personnel can be  exposed
to thes wastes and to releases of odors and other  emissions from the wastes.
                                     114
-------
                                  SECTION 7

                       CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS


      The  following conclusions  and recommendations  regarding  the use  and
performance of alternative daily cover materials are based on evaluation of the
information presented in this report.

7.1  CONCLUSIONS

      Use of alternative materials for daily cover in lieu of soil  can result in
operational, performance,  environmental and economic benefits at municipal solid
waste landfills.  These include ease of application, improved effectiveness in
meeting  site operational  and  regulatory  requirements,  savings   in  landJrill
capacity, decreased requirements for soil,  and more effective leachate and gas
management.

      Most  alternative daily  cover  materials  are able  to meet established
criteria for daily cover under various operational  and climatic conditions.  In
addition, although dependent on site specificity and the particular alternative
material used, certain materials are more effective than  soil as a daily cover,
especially with respect to control of vector access, blowing litter and odor, and
the minimization of moisture infiltration.                        :

      The use of alternative cover materials essentially eliminates intervening
barriers within the landfill and thereby facilitates the controlled movement and
collection  of  leachates  and gases for ultimate  disposition without incurring
adverse environmental effects associated with  less  predictable lateral leachate
and gas migration.

      The effectiveness of ADCMs is dependent on proper working face preparation
and equipment operator proficiency during application or  placement of the cover
material.  Climatic conditions and other site-specific  considerations will also
affect the choice of ADCM, its method of application and  effectiveness as daily
cover.   Therefore,  appropriate understanding  of these factors is an important
consideration in selecting  and applying ADCMs.

      Evaluation  of the  effectiveness  of  ADCMs  in  meeting  operational and
regu]atory criteria for daily cover is generally based on subjective comparisons
with  soil cover.  Therefore, this lack of consensus performance-based standards
for   various  operational  and  climatic  conditions   limits   selection  and
determination of relative effectiveness.

      Since many alternative cover materials  have  only been available and used
for relatively short periods of time,  some questions remain concerning potential
long-term impacts of leachable constituents and/or their final disposition within
the  landfill disposal  context.

      There is currently limited information and operational experience  related
to the longevity of foam and spray-on  application equipment, amortized equipment
costs and the operational and maintenance costs over extended periods of time.


                                      115
-------
Hence, it is difficult to determine long-term equipment operation and maintenance
costs related to the use of these products.

7.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

       Because  of the  potential for  enhancing operational,  performance  and
environmental  aspects  related  to  the management  of  municipal solid  waste
landfills,  as  well  as decreasing  space  requirements  and  conserving  site
resources, the use  of ADCMs  as  alternative cover options should be considered
during the design, construction and operational phases of municipal landfills.

      Performance-based standards should be established to permit more objective
evaluations of  the  short-term and long-term effectiveness  and suitability of
alternative materials for use  as daily cover  at municipal  landfills.   Such
standards may be particularly warranted for control of odors and other emissions,
for health, environmental and aesthetic considerations,  and  for the restriction
of the spread of fires at landfills.   Barrier to the spread  of fires within the
landfill  should also  be evaluated relative to  the need to improve and control
leachate  and gas" migration  and  the associated  benefit elimination  of  such
intervening barriers would provide.

      To  ensure  proper and  effective use of  alternative  cover  materials,
coordination  between manufacturers  of ADCMs  and  the  regulatory  and  user
communities is  recommended to ensure appropriate use of ADCMs and  to provide
training  and possible certification programs.

      Opportunities  to  further  improve  the  performance   as  well  as  the
environmental and operational acceptability of ADCMs should be pursued.  These
include  increasing  the use  of recyclable materials  in the  formulation  or
fabrication of ADCMs; use of leachate,  in  lieu of water,  in the preparation of
aqueous foams and spray-ons; reducing the  combustibility  of geosynthetics;  and
modifications to  methods of  application or placement.   In addition,  landfill
operators should  consider the  operational and economic  feasibility  of  using
different types of alternative cover materials under various  climatic conditions
in order to maximize the potential benefits. The potential for long-term impacts
on leachate composition  and subsequent treatment, landfill stabilization and the
environment  from  constituents of alternative  cover  materials  should  also  be
assessed.                                                         ,

      To  facilitate greater use of ADCMs, regulatory agencies should evaluate the
feasibility of granting State-wide approval for the use of specific-ADCMs, based
on pertinent performance data and/or selected site-specific demonstrations.
                                      116
-------
                                                                                          1
                                   REFERENCES
 1.


 2.


 3.
 Anon.  (1992) Alternative  Daily Cover Materials for Landfills.
 Works.  123,  62-63.
Public
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Anon.   (1991)  Landfill  Uses Old  Newspapers  as  Daily Cover  Material.
Pollution Engineering.  23,  74-75.

Aqua-Shed Manufacturing Corp.  (1992)  Aqua-Shed'"  Product  Literature,
Florence,  SC.

Barry,  G.F.  (1990) FabriSoil" - An Alternative  for  Daily  Cover  at  Solid
Waste  Landfills.  Paper presented  at Second Annual Waste  Equipment  and
Recycling Conference and Exhibition,  Rosemont,  IL.

Bay  Hill  Marketing.  (Acquisition  date:  1992)   Land-Cover Formula  480
Product Literature,   Altamonte  Springs,  FL.

California Code  of  Regulations.   (1990)  Title  14  -  California  Waste
Management Board,  Para.  17225.16, 17225.17,  17682, and 17683.

Carry,  c. (1991)  Sanitation District of Los  Angles County Green  Waste
Alternative  Daily  Cover  Proposal  for  Sanitation  Districts   Operated
Landfills, Los Angles County Sanitation  District, Whittier, CA.

Carson,   D.A.   (1991)  Municipal   Solid  Waste  Landfill  Daily   Cover
Alternatives.  Proceedings  of the  5th GRI Seminar on Geosynthetics  and
Filtration, Drainage and Erosion Control, Drexel Univ., Philadelphia, PA.
      CHEMFIX   Technologies,   Inc.
      Applications, Metaire, LA.
                                (1989)   CHEMFIX®   Product   in  Landfill
Chubb Environmental Security. (Acquisition date: 1992)  TerraFoam™ Product
Literature, Exton, PA.

Cieslik, M.J.,  Stecker,  P.P.,  and Marsden, M.A. (1986) Use of Synthetic
Daily  Landfill  Cover.    Proceedings  of  Ninth  Annual  Madison  Waste
Conference, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI.

CORMIER Textiles Products, Inc.  (Acquisition date: 1992) CORMIER Product
Literature, Sanford, ME.

COVERTECH  Fabrication,   Inc.  (Acquisition  date:  1992) COVERTECH  C-440
Product Literature, Rexdale, Ontario.

Donohue &  Associates.  (1989)  Inspection Report on  Application  of Fojun
Material as  Alternative Daily  Cover,  G.R.O.W.S., Inc. Landfill,  Falls
Township, PA.
                                     117
-------
15.   EEC Environmental,  Inc.  (1991)  Draft  Interim  Final Report,  Six Month
      Demonstration  of Daily  Cover at  Cape  May  County  Municipal Utilities
      Authority Sanitary Landfill, Woodbine, NJ.

16.   Environmental  Network.  (1991)  Alternative  Daily  Cover Material  for
      Landfill Use, Henniker, NH.

17.   Exxon Chemical  Company.  (Acquisition dates  1992)  Typar® Daily Landfill
      Cover Product Literature, Old  Hickory, TN.

18.   Federal Register.  (1991)  40 CFR Part 258.  Criteria for Municipal Solid
      Waste Landfills, Para. 258.21, Washington, D.C.

19.   Florida  Department  of  Environmental  Regulation.  (1990)   Solid Waste
      Management Facilities - Sanitary Landfill Criteria, Para. 17-701.50.

20.   Fluid  Systems,   Inc.   (Acquisition  date:   1992)  SaniCover™   Product
      Literature, Cincinnati, OH.

21.   Hull & Associates.  (1991) Report of Investigations Concerning the Relative
      Environmental Impacts of the Use of ConCover® and ConCover® with RainPlus,
      Toledo, OH.

22.   Kittle, P.  and Schmidt, C.E.  (1993)  Comparison of  Long Duration Foam,
      Synthetic Tarpaulins, Geotextiles, and Soil as Subtitle  D Compliant Daily
      Cover Materials for Sanitary  Landfills.   Paper presented  at the Solid
      Waste Management Association Waste Tech '93 Conference, Marina Del Roy,
      CA.

23.   Kmet, P.  (1983)  Evaluation of the Use  of  SaniBlanket™  to replace Daily
      Cover  for  Landfills  in  Wisconsin,  Wisconsin Department   of   Natural
      Resources, Madison, WI.

24.   Maguin,  S.  (1991)  Green  Waste  Recovery  Program,  Los Angles  County
      Sanitation District, Whittier, CA.

25.   Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. (1990)  Chapter 310
      CMR 19.000,  Solid Waste Management Facility Regulations, Para.  19.062,
      19.105, and 19.130.    ;

26.   Middlesex County Utilities  Authority. (1991)  Status Report -  Application
      of Sludge Derived  Product at Edgeboro Landfill,  Sayreville, NJ.

27.   Midwest Environmental Consultants, Inc.  (1989) Report on  the Effectiveness
      of the ConCover® Material at the Huron  County Landfill,  Toledo, OH.

28.   Midwest Environmental Consultants, Inc.  (1991) Report on  the Effectiveness
      of the ConCover® Material at the Wood County Landfill (2nd trail period),
      Toledo, OH.

29.   Newastecon,  Inc.  (Acquisition date:  1992)  ConCover® Product  Literature,
      Perrysburg, OH.        ;

30.   Newastecon,  Inc.   (Acquisition date:  1992)  ConCover® Site Certification
      Procedure, Perrysburg, OH.

31.   New York Department of Environmental Conservation.  (1991)  6NYCRR, Part
      360, Solid Waste Management Facilities,  Section 360-2.17.

32.   N-Viro  Energy  Systems  Ltd.  (Acquisition  date:  1992)  N-Viro   Product
      Literature, Toledo, OH.



                                      118                        ;
-------
33.   Pennsylvania  Bulletin.  (1992)  Vol. 22,  No. 41,  Environmental Quality
      Board, Solid Waste Management Regulations, Para. 273.232.  '

34.   Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources. (1991) Modification to
      Solid Waste and/or Processing Permit, Grand Central Sanitary Landfill, Pen
      Argyl,  PA. Bureau  of Waste Management,  Wilkes-Barre  Regional Office,
      Wilkes-Barre, PA.

35.   Phillips   Fibers  Corp.   (Acquisition  date:  1992)  FabriSoil™  Product
      Literature, Greenville,  SC.

36.   Pohland,  F.G.  (1983)  The Use of Plastic Foam as a Cover Material During
      Landfilling  of  Solid  Wastes,  Report  E-20-HOI,  Georgia Institute  of
      Technology, Atlanta,  GA.

37.   Polyfelt,  Inc. (Acquisition date:  1992) Polyfelt X0010 Daily: Cover Product
      Literature, Evergreen, AL.

38.   Polytechnica.  (1990)   Evaluation of TerraFoam™ for Suppressing Volatile
      Hydrocarbon Vapors, Wallace, CA.

39.   PRC  Environmental  Management,   Inc.   (1992)  Alternative  Daily  Cover
      Materials For Municipal  Solid Waste Landfills, McClean, VA.

40o   Querio,  A.J.  and Lundell, C.M.  (1991)  Geosynthetic  Use as Daily Cover.
      Proceedings  of  the   5th  GRI Seminar  on  Geosynthetics  and  Filtration,
      Drainage and Erosion  Control, Drexel Univ.,  Philadelphia, PA.

41.   Reef Industries,  Inc. (1992) Griffolyn® Product Literature, Houston, TX.

42.   RUSMAR,  Inc.  (1992)  RUSMAR® Foam Technology Product  Literature,  West
      Chester,  PA.

43.   Spleen,  T. (1988) Daily Cover Is Where You Find It. Waste Age. 19, 125-
      126.

44.   3M Industrial Chemical Products  Division.  (1989) SaniFoam™ Synthetic Dciily
      Cover  Product Literature,  St. Paul, MN.

45.   3M Industrial Chemical Products  Division.  (1989) Available Tests, Reports,
      Site Evaluations, and Laboratory Analysis Performed on SaniFoam™ Synthestic
      Daily  Cover by  Independent Laboratories, Universities,  and  Consulting
      Firms,  St. Paul,  MN.

46.   Tucker,  O.K.  (1992) An Evaluation of Alternative Daily Cover Materials in
      Sanitary Landfills.  Senior Project, Allegheny College, Meadville, PA.

47.   URS Consultants.  (1990)  Evaluation of  3M  SaniFoam™ Synthetic Daily Cover
      System,  North Royalton Road Landfill,  Cleveland, OH.

48.   VFL Technology Corp.  (Acquisition date:  1992) Sludge-based Soils: The Cost
      Saving Alternative for Sludge Disposal, Malvern, PA.

49.   Williamson,  C.   (Acquisition date:  1992)  N-Viro Soil  and Landfill  - An
      Economic Opportunity. Carey Technologies, Lexington, KY.

50.   Wire  Rope Specialists.  (Acquisition date:  1992)  Airspace Savers™ Daily
      Cover  Product Literature,  Baton rouge,  LA.

51.   Woods,  R. (1992)  Building a Better Liner  System.  Waste Age. 23, 26-32.
                                      119
-------
                                  APPENDIX A

                    MANUFACTURERS OF COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE
             ALTERNATIVE DAILY COVER MATERIALS WITH 1992 CONTACTS
FOAM PRODUCTS

RUSMAR®
      RUSMAR, Inc.
      216 Garfield Street
      West Chester, PA 19380
      (215) 436-4314
      Contact:  Paul Kittle
SaniFoam™
      3M Industrial Chemical Products Division
      3M Center Building 223-6S-04
      St. Paul, MN 55144
      (612) 736-4236
      Contact:  Bruce Spoo
TerraFoam'"
      National Foam, Inc., Environmental Products Division
      (formerly Chubb Environmental Security, Inc.)
      150 Gordon Drive
      Exton, PA 19341
      (215) 363-1400
      Contact:  Scott Biddle/William Swayne
TopCoat*
      Central Fiber Corporation
      4814 Fiber Lane Road
      Wellsville, KS 66092
      (800) 654-6117
      Contact:  Dung Trieu
SPRAY-ON PRODUCTS

ConCover®

      New Waste Concepts, Inc.
      (formerly Newastecon, Inc.)
      7401 Fremont Pike
      Perryburg, OH 43522
      (419) 872-8160
      Contact:  Tim Johnson
                            ;      (continued)


                                     120
-------
Land-Cover Formula 480

      Enviro Group, Inc.
      913 N. Drexel Ave.
      Indianapolis, ID 46201
      (419) 872-8160
      Contact:  Jerry Backer

      Bay Hill Marketing, Inc.
      913 State Road 434, Suite 1201
      Altamonte Springs, FL 32714
      (407) 774-6952
      Contact:  Obrian Norris

Posi-Shell1"

      Landfill Service Corporation
      2183 Pennsylvania Avenue
      Apalachin, NY 13732
      (607) 625-3050
      Contact:  David Hansen/Bruce Super
GEOSYNTHETIC PRODUCTS

Airspace Saver™ Daily Cover

      Wire Rope Specialists
      P.O. Box 77757
      Baton Rouge, LA 70879
      (8QO) 673-1570
      Contact:  Marlou Yarborough

Aqua-Shed™

      Aqua-Shed Manufacturing Corporation
      3231 Bryson Drive      '.
      Florence, SC 29501
      (803) 661-7444
      Contact:  Fritz Kramer

COVERTECH C-440

      COVERTECH Fabricating, Inc.
      52 Carrier Drive, Unit 7
      Rexdale, Ontario M9W 5S5 Canada
      (416) 798-1340
      Contact:  John Starr
      Cormier Textile Products, Inc.
      P.O. Box 1718
      Sanford, ME 04073
      (207) 490-2400
      Contact:  Ken Cormier
                                  (continued)


                                     121
-------
FabriSoil®
      Phillips Fibers Corporation
      P.O. Box 66
      Greenville, SC 29602
      (803) 242-6600
      Contacts  Richard Berry

Griftolvn*

      Reef Industries, Inc.
      P.O. Box 75250         :
      Houston, TX 77275
      (800) 231-6074
      Contact:  Mike McElhany

Polvifelt  X0010  fDailv Coverfelt)

      Polyfelt, Inc.
      P.O. Box 727
      200 Miller T. Sellers  Drive
      Evergreen, KL 36421
       (205) 578-4756 or  (312)  477-9228
      Contact:  Dave Colosimo

SaniCover™

      Fluid Systemsj Inc.
      32  Triangle Park Drive,  Suite 3201
      Cincinnati, OH 45246
       (513) 771-5656
      Contact:  Gregory  Scales
 Typar®
       Exxon Chemical Company
       70 Old Hickory Blvd.
       P.O.  Box 511
       Old Hickory, TN 37138
       (800) 321-6271
       Contact:  William Hawkins
                                       122
-------
                     APPENDIX B.

   SUMMARY  OF  INFORMATION REQUESTED FROM MANUFACTURERS
              AND  LANDFILL OWNERS/OPERATORS
                       Table B-l.

SUMMARY OF 1992 INFORMATION REQUESTED FROM MANUFACTURERS
          OF ALTERNATIVE DAILY COVER MATERIALS
   1.  Name  and/or trademark of  product.                i

   2.  Description and  composition.

         -   Does  it contain recyclable materials?
         -   Does  it contain leachable  hazardous  constituents?
            Is  it combustible?

   3.  Requirements for special  equipment  to  apply.

   4.  Shelf-life restrictions or  storage  requirements
      for constituents and/or application equipment.

   5.  For geosynthetics:   typical panels  sizes  and  any special
      modifications made to the material  for use  as an daily
      cover.

   6.  Costs

         -   Materials
         -   Equipment required for application
         -   Optional equipment that can be used  to facilitate
            application.
                       (Continued)


                          123
-------
                                                                                        1
                                 fable B-2.

    SUMMARY OF 1992 INFORMATION REQUESTED FROM LANDFILL OWNERS/OPERATORS
      ON THE USE AND PERFORMANCE OF ALTERNATIVE DAILY COVER MATERIALS.
1.  General.

    a.  Name of product used.

    b.  Regulatory requirements and/or restrictions.

   .c.  Primary benefits associated with the use of ADCMs

         -  Increases landfill capacity/extends useful life.
         -  Easier to apply.
         -  Requires less time, equipment and/or manpower.      !
         -  Less expensive.
         -  More effective than soils.

    d.  Extent of ADCM use (How long and under what conditions).

    e.  Operational requirements and/or restrictions (e.g., working
        face size or preparation) for use of the ADCM.

    f.  Operator acceptance.                                    •


2.  Application.

    a.  Method(s)  of application.

         -  Type of equipment required.
         -  Material and equipment preparation requirements.
         -  Alternative methods of application, if any.

    b.  Manpower Requirements.

         -  Number of operators/laborers required.
         -  Time required for preparation and/or application.
         -  Special skill requirements.
         -  Occupational health and safety considerations.

    c.  Foams/spray-ons application:                             ]

         -  Thickness applied.
         -  Application rate.
         -  Curing time,  if applicable.

    ct.  Geosynthetics application:

         -  Size of panel(s)  used.
         -  Number of times reused.
                                (Continued)


                                   124
-------
                         Table B-2 (Conf d)
Impact of Climatic Conditions.

a.  Rain.
b.  Wind.
c.  Temperature.
d.  Snow.
Effectiveness as a Daily Cover.

a.  Vector access control
b.  Fire control (combustibility/air intrusion/barrier wall)
c.  Litter control.
d.  Odor and other air emissions control.
e.  Water infiltration control.
f.  Dust control.
g.  Leachate and gas migration control.
h.  Aesthetic considerations.                              :
Costs.

a.  Materials.
b.  Equipment (required and/or optional).
c.  Other (e.g., storage facilities).
                                125
-------
o
X

    8
    3
    u,
    O
    CO
    w
    D
    co
             s

-------
U
a
en
Co
        l*s
        'S w
        >£ m
      60





      ,O 1
                 S

               a.

                         .1I.a .a
                    2 s
             CO
                    .a
 &
 CO
 
                                     8s

                                    I
         a
         CO
                                    *&
                                    jg
                                    *
                                       127
-------
s
tio
s)*
Info
Sou
              eo

             J'S
             fe 35 f-1
                Pi
                  £
Op
up. No cold weather experience, but
a building. Cover effectiveness is d
application. Cover can remain effective
Noticed fe birds on/near orking
also effecti controlled. er
w
Cov
wer bi
vely
light ra
change
nitored
ouch-
ide
lic
er/quicker to apply than soi
acity an
Saves landfi
Benefit
Stat

o   .2
  Sr- 5
  0 u
                      £
                      t
                      CO
F
ts
. Re
is
m2)
                                                               S
                                                               CO
                                                                  5
3-1
                                                               O
                                         2
                                         CO
y (10
t
is
d

it
dfill
Saves
Benefits
Stated
                                                              •s


                                                              i
                                                              *
                                               128
-------
Comments
Information
Source(s)*
%
•3 8 ^
"C c5 4S
|-~
llt
§ 8 H
^ <2 °
!
H
"do
Operational: Has been used for 18 mo. Equipment applies a 6-in. (15-cm) layer of
foam as required by permit. Foam can be applied during light to moderate rainfall,
but is not used if heavy rains (e.g., thunderstorms) are forecast. Can last 72 hr or
more, but regulators limit to overnight use. Concentrate/foaming unit stored in shed
in cold weather.
Stated Benefits: Saves landfill capacity (estimated at 5-6%).
E
S
CO
go^J ggf
O O GO *""* c3 "*3 ^ ^
aadSsls'S
P
gS-g
8 «. §
~* ^ s
<
cu
I :
Operational: Site demonstration. Applied 6-in. (15-cm) layer of foam. Foam
provides complete and continuous coverage of wastes. "Monitor" nozzle was used
to cover large protrusions. Refilling of unit required 15-20 min. The foam's sticky
consistency discourages birds and animals and traps insects. Provides good odor
control and an aesthetically pleasing appearance. Foam can withstand moderate rain
events, including thunderstorms.
CO
s
CO
|8.|
o o o o\
o" in" S "I
«— 1 1—4 ^S *—'(

as
«?
&
Operational: Product has been available since 1990. Protein-based foam is
designed to last 72 hr. Concentrate shelf-life is at least 6 mo. Application unit is
designed to be multi-functional. Units can be designed to meet site-specific
requirements (self-propelled, truck-mounted or towed). Preparation takes 30 min
and application of a 6-in. (15-cm) thick layer to a 10,000 ft2 (930 m2) working face
requires 30-40 min (not including refilling time which varies with sites).
Modifications in formulation of foam and method of application are being evaluated.
Material costs averages $0.12/fi? ($1.29/m2) for 6-in. (l5-cm)Jayer. Equipment „
costs ranged from $70,000 (truck-mounted) to $350,000 for self-propelled unit.
>
?2,
04
S
|
i
i
I
i
1
i
S
£
129
-------
3
i
                 I
                               130
-------
s.
1
                                     131
-------
O
3
             I
o
                               132
-------
u

i
              o
              so
          I*

            llr
              •o
              1
,3

is


1
OQ
                  O O


                 -
                      J
                 EL,
                                  133
-------
u

9
22
          »

          ll^
          ^ (In >-*
          ^
          *li
          J S|
          ^ 3^-
                           .s
                  ••2 i—< >
                 co 5S
                 m'O
                 <% W
  t
O O

oS
              §
              •fl
              &
              '&
                 V)
                 0*
                                                  Z £

                                              i
                                                ,5-S
                                £ S
                                2 *-<*, ff 5 §
                              I
                              S
                              CO
                              OH
                                                               >
                                                             •B S
                                                             w s
                                 134
-------
CO

6
Comments
Information
Source(s)*
eo
O fT [ *~*
^ oi C-
Location
1
Operational: Has been used since 1990. Uses multiple 50 by 50 ft (15.3 by 15.3
m) panels overlapping their edges. A panel requires two to three person 5-10 min
to place. Also has used "tow bar" to place 100 by 100 ft (30.5 by 30.5 m) panel by
dragging it onto the working face with landfill equipment (average time 20-30 min).
Currently uses on-site fabricated lifting bar (costs $2,000) with excavator to
place/retrieve panels. With help of two-person crew, can place 12 panels in 1-1.25
hr. Panels can be placed in winds of 20 mph (32 km/hr) without difficulty. They
are anchored if high winds are expected. Anchoring takes 15-20 min. Also uses
panels with 5/8-in. (1.6-cm) chain sewn into hem, which effectively anchors panels
in winds of 35 mph (56 km/hr). No problems using panels during rain or freezing
temperatures. Cover sheds all rainwater. Birds do not land on it. It is too heavy, .
especially with "chain-in-hem" for animal access around edges. Panels are very
durable; they last 10-12 mo, some 18 mo.
Stated Benefits: Saves landfill capacity (up to 20%) and is easier to apply and less
expensive than soil (saves $350/day in soil and operational costs).
*"•"*.
E
S
CO
1
1 1
CO
CO
Operational: Was used for 1 mo demonstration utilizing lifting bar and excavator
and two-person crew to place 50 by 50 ft (15.3 by 15.3 m) panels with "chain-in-
hem". Lifting bar was custom-fabricated for $4,000. Was able to cover 10,000 ft2
(930 m2) in 30 min. Panel placement required that crew walk on working face.
Panels were retrieved the next operating day while it was still dark. Flashers were
placed on the end of the lifting bar as a safety precaution. Was able to retrieve
panels with lifting bar after 2- to 3- in. (5- to 7.5-cm) snowfall. No operational
problems were reported during freezing weather, but can become slippery to walk
on. Panels completely covered wastes and were very durable. It was too heavy
(Cont'd)
S o
co m
§ O O •— i
2" 2 ii 3
1
<
CO
                                                                                     §
                                                                                     V
                                           135
-------
oo
U

9
        §p
                                                136
-------
60
,0 tt.
*lt
£ 8H
  OS *-'
•a
"55
                                    2 .
                                                8 & &
                                                -2 2; 2
50
of
o tl
abl
dai
o
g
ther wi
used.
eeled c
te
are
working f
waste, bu
Panels
followi
dfi
Saves
Stated Benefi
P
                                 w
                                 oo
                                 w
                                 a
                                            O>
                        137
-------
o
S
3




Comments
8s.
'S f
i **
s a
•il

CO
•i 1*T
if fe ~

s'S-s;

.§
4_*
'
0
.a
t^Joll^l^
^ 13  >
ssrt
GO OO W
cT1
8 § . -*
2 S 8 2-


i

s
*-"4

• '- 0 T3 * «> fe
1 !=s -a-8!! S*2
— .s ^§ S "2 « §• ts 8
11 -§2* 111 -a
•a I A& 1 £ja •
H^§.a-« s * « If 2
£. a ° o- a -a a** il t5.
^£3 ? 2^| s-^T
iS-^imii
Operational: Material has been available as daily cover
60 by 150 ft (18.3 by 45.7 m) and weigh approximately
usually placed by three- to four:person crew in 15-20 mi
equipment. Anchoring is done in a grid pattern at 20-ft
durable and woven, preventing punctures and tearing by
not like to land on the cover. Panels typically lasts 2-3 i
for 6 mo. With extended use, "flutter", caused by wind
can weaken material. This, however, has not been repoi
as daily cover. Panels are also available with a fire-reta
WP-640 is $ 0.085/ft2 ($0.91/m2) and for WP-1440 $ 0.


^.^
E
S"
^


i


1

i
s

                                      138
-------
o
§ Jv
1*
§g
I*
         1.8
          llf
           '
            •B
                   ~ -^ 2
               VO
               •B
                  J
                 b«<
                >.

                1
                2

                .s

                .a

                1
                £•
                           o
                          <*—*

                          1C
                          I
               !C
                
-------
   to
   a
   •z
   S
o  W

3  I
W  o
I-J  ^f*
cq  S

2  g
   00
tion

s*
Info

Sou
           CO
          slf
            '  "
Locati
is
                 S
                 00
                 o o
                 a
                 o
                                            aits §
                                                *  _£
                                                  "^
                                             o
                                            &0
                                 140
-------












I?"
N-X
C4
T-M
u
S
B



























-a
S
a





§*
'"§ -^
S t
o =
& w
60
!§ 8 <=T"
^ (2 -^



s| J
^ J fc-
.


_
C
•1
c
c
<
 to
§11
l|l
(Cont'd)
rain/freezing)
climatic condi
attractive to b
•«
1
1
"I
1
1
1
1
o
o
I
u
s
•a
I
«
CD
CO
CO
\n
1
CO




,




1
I
5
"3
CO
• *.
'oo
tS
s
CO
w
CO

I
3
*
.&
1 equipment to
.
























s
01
1
R-Manufacturer's R
> Visit
S £
.. co
i*
S_. J?
o *

§ s
.&*«
3 a
cr O
Itx g
o 2
W IX
3
O


Cjl
CO
U-,



co
c
_o
"*i
e
I
t— C
*

1
141
-------
O
a
                                         142
-------
      1

      1
      U)


3    I
w    o
I—1    
-------

          o
          U
-o

I
S
53
        S ^J

        I-
       g>
       -a *



b
            S-S 8 2
            > « &T3

            8-1 Si
                            1!
                            —
            tA
                            144
-------
3
22


Comments
*.*_» 'vi'
1 •§
<2 §
J3 w

c
S S *g*
O PH N"*1'
*
jg 1 >:
l|£
Location
"co
0 rf « -
^ S -2 13 f^2 . « 0
Operational: Has used both SaniCover™ 150 and 750 for 17 mn Panels 75 In
ft (22.9 by 24.4 m) are placed by using two compactors and two-person crew.
Orienting the leading edge into a 5 mph (8 km/hr) wind helps lift panel, reduce
drag and facilitates placement. Panel placement typically requires 15-20 min.
Tires are used as anchors at 20-30 ft (6.1-9.1 m) intervals. If not anchored,
SaniCover™ 250 can be blown off by 5-10 mph (8-16 km/hr) winds. Size of
working face must be controlled to ensure panels can completely cover the was
SaniCover™ 150 absorbs moisture during heavy rams and becomes heavier, ma
placement/retrieval difficult. During freezing conditions, it can become slipper
and also freeze to wastes. SaniCover™ 250 does not absorb moisture, but in cc
weather moisture "trapped" between panel and working face can result in panei
freezing to waste. Panel useful life averages 20 days; maximum of 30 days.
Heavy rains/freezing conditions impact most on effective life. Both materials s
water from working face during rain events.
Stated Benefits: Saves landfill capacity (« R%). Is !*«« P»jv.ncjv« flmj easier t
apply than soil.

gs
S w
CO CO
,_,
S a
o o
i-T c*"1
2 gj.

i
B :
3
CO
O a,
10 ^ 43
Operational: Has used both SaniCover™ 150 and 750 fnr 2 yr Panels 75 by 1
ft (22.9 by 45.7 m) are placed with two compactors by attacbjng panel corners
with straps. Wrapping a ball/rock in the corner of the panel and then attaching
straps reduces tearing of panel. Soil placed onto edges and/or tires are used fo
anchoring. Soil is primarily used when wastes remain exposed after panel
placement, i.e., working face is larger then panels. Panels are anchored if win
exceed 10 mph (16 km/hr). Winds above 25 mph (40 km/hr) make panel
placement difficult. SaniCover™ 150 absorbs moisture. In whiter, SaniCover™
(Cont'd)

IS

CO CO

§^
—^
2"E
1
_3
X
S
CO
                                         145
-------
o
1

               CO
                                                   CO
                                              146
-------

u
a
          §
          '•§
          ^
          CO
    •" OO &1
    §S2
             \o
             CO
                * •« 43 .2
    to   13


i?|l|
-=5 rtv Q W3 3

   ^"ll
    **•» »4 .w^
                         '-3
                         •2
          ..a



          £•


          I*
                ON
             a .5
  £3 »'
SS^SI
a i> 2 2 o
                         CO
                         i
                         DQ
                         CO

             8
                  a
                  O
                H
                o
             5 "i "S
             N ci a
             u
             CO
                                147
-------
o
3
Informati
Sources
                       .2
                       iw
birds/
overla
Altho
in red
B
tat
il
                            00
                               VO
                            O
                            S
                                                                             CU
                                                                             S
                                                                             00
                                                                             CL,
                                                                             H
                                                       148
-------
                       £ ^ «
                                A
                          2 wT A  § -
                       s s « >~'

                       " 1 =3 -3  S3

s
               1
                                               .2
                       §J9  >  %-&»
Si
VO

3

S



        ~  •?      "~*  ^  W  w
         a  «  i  °  »
ral

ma

lar
g.
S
6
per
St
facil
         60
                                                        «!
         £ U-
               3s

                                                        1
                                                        149
-------
            u

            S
                 O
                 z;

                 &]
                 O!
                 W
                 CLi
                 X
                 U'l »

                 «; .2
                 U
                 **• O
                 £; I
                  CM
                  ON
                                           8  a1
                                           §  g.
                                                     *


                                      £ -a

                                      il

                                    '
ents
                                                     8-S

.




          i

          si
            (3
          « -5
                                            ls§
                                            Js -0
                              d *
                             i; co
                           I -I:f

                           "^ rS ^'
                                !
                                co
                                                                                  O

                                                                                  •O
a
                                       -
                                       oo
                                                                                        oo 5
                                                                                           w ra
                                                                                           '
le

e

pl
                                                            00
                                                                                         co
                                                               •*
                                                               ON
                 _. tn o
                 g co -c


                 °°-- 1
                 —• -^ c
                                                                                         
-------







Comments
•a >£•
1 1
& CO
eo

3 y rC*
o u, ^— '
^
HI
o
•a
,3
CO
o .-
5* § s « R,
•S 3 w » "g : _. .S3
e ~ -a a £ c ' * *o
"S 3 £ J"3 S c§ fc-
w "° — ° .5 g §  « S 8
Q •§ >- "S, 8" a.
g».2^| I* -a
& jj ja ^4 .aS5
Operational: Uses fully digested sludge on part (20%) of the
placed with the same equipment as soil in a 6-in. (15-cm) lay
climatic conditions, except heavy rains (it is more difficult to
effective cover, although odors are released for a short time 1
Stated Benefits: Saves landfill capacity (sludge would otherw
waste material) and conserves on-site soil. It also enhances d
•
S*,
CO

^^*
» _ ja
O O i w
O O VI ^
\o" oo !G- r-
1


.-3
fc-H
151
-------
f-
3
S
                                              152
-------
                                    GLOSSARY
Alternative Daily Cover Material (ADCM)  - A commercially available or indigenous
material  that  may be used in lieu  of  soil as  daily  cover at  landfills.


Bulk  Storage  and Dilution Unit  (BSD) - RUSMAR® foam concentrate storage tank
equipped  with a built-in dilution unit which  automatically dilutes  the foam
concentrate with water as it is  transferred to  a  foam application unit.


ConCover® All Purpose Sprayer  (CAPS!  - A towed or skid-mounted  spray unit
designed  and configured to apply ConCover® slurry  to the working face.  The unit
can also  be used for power-washing and  fire fighting.              .


Hvdroseeder -  A  device consisting  of  a  liquid storage tank,  high pressure pump
and spraygun  used to  apply  a seed/fertilizer mixture to  areas susceptible to
erosion along  roadways,  at construction sites,  and at landfills.


Indigenous  Material  -  A locally generated waste  material that has been approved
for use as an alternative daily cover.  Most of these materials require physical
or chemical modification, or evaluation for  hazardous  constituents,  prior to
being considered acceptable  for  use as  an daily cover.


Pneumatic Foaming Unit (PFUi  - A self-propelled  foam generation and application
unit designed  and configured for the application of  RUSMAR® foam to the working
face.


Sludge-derived Product (SDP>  - A soil-like material produced  from the treatment
of  sludges with various additives  including  lime,  cement  kiln  dust,  and
silicates.  SDPs can be used  for agricultural and construction purposes, and for
daily, landfill cover.


Total Nonmethane Hydrocarbons (TNMHC1 - The total emissions of  hydrocarbons, less
methane,  as determined by gas chromatography using EPA Method TO-12.
                                      153
-------