United State* Region VIII
Environmental Protection 1860 UncoJn Street
Agency Denver, Colorado 80295 March 1931
Solid Waste
A TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
IN
CLIMATICALLY SEVERE AREAS
-------
REPORT NO. 908/6 81-001
A TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM REPORT
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL IN CLIMATICALLY
SEVERE AREAS
Prepared for:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region VIII
1860 Lincoln Street
Denver, Colorado 80295
Prepared by:
S. Caretsky, N. Grundahl, B. Lokey,
F. Lorincz, J. Rogers, W. Tusa,
and T. Van Epp
Fred C. Hart Associates, Inc.
Market Center
1320 17th Street
Denver, Colorado 80202
March, 1981
-------
Public Law 94-580 - October 21, 1976
Technical assistance by personnel teams. 42 DSC 6913
RESOURCE RECOVERY AND CONSERVATION PANELS
SEC. 2003. The Administrator shall provide teams of personnel, includ-
ing Federal, State, and local employees or contractors (hereinafter referred
to as "Resource Conservation and Recovery Panel") to provide States and
local governments upon request with technical assistance on solid waste
management, resource recovery, and resource conservation. Such teams shall
include technical, marketing, financial, and institutional specialists, and
the services of such teams shall be provided without charge to the States or
local governments.
This report has been reviewed by the Project Officer,
EPA, and approved for publication. Approval does not
signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views
and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor
does mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
Project Officer: William Rothenmeyer
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ". . 1
I. INTRODUCTION 4
A. Objectives 4
B. Scope 4
C. Methodology 4
D. Organization 5
II. COMMONLY OCCURRING PROBLEMS IN
CLIMATICALLY SEVERE ENVIRONMENTS 7
A. Introduction 7
1. High Altitudes 7
2. High Plains and Deserts 8
B. Other Environmental Considerations 11
III. POTENTIAL SPECIFIC LANDFILL
PROBLEMS IN CLIMATICALLY SEVERE
AREAS - THEIR CAUSES
AND ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES 15
A. Inadequate Cover Type
and Available Quantities 15
B. Difficult Functioning of
Landfill Equipment 20
C. Potential for Surface Runoff
and Erosion 27
D. Potential for Groundwater
Pollution . . . . , 29
E. Potential for Blowing Litter 38
F. Low Reliability/High Maintenance Requirements
for Landfill Equipment 40
G. Low Performance/Health and Safety Risks for
Landfill Equipment Operators 42
H. Solid Waste Collection Considerations 45
I. High Seasonal Variations in
Waste Volumes 56
IV. ADDITIONAL ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS TO LANDFILL PROBLEMS
IN CLIMATICALLY SEVERE ENVIRONMENTS .... 59
A. Alternate Landfill Sites 59
B. Waste Reduction 60
C. Energy Recovery 61
-11-
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Page
V. SITE-SPECIFIC CASE HISTORIES 66
A. Pagosa Springs, Colorado 66
B. Gunnison, Colorado 72
C. Meeker, Colorado 76
D. Lararnie, Wyoming 81
E. Bismarck, North Dakota 85
F. Summit County, Colorado 92
G. Telluride, Colorado 97
H. Silverton, Colorado 101
I. Delta, Utah 104
J. Forsyth, Montana 106
VI. CONCLUSIONS 109
VII. REFERENCES 112
-TM-
-------
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit Page
1. Average Annual Precipitation 9
2. Mean Annual Total Snowfall 10
3. Regional Depth of Frost Penetration 13
4. Suitability of Soils for Landfill Operation 16
5. Landfill Equipment Types 24
6. Utility of Polymeric Materials as Liner Materials ... 33
7. Effectiveness of Leachate Treatment Processes 34
8. Transfer Stations 47
9. Tilt Frame/Roll-Off Transfer Vehicle 49
10. Transfer Trailer Vehicle 50
11. Green Boxes 52
12. Front and Rear-loading Green Box Collection Vehicles. . 54
13. Small Modular Incinerator 63
14. Summary of Potential Climatic Alternatives Ill
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Severe climate areas present difficult operational problems to sound
sanitary landfill management. To research the problems involved, an exten-
sive literature search on the climate, geology, soils, and hydrology of
climatically severe areas was conducted and ten landfill sites in climati-
cally severe areas of U.S. EPA Region VIII were visited.
Common problems were found. For instance, the proper operation of
landfills may be curtailed throughout much of the year due to freezing
temperatures, deep snows, high runoff rates, insufficient cover material
and/or high winds. Other common problems found were difficulty in main-
taining landfill equipment, poor maintenance of proper surface runoff con-
trol measures, the potential for groundwater pollution, and blowing litter.
Problems were typically exacerbated by the lack of environmentally appro-
priate sites, leading to the selection of only marginally suitable sites.
Additional problems found were lengthy and difficult haul distances, sea-
sonal variations in waste volumes (most commonly due to mining and/or
tourism), and increased discomfort and health and safety risks to equipment
operators.
Suggested solutions to some of these problems are as follows. Addi-
tional alternatives are given in Exhibit 14, Summary of Potential Climatic
Alternatives, in Chapter VI of this report.
Inadequate Cover Type and Quantities
procure off-site soils
utilize alternative cover types (ash, fixed sludges, mining
wastes, etc.)
modify soils chemically (e.g., bentonite addition)
blend soils
increase compaction to improve the performance of a thinner layer
-1-
-------
reduce cover application rates
limit landfill operations to a few days a week to reduce daily
cover requirements
Difficult Functioning of Landfill Equipment
alter cover stockpiling operations to minimize moisture intrusion
and frost penetration
excavate and stockpile cover during dry, warm periods
provide a separate inclement weather area
use appropriately sized or specialized landfill equipment
vary landfilling methods according to conditions (e.g., using
trench operations on windy days)
Surface Runoff and Consequent Soil Erosion
provide proper grading on top and side slopes
select erosion-resistant soils (where possible)
provide on-site and off-site drainage and run-on diversion systems
treat the landfill surface (mulching, compaction, revegetation,
fabric lining, etc.)
Groundwater Pollution
physically contain leachate with a natural clay or synthetic liner
minimize surface water infiltration
Blowing Litter
use the trench method, aligning trench axes perpendicular to the
predominant wind direction
modify operating hours to best utilize low wind periods (early
morning, late afternoon)
provide litter barriers (fences, nets, vegetation)
orient landfill layouts to take advantage of natural or con-
structed wind barriers
In addition to these environmental and subsequent operational problems
in severe climate areas, a number of accessory general conditions were found
-2-
-------
to impinge on waste disposal in U.S. EPA Region VIII. These were the
general lack of capital and operating funds, sparsely settled but large
wasteshed areas, the predominance of government-owned lands which are often
unavailable for waste disposal, and the large seasonal variations in popu-
lations and needs for services. "
-3-
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
A. OBJECTIVES
Landfill disposal of solid waste in climatically severe areas within
EPA Region VIII poses difficult operational problems to local communities.
Proper operation of landfills may be curtailed throughout much of the year
due to freezing temperatures, deep snows, high runoff rates, insufficient
cover material, and high winds. Further, mountainous areas generally have
fewer appropriate sites available as landfill disposal areas. Operational
problems due to steep slopes, nearness of surface waters, undesirable soil
types, etc., result.
The purpose of this report is to characterize the operational problems
of solid waste landfill disposal in severely cold, mountainous, or plains
regions typical of the States of Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South
Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming, and to offer alternative approaches to these
problems.
B. SCOPE
This report is limited to landfill disposal problems in severely cold,
mountainous, or plains areas. The non-site-specific portions of this
manual, Chapters I through IV, could serve as general guidelines for land-
filling in most cold climate areas. Moreover, the types of landfills and
communities to which this report is directed are small- to medium-sized, and
have correspondingly small budgets. These communities may be impacted by
mining and energy-related population growth, and by the seasonal population
changes attended by tourism and recreation.
C. METHODOLOGY
The available literature on the climate, geology, soils, and hydrology
in climatically severe areas, and their impact on landfill disposal problems
was reviewed. Available literature specifically on cold climate solid waste
-4-
-------
disposal was found to be generally limited. The review was completed by re-
searching landfill methodologies and climatic conditions commonly ex-
perienced throughout Region VIII.
To supplement and complement the general guidelines resulting from the
literature review, the consultant team visited ten landfill sites in severe
climate areas in the six state region. The actual site visits included
analyses of (1) waste types and quantities; (2) waste collection area, pro-
cedures, and costs; (3) landfill site hydrogeology, soils, and climate; (4)
landfill design, operation, equipment, personnel, and costs; (5) site per-
mits, and compliance records; and (6) disposal problems and potential
solutions available to landfill operators.
D. ORGANIZATION
The following chapters describe the problems and potential solutions
available to site operators as well as to regulatory authorities in
achieving environmentally adequate waste disposal at minimal cost. Chapter
II highlights the severe climate conditions commonly found in western slope
deserts, western slope mountains, eastern slope mountains, and Great Plains
regions located throughout EPA Region VIII. Major natural climatic charac-
teristics which inhibit proper land disposal include cold temperatures,
inadequate soil supplies, high winds, steep slopes, difficult to control
runoff conditions, etc. In addition to being located in severe climate
areas, the selected landfill sites, as well as many other sites located
throughout the region, exhibit a number of additional characteristics which
similarly impact adequate waste disposal activities. These include land use
development requirements, large variations in seasonal waste generation,
limited site capacities, limited capital and operation budgets, and large,
remote, and sparsely settled service areas.
Chapter III examines the range of operating problems most commonly ex-
perienced at the landfill site. Typical problems include inadequate soil
cover types or quantities, difficult operating environments for landfill
equipment and personnel, high soil erosion potential, high surface and
ground water pollution potential, high blowing litter potential, leachate
-5-
-------
control problems, difficult waste hauling problems, and variations in sea-
sonal waste volumes. In each case the problem is described and alternatives
are discussed.
Chapter IV describes more general solutions which may apply to any
severe climate landfill problem, particularly where upgrading of any one
particular site might not be appropriate. These include utilization of
alternate landfill sites, waste reduction through source separation, and
materials and energy recovery.
Chapter V presents data from the landfill site visits conducted in EPA
Region VIII. Specific sites which were examined included the following:
Location State
Pagosa Springs Colorado
Gunnison Colorado
Meeker Colorado
Summit County Colorado
Telluride Colorado
Silverton Colorado
Delta Utah
Bismarck North Dakota
Forsyth Montana
Laramie Wyoming
The analyses present data (where available) concerning on-site
locations, operational descriptions, waste quantities and characteristics,
hydrogeology, operating problems, recommendations relating to severe cli-
matic conditions, potential financial options, and other solid waste issues.
Chapter VI summarizes typical severe climate related problems experi-
enced in Region VIII and identifies a number of additional conditions which
negatively impact solid waste disposal in the region.
-6-
-------
II. COMMONLY OCCURRING PROBLEMS IN CLIMATICALLY SEVERE ENVIRONMENTS
A. INTRODUCTION
The intent of this chapter is to define those naturally occurring
phenomena which inhibit efficient and environmentally acceptable disposal of
solid waste throughout Region VIII. The diversity of topography, altitude,
solar aspect, and other factors makes it difficult to generalize about
severe climate types within the region. However, several major climatic
categories can be described which influence solid waste management practices
i.e., high altitude, high plains and high deserts. Different conditions
typify each depending upon their specific location (i.e., east or west of
the continental divide, local topography, etc.). Climates vary signifi-
cantly from region to region and, on a local scale, are actually composed of
a great number of diverse micro-climates. There are several factors, how-
ever, which serve to distinguish the "highland climate" types from climatic
types characteristic of lower elevations. These common factors are dis-
cussed separately below, after which the additional variables affecting
local micro-climate differences are evaluated.
1. High Altitudes
Increasing altitude affects large-scale climatic conditions in several
respects. First, on the average, air temperatures normally decrease 3.3°F
per thousand feet increase in elevation. At the same time, solar radiation
increases with elevation. Insulating aspects of the atmosphere are less at
higher altitudes and as a result, both incoming visible radiation and out-
going infrared re-radiation pass more freely through the atmosphere with
increasing elevation. This, in combination with decreased quantities of
atmospheric water vapor, causes large variations in air temperature between
night and day and shade and sunshine. A major implication of large diurnal
temperature differences in generally cold areas is the increased frequency,
amplitude, and rate of temperature fluctuation about the freezing point.
This directly affects the incidence and severity of frost action at the
ground surface, which impacts the relative ease by which cover material can
be obtained. In addition, low temperatures often result in decreases in
-7-
-------
efficiency of operation for landfill equipment as well as for site oper-
ators.
In a very general sense, precipitation often increases with elevation,
at least up to altitudes of several thousand feet, above which the "mountain
barrier effect" common in Region VIII, may severely deplete the available
atmospheric moisture. The proportion of total precipitation which falls as
snow also increases with elevation. Depending upon their specific location
within Region VIII, solid waste disposal sites incur a range of total pre-
cipitation ranging from 8" to 40" per year. (See Exhibits 1 and 2.)
Prevailing wind speeds at high altitudes are also usually greater than
at lower altitudes. Highland prevailing wind directions may in some areas
conform more nearly with regional circulation patterns. Chinook winds from
the Northwest are also common along the Front Range.
As indicated earlier, the general highland climatic characteristics
(which derive mainly from the elevation factor alone) may be greatly modi-
fied on a local microclimatic scale, depending primarily on local relief and
the regional "mountain barrier effect". For example, local relief may
affect local temperatures by causing variations in the amount of insulation
received by slopes of differing orientation. Since solar radiation is more
intense at high elevations, these variations have greater implications for
soil temperatures and vegetation growth than they do at lower elevations.
Local relief may also alter prevailing wind speeds and directions in in-
numerable ways through the obstructing or channelling action of mountain
ridges, valleys, and canyons.
2. High Plains and Deserts
High plains areas typically found in portions of Wyoming, Utah,
Colorado, South Dakota, North Dakota, and Montana exhibit some of the same
natural characteristics described in the previous section. However, local
relief tends to be much more uniform, often resulting in a different set of
landfill ing operations problems. For example, blowing litter, caused by
high winds, can be a severe problem.
-8-
-------
EXHIBIT I;
AVERAGE ANNUAL PRECIPITATION (IN INCHES)/
36 36
Source: Linsley.RaySFranzini, Joseph./
Water Resources Engineering. /
-------
o
I
EXHIBIT 2
MEAN ANNUALTOTAL SNOWFALL (IN INCHES)
CAUTION SHOULD « U1O> IK
INTERPOLATING ON THMt G(N-
(RAMZED HAPS. PARTICULARS
IN MOUNTAINOUS ARKA3.
DATA BA31D OH PKIOO OF
THROUGH 1960
Source: Design and Construction of Covers for Solid Waste Landfills.
U.S. Environmental Agency Report, EPA600/2-79-165,1979.
-------
A number of other differences are also generally evident. Perhaps the
most important of these relates to the amount of available moisture. Site
locations east of the continental divide generally exhibit low total annual
precipitation, and as such runoff and groundwater pollution problems are
less severe than at sites west of the continental divide. In addition, soil
quantities are generally much greater at high plains sites than at sites
located in high altitude, mountainous areas.
B. OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
A number of other factors also inhibit proper waste management acti-
vities at landfill sites. .These vary on a site-by-site basis and need to be
considered in identifying site specific severe climate operational difficul-
ties and potential solutions.
1. Topography
High altitude, mountainous areas, such as those found primarily in
Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, and Montana, are obviously characterized by high
elevation, severe local relief, steep slopes, etc. These factors have a
number of implications relating to the ease of operating any specific land-
fill site. (High plains areas, on the other hand, are generally less char-
acterized by severe local relief.)
2. Geology and Soils
The soils found on relatively steep slopes at high elevations tend to
be shallower and less developed than soils lying at flatter or lower eleva-
tion locations. First, the climate at high altitudes may inhibit the growth
of vegetation and deter microbial activity, both of which are processes
critical to soil development. Second, strong winds combined with storm
runoff on long, steep slopes and the lack of substantial vegetation in some
areas, lead to a situation where soil is eroded as fast as it is developed.
Finally, the fact that a soil is found on a steep mountain slope may in-
dicate that it has had relatively less time to develop than soils found
elsewhere.
-11-
-------
Soils on the high plains, however, are usually deep and more developed
but have the same potential for erosion if not managed properly.
3. Surface and Ground Water Hydrology
Shallow soils overlying bedrock on steep slopes often result in con-
ditions consisting of high runoff or shallow sub-surface flow rates. This,
in conjunction with seasonal snow melt, leads to greater peak runoff volume
events. Greater runoff volumes, when combined with steep slopes and sparse
vegetation, create high runoff velocities. This, in turn, results in sub-
stantially higher soil erosion, particularly on loose, poorly developed
soils.
High plains areas may exhibit totally different surface and groundwater
hydrologic characteristics than high areas with steep slopes. Shallower
local relief generally results in lower runoff rates and high infiltration
rates. Deeper soil depths and decreased annual precipitation rates also
generally result in increased depths to groundwater and less potential for
pollution.
4. Frost Action
Soil moisture near the ground surface freezes when the temperature
remains below 32°F for periods longer than three to four days. The longer
and colder the period of freezing, and the greater the ability of the soil
to conduct heat, the greater the depth to which freezing occurs. Exhibit 3
maps the maximum depth of frost penetration in Region VIII. As a result of
this freezing, layers of ice form beneath the soil and the surface of the
ground rises. This phenomenon is called "frost heave". Frost heave can be
very damaging to pavements, compacted earth layers, and small structures
with shallow foundations. Upon thawing of the ice lenses, an excess of free
water is left in the upper layers of soil until the lower layers also thaw
and allow drainage by percolation. This temporary condition lowers the
soil's strength and stability. The greater the frequency, rate, and ampli-
tude of temperature fluctuation about the freezing point, the more severe
-12-
-------
EXHIBIT 3
REGIONAL DEPTH OF FROST PENETRATION (IN INCHES)
OJ
I
Source: Design and Construction of Covers for Solid Waste Landfills.
U.S. Environmental Agency Report, EPA600/2-79-165,1979.
-------
the frost action. When sufficient quantities of soil moisture are avail-
able, frost action in both mountainous and high plains areas can result in
fractioning of liners and soil covers and consequently increases the poten-
tial for pollution.
5. Ecology
Many organisms inhabiting high altitude areas have developed very
specialized adaptations to their severe, fragile, and very localized en-
vironments. As a result, many of these plant and animal species have parti-
cularly slow growth rates and may be considered rare, threatened, or en-
dangered. Consequently, revegetation efforts must be planned more
thoroughly to ensure adequate closure of completed cells or sites.
-14-
-------
III. POTENTIAL SPECIFIC LANDFILL PROBLEMS IN
CLIMATICALLY SEVERE AREAS - THEIR CAUSES AND
ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES
The following sections provide a description of the most common opera-
tional problems experienced at severe climate sites throughout Region VIII.
Alternative approaches which can conceivably mitigate the described opera-
tional difficulty are presented. In a number of cases the same approach
could be utilized to minimize operational problems in a number of areas. It
is up to the landfill operator, designer, or appropriate regulatory official
to determine the technical, environmental, economic, and/or legal applicabi-
lity of each alternative for any site specific situation. In some cases,
technological approaches not actively utilized in Region VIII, and generally
more expensive than current practices, are presented. While perhaps not
immediately economically attractive, increasingly stringent Federal and
State environmental regulatory programs may result in eventual utilization
of these approaches.
A. INADEQUATE COVER TYPE AND AVAILABLE QUANTITIES
1. The Problem
In mountainous areas an adequate supply of appropriate cover soils for
daily application and final closure at landfills may be difficult to obtain.
Exhibit 4 presents information detailing the most appropriate types of
cover soils. Characteristics most important in selecting a cover soil
include workability and low permeability.
As discussed in Chapter II, the steep slopes and cold climate normally
found at high altitudes in mountainous areas may combine to inhibit soil
development. The typical result is a shallow, coarse soil not well suited
for cover operations. Even where adequate supplies of appropriate soil
types are available, the frozen ground and snow accumulation characteristics
of highland areas may combine to make soil extraction and movement very
-15-
-------
SUITABILITY OF SOILS FOR LANDFILL OPERATION
100
Acceptable soils
Percent Sand
Suitability of General Soil Types as Cover Material.3
Function
Dean Clayey-silty Clean Qayey-silty
gravel gravel sand sand Silt Gay
Prevent rodents from burrowing or tunneling
Keep flies from emerging
Minimize moisture entering fill
Minimize landfill gas venting through cover
Provide pleasing appearance and control
blowing paper
Grow vegetation
Be permeable for venting decomposition gasc
G
P
P
P
E
P
E
F-G
F
F-G
F-G
E
G
P
G
P
P
P
E
P-F
G
P
G
G-E
G-E
E
E
P
P
G
G-E
G-E
E
G-E
P
P
Eb
w
Eb
Eb
E
F-G
P
aE-excellent; G-good; F-fair; P-poor.
Except when cracks extend through the entire cover.
cOnly if well drained.
Source: Brunner, Dirk R. and Danial J. Keller,
Sanitary Landfill Design and Operation.
U.S. Environmental Agency, Report,SW-65ts, 1971.
-16-
-------
difficult. Typically, suitable off-site soils are often not available
within economically acceptable haul distances.
On the high plains, larger quantities of soil are generally available
for use as cover material. However, depending on the specific site, hard
pan, sandy, or other coarse soils may not prove to be particularly effective
as cover soils due to difficulties in extraction and/or high permeabilities.
2. Alternate Approaches
The following discussions are intended to present a number of potential
solutions to the problem of inadequate cover soils in climatically severe
regions.
a. Reduced Cover Application Rates
Alternatives to daily cover include a reduction in actual cover appli-
cation, either in terms of the frequency of application or of the thickness
of application. For example, during cold weather reducing cover application
may be possible since the waste is susceptible to freezing due to the mois-
ture content of the waste itself. The primary purpose of daily cover is to
minimize blowing refuse and control vectors, fire hazards, gas and leachate
generation, and surface runoff. In some instances freezing of the solid
waste can reduce these problems by binding the waste, by inhibiting bio-
logical activity, and by minimizing infiltration. This method may have its
drawbacks in terms of eventual leachate generation, since, on the average,
larger quantities of moisture would infiltrate the fill. The degree to
which cover application rates can be reduced safely must be assessed on a
site-by-site basis, and will depend on many factors including waste moisture
content; duration and intensity of freezing periods; precipitation or snow-
fall frequency, duration, and intensity; cover soil type and availability;
site drainage; surrounding land uses; etc. Another option in small com-
munities is to limit the operation of the landfill to one or two days per
week. Cover material would then only be required on those days.
-17-
-------
b. Alternate Cover Design
Typically recommended cover designs include 6 inches of compacted soil
for daily cover, 12 inches of compacted soil for intermediate cover and 24
inches of compacted soil for final cover. A large number of variations or
possible different design alternatives exist. For example, increased depth
of final cover could result in decreased infiltration in the long run, and
could result in decreased daily cover requirements.
Selection of different soil types for daily, intermediate, or final
cover could also result in increased utilization of locally available soils.
Blending of different available soil types could also result in a cover soil
mix with more appropriate handling and permeability characteristics. Exhi-
bit 4 provides additional detail with respect to suitability for landfill
operation.
c. Additional Compaction
Additional compaction of existing soil cover to reduce permeability and
increase bearing strengths could also assist in minimizing the amount re-
quired for daily cover. A few extra passes with conventional compaction
equipment can achieve the required results with respect to vector, fire,
leachate, gas, and runoff control, but with lower soil requirements.
d. Dewatering
Dewatering of stockpiled soil can help maximize the use of potential
on-site cover supplies by greatly minimizing stockpile freezing during
severe winter weather. By providing maximum slopes on stockpiles and sur-
face diversion ditch systems, infiltration of water into the cover material
can be minimized. This can result in the year-round availability of on-site
cover and the potential utilization of otherwise marginal soil types.
An alternative approach to maintaining cold weather soil availability
consists of placing cover into furrows approximately eighteen inches high.
In situ soil drying generally results in non-uniform soil freezing which
consequently results in a more readily worked soil source.
-18-
-------
e. Chemical Modification
In severe climates, soil cover problems can be minimized through soil
blending or chemical modification. Where appropriate cover types are i'n
short supply or unavailable, the blending of soils of different textures
that are available on or near the site can achieve the desired cover soil
grain size distribution, permeabilities, or in some cases attenuation capa-
bilities. This blending can be achieved through the addition of gravel,
sand, silt, or clay, depending upon the needs of the particular landfill.
Many other desired cover soil properties may be achieved artificially with
chemical additives or cements. Cements serve as strengtheners or stabi-
lizers and include soil-cement and soil-bitumen. Other cement-modified
soils include bentonite cement-treated soil, lime-treated soil, fly ash-
lime-treated soil, fly ash-treated soil, and fly ash-lime-sulfate-treated
soil. Numerous chemical additives can serve as dispersants, swell reducers,
freeze-point suppressants, water repel!ants, and dust palliatives. The
advantages of any particular cover soil modification must be carefully
weighed against increased operational costs.
f. Off-site Cover Procurement
Procurement of off-site soil for daily, intermediate, or final cover
use is an alternative which should be considered if sufficient on-site soil
is unavailable or inappropriate for use. However, because of transportation
costs, costs of off-site soil increase dramatically with increasing distance
from the site.
g. Alternate Cover Types
Complete substitution of soil cover materials by non-soil materials may
also achieve the desired cover properties. These materials include fly ash,
incinerator residue, foundry sand, mine wastes, dried and stabilized waste-
water treatment sludge, dredged materials, composted sludges, or weathered
shale. However, it should be noted that these materials constitute feasible
alternatives only if there are sources in close proximity to the landfill
site. In addition, each alternate cover material must be investigated for
-19-
-------
the following parameters prior to use: ease of handling, flexibility,
cracking, deterioration, possible added pollution impacts, permeability,
porosity, compaction potential, and other soil-related characteristics. It
is particularly crucial" that an alternative soil type be capable of
achieving required design functions such as litter control, erosion control,
minimization of infiltration, etc.
h. Alternate Landfill Equipment and Accessories
In cases where soil is unavailable for daily cover immediately adjacent
to the working face, but is available from other areas of the site, equip-
ment selection for cover transport is important. Scrapers or draglines are
often used for procuring and transporting cover from one area of the site to
another. Difficulties in excavating frozen soil can be minimized to some
degree with the aid of machine accessories such as rippers and larger bucket
blades or teeth. Larger equipment, i.e., heavier and higher horsepower
outputs, can also be more effective in procuring frozen cover. Trucking
soil in large dump trucks may also prove efficient. If the problem is
consistent throughout the life of the landfill, purchase of such equipment
may be feasible; however, if cover procurement from one area to another is
only incidental, leasing or borrowing such equipment may be more economical-
ly feasible.
B. DIFFICULT FUNCTIONING OF LANDFILL EQUIPMENT
1. The Problem
A number of environmental factors characteristic of mountainous, windy,
and cold climate regions can combine to make the actual landfill operations
of waste placement and burial very difficult. These factors include snow
accumulation, frozen ground, ice, and steep slopes, among others. The
previous section dealt with these factors as they related to inadequate
cover types and quantities. This section deals with these factors as they
impact the operation of landfill equipment and the potential for and the
control of environmental pollution.
-20-
-------
2. Alternate Approaches
a. Alternate Landfill Design
Initial site design can minimize landfill operating difficulties by
controlling surface runon and runoff (and thus wet or freezing working
conditions), reducing fill and side slopes, sequencing fill operations to
minimize haul distance, etc. These in turn all result in significantly
improved operating efficiency. The following sections provide more detail
in a number of these areas.
b. Alternate Cover Types
Many of the alternate cover types and combinations outlined in the
previous section can assist in minimizing the difficulty of equipment opera-
tion at the working face. For example, some of these cover materials may be
less susceptible to freezing than other types. Incinerator residues, fly
ash, and other non-soil covers, specifically, may be less susceptible to
freezing, and therefore will minimize difficulties at the working face.
Alternate cover soils may also provide more traction for landfill equipment,
i.e. , loam soils are more tracticable than fine clayey soils.
c. Off-site Cover Procurement
Off-site procurement of cover materials can minimize strain on landfill
equipment, since such cover is often selected due to ease of access.
d. Alternative Cover Handling Operations
Frost penetration in severely cold areas can be as deep as 6 feet or
greater. As a result, to reduce equipment operating difficulties, cover
material should be stockpiled in warm and preferably dry months to avoid
having to procure cover material during heavy frost months. Although stock-
piled material is also susceptible to freezing, a number of preventive
measures can be instituted. To prevent water infiltration into the soil,
the stockpile can also be covered with a synthetic liner. A number of
-21-
-------
commercially produced liners including butyl rubber, Hypalon, and chlori-
nated polyethylene are available. If properly utilized, snow cover may also
act as an insulator and can assist in minimizing the depth of frost penetra-
tion.
As previously mentioned, cover soil modifications can also assist in
minimizing landfill equipment difficulties. These include the application
of chemical additives such as freezing suppressants (e.g., calcium chloride
in solution or dry powder form) and surface water repellents (e.g., soil-
cement and soil-bitumen).
e. Alternate Landfill Equipment and Accessories
Proper selection of the basic landfill equipment for day-to-day opera-
tions can also minimize operating difficulties. Often, since many solid
waste service areas in Region VIII are quite small, landfill equipment
serves a dual role—highway work and landfill operation. Two generalized
types of motorized equipment have been developed which can be utilized in
both instances with varying degrees of efficiency. Crawler mounted equip-
ment is designed for operation on soft or uncompacted materials. The crawl-
er tracks provide a large surface area to support the equipment's weight.
Although versatile, crawler equipment is generally limited to top speeds of
less than ten miles per hour and as such is most useful for moving large
quantities of soil or waste materials distances of less than 200 to 300
feet.
Wheeled equipment types travel at much higher speeds (up to 30 mph)
where surface traction is amenable and are generally best utilized at sites
with lengthy on-site haul distances.
A number of specific equipment types, either crawler or wheel mounted,
are typically used at landfill sites. Bulldozers are generally heavy front
bladed pieces of equipment available in crawler or wheel mounted modes. The
majority of dozers utilized at sanitary landfills, however, are crawler
mounted. A number of additional accessories include refuse blades, track
-22-
-------
roller guards, sprocket seals, reversible fan blades, armor-protected hydrau-
lic lines, cab roll bars, engine screens, radiator guards, crankcase guards,
sheepsfoot roller attachments, and enclosed operator's cabs with heating
and/or air conditioning options.
Front loaders (shovel loaders) are also available in wheeled or crawler
versions. A single or double jawed bucket is provided for excavation and
waste transport. Front loaders can be equipped with many of the same acces-
sories as indicated for bulldozer equipment. Wheeled equipment is generally
provided with steel cased tires with traction treads.
Power shovels perform large volume excavation and loading functions. A
variety of power shovels are available including dipper shovels, dragline
shovels, clamshell shovels and backhoes.
Scrapers perform large volume earth moving functions where soil materi-
als must be moved long distances. Scrapers can be drawn by another piece of
equipment or can be self-propelled units. Graders are also available in
self-propelled or non-motorized models. Scrapers are capable of final
contouring and shallow excavation activities.
Landfill compactors are generally modified highway compactor designs
consisting of steel wheels with special compactor cleats. Compactors are
not useful for excavation purposes but can serve to spread waste and coarse
material via installation of a refuse blade.
Exhibit 5 presents a schematic of common landfill equipment types.
Equipment manufacturers, well aware of problems encountered when operating
their products in severe climates, have produced a number of optional acces-
sories to assist in minimizing these problems. Track or wheel-loaders have
detachable rippers available with a standard 3-shank arrangement or an
optional 5-shank arrangement, both capable of penetrating and loosening
frozen ground to a maximum depth of 14 inches. A ripper linkage system,
available for almost any size loader, is a necessity for landfills located
in severe climate areas for cover procurement and other earthmoving func-
tions. Landfill equipment used in cold climate areas should be provided
with bucket teeth to assist in ripping and loosening frozen ground.
-23-
-------
EXHIB[T.5j
LANDFILL EQUIPMENT TYPES
Dragline
Steel-wheel Compactor
Rubber-tired Tractor
Scraper
Multipurpose
Bucket
Crawler Tractor
Front-end Accessories
Source: Sorg,Thomas J. and H. LanierHickman,Jr.
Sanitary Landfill Facts, U.S. Dept. of H.E.W.
Report SW-4ts, 1970.
-24-
-------
Because of excessive thaw and wet conditions experienced in the spring
months it may be beneficial to provide a winch system on some of the equip-
ment to assist in freeing disabled landfill or collection equipment.
f. Surface Runoff Controls
Drainage systems help to remove excess surface runon and runoff prior
to infiltration into the waste cells. In cold climate areas where spring
thaw of the snow cover and the frozen ground yields large quantities of
runoff, proper peripheral drainage around the working area must be main-
tained. Ditches and berms constructed as surface runoff controls should be
lined either with synthetic material or seeded with appropriate vegetation
to minimize erosion. A number of techniques to control drainage channel
velocity and scour include adjustments in channel depth or width, and varia-
tions in vegetation type and slope design. Berms can also be protected with
rip-rap, or gabions constructed on-site or commercially prefabricated.
To control runoff on previously filled areas, the surface should be
properly graded to achieve adequate runoff, inhibit ponding, and reduce
erosion. Generally a maximum slope of 20% and a minimum slope of 3% are
recommended. In cold climate areas ponded water, particularly when frozen,
hinders mobility over the landfill surface.
g. Inclement Weather Reserved Area
In severe climate areas, particularly during the winter and spring
months, the working face should be kept as close to a good access road as
possible. Waste delivered in inclement weather should be landfilled in such
a way that the base of the working face is on original soil to avoid possi-
ble difficulties associated with previously disturbed or settled areas.
Suitable soil cover should be maintained in close proximity to the desig-
nated inclement weather area. In cold climate areas, particularly severe
weather conditions may warrant postponement of landfill operations. Land-
fill operators should make such judgements on a day-to-day basis.
-25-
-------
h. Snow Removal Considerations
Landfill operations are often hindered by accumulations of snow. On
access routes snow accumulations as little as six inches can hinder waste
delivery. Snow removal is also necessary on the working face and on cover
procurement locations. While all the pieces of landfill equipment previous-
ly discussed can be utilized in snow removal operations, tracked or wheel
mounted equipment with dozer blades are the most efficient.
i. Alternate Landfill Methodologies
To minimize operating difficulty at the working face due to inclement
weather it may be beneficial to alternate among landfill methods to resolve
specific problems. For example, during snow storms and high winds the
trench or valley method is superior, because it aids in providing a barrier
for the operator at the working face. Cover material obtained when using
the valley or trench method is also less likely to be frozen because it is
often freshly excavated on a day-to-day basis. The borrow area is also
protected from wind and snow because of the trench embankment. When using
the trench method, it is imperative that the periphery of the excavated area
be properly channeled to minimize the amount of runoff into the trench.
During the thaw season, the ramp or area methods of landfill ing may be
preferable because of wet conditions and mud throughout the site. The ramp
method allows for a build up of an area higher than the existing contours,
thus creating a drier working face.
Another simple approach which can minimize difficult operations due to
severe climatic conditions is proper landfill operation sequencing. Natural-
ly, cell sequencing should be considered in the site planning and design
stages. However, a landfill operator may choose to reschedule landfill ing
operations in accordance with seasonal or daily weather conditions. In case
of particularly difficult operating conditions, such as severe snow storms,
site operations may be postponed and waste collection services delayed until
landfill operation can be reinstated. Alternatively, on-site waste storage
areas or "wet weather" operational areas could also be provided.
-26-
-------
C. POTENTIAL FOR SURFACE RUNOFF AND EROSION
1. The Problem
Surface runoff and consequent soil erosion and stream sedimentation can
be severe problems at landfill sites in high altitude/cold climate areas.
The soils in these areas tend to be shallower, less developed, and more
credible since: (1) they lie on steep slopes; (2) they are more recent in
origin; and (3) the cold climate hinders vegetation growth and soil micro-
bial activity. In addition, these soils are subject to the relatively more
powerful erosive forces of: (1) high winds; (2) surface runoff on long,
steep, and often sparsely vegetated slopes; (3) surface runoff volume peaks
due to snowmelt; and (4) frost action.
2. Alternate Approaches
a. Cover Soil Type Selection
Soil erosion on landfills can be minimized by selecting cover material
types which are characteristically erosion-resistant. The parameters which
are most important in determining potential soil erodability are particle
size distribution, organic content, soil structure, permeability, and in
some cases, soil chemical properties. Due to the remolding and mixing which
occur during cover soil excavation and placement, the most important of
these factors in soil cover selection is grain size. The larger the grain
size, the less susceptible cover is to erosion. In cases where excessive
erosion is evidenced, it may be beneficial to procure large grain-sized
cover from off-site borrow areas.
Another erosion control measure is soil stabilization through chemical
and cement additives. The approach is best used on areas where slopes
cannot be limited and where high runoff rates are unavoidable.
-27-
-------
b. Top and Side Slopes
Proper grading of top slopes assists in controlling erosion by rerout-
ing flows and reducing flow velocities. In- general, if possible, design
recommendations suggest that surface slopes should be at least 2% to avoid
ponding, but should not exceed 5% to avoid excessive erosion. Berms or
swales should be constructed along the top of the slope to intercept runoff.
These channels can be drained at various locations through spillways or
vertical drops constructed from prefabricated material. Slopes can also be
rip-rapped with rock or prefabricated materials if the slope is a permanent
structure.
c. Surface Treatment and Vegetation
Surface erosion can be controlled through a number of methods including
mulching, fabric lining, vegetation, surface smoothing, and compaction.
Controls should be initiated as soon as possible after final cover applica-
tion. Seeding can be a progressive operation, moving from one cell to an-
other as landfilling proceeds. Mulch should be applied after seeding to
minimize exposure, erosion and wind damage. A number of mulches that can be
used in severe climate areas include shredded wooden bark, hay, and a number
of commercial products and synthetic materials. The appropriate type of
vegetation and mulching material should be selected in accordance with
site-specific climatological and topographical conditions.
d. On-Site Drainage Features
Utilization of stabilized existing site contours for runoff control can
be beneficial in that it reduces the amount of site work required. This
option is very site-specific, and if possible should be incorporated into
the overall site drainage plan.
Large volumes of water, in the form of precipitation or spring thaw,
should be diverted with prefabricated or constructed ditches or swales
around the landfill site. To minimize cost, swales or ditches constructed
-28-
-------
by landfill equipment and properly protected for scour velocity are effec-
tive. Pump operated systems at a landfill site should be employed only if
absolutely necessary due to cold weather operating problems and long term
energy and maintenance commitments.
e. Off-Site Runoff Diversion
It is beneficial to divert natural drainage upgradient of the site to
minimize surface runon onto the landfill itself. To divert runoff, a ditch
or swale constructed around the periphery of the site and discharging down
gradient of the site is generally suitable. Care should be taken with
discharge point design or problems like undercutting may result. In cases
of excessive runoff, berms or dikes with appropriate channel protection may
be required.
D. POTENTIAL FOR GROUNDWATER POLLUTION
1. The Problem
Groundwater and infiltrating surface water percolating through land-
filled solid waste may produce leachate, a solution of dissolved and sus-
pended matter and microbial waste products. Depending upon its composition,
concentrations, and volume, this leachate may pose a danger of severe con-
tamination of underlying groundwater and/or adjacent surface waters. In
some instances, the potential for groundwater pollution due to leachate
generated from landfilled solid waste can be high in severe climate areas.
For example, leachate migration volumes may reach temporary extremes
with the onset of warmer weather and the thawing of precipitation stored as
snow cover and ice lenses in frozen ground. In addition, cold weather
during the winter months may hamper cover application operations and land-
fill operators may be forced to allow snow to fall directly on the waste
mass. Thus, the thawing of frozen waste may compound the increased infil-
tration which occurs during the spring season.
-29-
-------
2. Alternate Approaches
Alternate approaches to minimizing the potential for ground water
pollution at climatically severe landfill sites include:
(1) various means of controlling surface runoff and
infiltration;
(2) raising the landfill base with clean fill to in-
crease the separation to adjacent high groundwater
levels and to increase the soil depth through which
leachate must percolate before reaching ground-
water;
(3) physically containing the leachate with natural
clay or synthetic liners;
(4) using a variety of direct leachate control measures
including leachate collection, treatment, recycl-
ing, and monitoring; and
(5) utilizing an alternate landfill design and operat-
ing approach.
These potential solutions are discussed separately below.
a. Surface Runoff Control
If water quantities flowing over landfill areas are minimized, infiltra-
tion to the waste mass and the amount of leachate generated should also be
minimized. Therefore, the measures outlined in Section C. , "Potential for
Surface Runoff and Erosion", are also applicable as solutions to minimizing
groundwater pollution at landfills in climatically severe areas.
b. Raising Landfill Base with Clean Fill
When siting a landfill, the natural topographical and hydrogeological
considerations which indicate the potential for groundwater pollution must
be analyzed. Landfills should not be placed in direct contact with underly-
ing groundwater aquifers. If local groundwater tables are high, one method
of protecting groundwater is to raise the base of the landfill site with
fill materials. Assuming that natural soils are available, soils best
-30-
-------
suited to such purposes are those with reduced permeability and/or high
attenuation capacity.
c. Leachate Control Measures
Maintaining a physical separation between solid wastes and groundwater
reduces the potential production of leachate and the potential contamination
of surface water and groundwater by leachate. Vertical separation of the
waste above the historical high groundwater level can prevent intrusion of
groundwater into the waste and consequent leachate contamination. However,
leachate has the potential for downward migration into groundwater systems
and therefore, physical separation of the waste and groundwater supply is
usually not totally adequate to prevent groundwater contamination. A natu-
ral clay or synthetic liner which can both minimize the downward movement of
leachate pollutants and prevent direct intrusion of groundwater into land-
filled solid wastes is clearly more effective.
Proper liner selection, design, and construction in severe climate
areas depends upon several factors including climatic conditions, waste
types and quantities, subsurface soil conditions, landfill type, current and
projected regional water resource uses, the potential effect of leachate on
groundwater quality, direction of groundwater movement, and the interrela-
tionship of the aquifer with other aquifers and with surface water. To be
effective, liners must be relatively impermeable to leachate and must be
sufficiently durable to maintain their integrity over the expected period of
landfill leachate generation. Specifically, in severe climate areas the
liner must be capable of withstanding the stresses associated with freezing,
thawing, wetting and drying, periodic shifts of the earth and subgrade
settling, as well as stresses associated with liner installation and initial
operation of equipment on the lined base.
Available synthetic liners are usually made of either polymeric or
asphaltic materials. The asphalt group includes asphaltic concrete, emulsi-
fied asphalt, soil-asphalt mixtures, and asphalt seals. The polymeric group
includes synthetic butyl rubber, PVC (polyvinylchloride), PE (polyethylene),
and Hypalon. Synthetic liners must resist attack from ozone, ultraviolet
-31-
-------
radiation, soil bacteria, mold, fungus, and vegetation and must be compati-
ble with the wastes deposited. The liner must be amenable to field splicing
and to repair as necessary on a year-round basis. Furthermore, synthetic
liners used in severe climates must resist cracking, laceration, abrasion,
and puncture by the landfilling operation. Placing the liner between layers
of sand, each layer being a minimum of six inches thick, will cut down on
liner damage caused by the weight of waste and equipment from above. Da-
mage, however, may also occur from the buildup under the liner of decomposi-
tion gas from previously filled areas underlying or in close proximity to
the liner. Placing an impermeable soil layer under the bottom sand layer or
installing a gas venting system would mitigate this problem. Exhibit 6
lists various synthetic liners and their advantages and disadvantages.
Another liner material is natural clay, either in situ or transported
in and compacted. Natural clayey materials may offer an advantage in that
they may exhibit attenuation properties for specific leachate constituents.
Selection of a natural clay liner based upon specific attenuation properties
for a particular waste type can therefore provide an additional degree of
protection for adjacent groundwater supplies.
Clay liners, as well as synthetic liners, should be overlain by a sand
layer. This layer, besides affording protection, acts to facilitate drain-
age of leachate. This layer may be six inches to two feet in thickness and
can incorporate gravel or clay tile (or pipes of asbestos-cement, plastic,
ductile iron, corrugated metal, or concrete) gravity drainage systems de-
signed to channel leachate to the collection sumps. Once collected, the
leachate may be treated immediately or pumped to a storage tank for eventual
treatment or recycling. Leachate treatment methodologies are generally
biological and/or physical-chemical. Land application of raw leachate,
recirculation of leachate back through the fill, and piping leachate to a
municipal wastewater treatment plant are alternative disposal methodologies.
Several wastewater treatment techniques have been tested, primarily on
a laboratory scale, for their effectiveness in treating landfill leachate
containing organic matter and inorganic ions. While many researchers have
-32-
-------
EXHIBITS
UTILITY OF POLYMERIC MATERIALS AS LINER MATERIALS
Liner Material
Polyethylene
Polyvlnyl Chloride
Butyl Rubber
Hypalon
Ethylene Propylene Diene
Monomer
Chlorinated Polyethylene
Advantage
Expense
Chemical Resistance
Tensile Strength
Low Temperature Handling
Range of Manufactured
Properties Available
Chemical Resistance
Low Permeability
Exoosable
Puncture Resistance
Low Temperature Handling
Chemical Resistance
Exposable
Exposable
Low Temperature Handling
Weatherability
Tensile Strength
Elongation Strength
Disadvantage
Weatherability
Puncture Resistance
Unexposable
Some Formulations Sub-
ject to Biological
Degradation
Low Temperature Handling
Unexposable
Lack of Chemical
Resistance to Hydro-
carbons and Solvents
Splicing Difficulty
Cost
Tensile Strength
Lack of Chemical
Resistance to Hydro-
carbons and Solvents
Chemical Resistance
Source: Overview of Landfill Technology.
Fred C. Hart Associates, Inc., 1978.
-33-
-------
.EXHIBIT?
EFFECTIVENESS OF LEACHATE TREATMENT PROCESSES
I
CO
Character of Leachate
COD/
TOG
(1)
>2.8
2.0-
2.8
<2.0
BOD/
COD
(2)
>0.5
0.1-
0.5
<0.1
Age
of
fill
(3)
Young
«5 yr)
Medium
(5 yr-10 yr)
Old
.C>10 yr)
(mg/t)
COD
(4)
>10,000
500-10,000
<500
Biolog-
ical
treat-
ment
(5)
Good
Fair
Poor
Chem-
ical
precipi-
tation
(6)
Poor
Fair
Poor
Processes
Chem-
ical
oxida-
tion
(7)
Poor
Fair
Fair
Re-
verse
os-
mosis
(8)
Fair
Good
Good
Acti-
vated
car-
bon
(9)
Poor
Fair
Good
Ion
ex-
change
resins
(19)
Poor
Fair
Fair
Source: Chian 8 Dewalle
-------
been involved in landfill leachate treatability studies, this evaluation
relies most heavily on the more recent and comprehensive investigations by
Chian and DeWalle. Exhibit 7 summarizes the relative efficiencies of vari-
ous leachate treatment methods for leachates from landfills of various ages.
In addition to the methods listed, leachate can also be treated by recircu-
lation back through the waste or by placement in evaporative lagoons.
Recirculation, however, usually requires specialized landfill design and
evaporative lagoons are technically possible only in arid regions.
Cold weather impacts on any of these treatment processes are at this
point inconclusive because data on leachate treatment in severe climates are
very limited. The most obvious effect that cold climate has on any treat-
ment process is freezing and the resulting hindrance of mechanical equipment
operation. Existing treatment facilities have resolved such problems by
enclosing the whole treatment process in some type of a heated structure.
As a result, the treatment process, either biological or chemical/physical,
is contained in a controlled environment.
As an alternative to treatment and/or discharge, land application of
landfill leachate has sustained little actual testing or experience to date
as a viable leachate treatment process. However, results from land applica-
tion of municipal wastewater can to some extent be extended to land applica-
tion of landfill leachate. Key variables in evaluating the potential of this
type of process include: soil type and attenuating capability, depth to
groundwater, topography, application rates, season of application, climate,
and the limitations that certain leachate constituents might place on the
process. Because land application is seasonal, the use of this process in
cold regions requires temporary leachate storage facilities or alternate
treatment methods.
Leachate recycling is the controlled collection and recirculation of
leachate through the landfill for the purpose of promoting rapid degradation
of refuse and stabilization of leachate constitutents. Since recycling may
result in the reduction of leachate strength it may also serve as a pretreat-
ment arrangement prior to leachate treatment processes or direct leachate
discharge. Leachate recycling is achieved via surface spraying with spray
-35-
-------
irrigation equipment in instances where the cover material is permeable. In
instances where the cover is impermeable, recycling may be accomplished via
irrigation fields placed below the cover.
The precise mode of operation of leachate recycling is still poorly
understood since it has only recently been investigated in experimental
landfill simulations; very little practical application of the concept has
yet been achieved, especially with regard to severe climate areas. The
generally hypothesized and accepted explanation is that recirculation of
leachate through a landfill promotes faster development of an active popula-
tion of anaerobic methane forming bacteria, which affect the bulk of the
waste decomposition process. This, in turn, increases the rate and predict-
ability of biological stabilization of the organic constituents in the
waste. While initial recycling may result in higher leachate constituent
concentrations than would normally be experienced, the potential increase in
degradation rates theoretically should result in reduction of leachate
constituents in a shorter time frame. A variety of constituents, particu-
larly non-organics such as metallic ions, may remain relatively unaffected.
Depending upon site specific considerations, requirements for long-term
post-closure landfill leachate monitoring and management may be reduced in
certain instances because of the stabilization that occurs.
Leachate recycling as a treatment process in severe climate areas is
limited because of unfavorable weather conditions. Since the ground is
frozen much of the year, recycling is limited to a few summer months unless
more expensive below ground irrigation systems are installed. Alternative-
ly, storage of all leachate generated during winter months could be pro-
vided. The construction of a retention pond with several months' capacity
may require large capital investments as well as land commitments, which are
both limited assets for small rural landfills typical of Region VIII.
In addition, groundwater monitoring facilities may be installed to
protect groundwater and surface water resources adjacent to the landfill
site. A properly designed monitoring program detects and evaluates pollu-
tion caused by leachate by periodically measuring and evaluating groundwater
quality. This information can aid in determining the need for and nature of
-36-
-------
leachate controls, and in evaluating their effectiveness once they are
implemented.
Groundwater monitoring techniques include monitoring in the zones of
both aeration and saturation, field inspections and other methods. Moni-
toring in the zone of aeration can be done indirectly by measuring tempera-
ture or electrical conductivity, or can be done directly using suction
devices, such as suction lysimeters, hollow fiber samplers, or membrane
filter samplers. Monitoring in the zone of saturation involves periodical
well sampling at a background station and at stations located downgradient
in the path of groundwater flow. Prior to establishing a monitoring net-
work, hydrogeologic studies should establish groundwater flow direction and
depth, soil permeability and porosity, and typical background concentration
levels.
This information is best determined by field inspection, but can be
supplemented by already published information. From this site-specific
data, a monitoring station network can be designed. A minimally acceptable
monitoring network might consist of:
1. one line of three wells downgradient from the
landfill and situated at an angle perpendicular to
groundwater flow, penetrating the entire saturated
thickness of the aquifer or aquifers which could
potentially be contaminated;
2. one well immediately adjacent to the downgradient
edge of the filled area, screened so that it inter-
cepts the water table; and,
3. a well located in an area upgradient from the
landfill so that it will not be affected by poten-
tial leachate migration.
The size of the landfill, hydrogeologic environment, climate, budgetary
restrictions, and regulatory requirements are factors which will dictate the
actual number of wells used. However, every effort should be made to have a
minimum of three wells at each landfill and no less than one downgradient
well for every 250 feet of landfill frontage. In locating test wells on
landfills in severe climates, it is important to locate wells accurately and
-37-
-------
have them clearly marked for easy location during severe weather conditions.
Wells should also be specifically located outside of highly trafficked areas
to minimize potential well damage.
Establishment of the actual testing program should depend on waste
types to be disposed of and on site specific conditions. For example,
weather conditions may require testing only infrequently or not at all
during the winter months.
E. POTENTIAL FOR BLOWING LITTER
1. The Problem
Prevailing wind speeds are normally greater in mountainous and high
plains areas due to the lower frictional forces experienced by mass air
movements at high elevations. In mountainous terrain, the local relief is
the most important factor in controlling site-specific wind speeds and
directions. In some site situations, the local topography may produce very
gusty short-term conditions which make the control of landfill litter very
difficult. High plains areas may also be subject to extended periods of
high winds. Blowing litter at a landfill site presents both aesthetic and
health problems and exacerbates public opposition to landfill ing.
2. Alternate Approaches
The best means of controlling blowing litter at landfill sites is to
minimize the quantity of litter exposed to wind forces. This can be accom-
plished with standard sanitary landfilling practices such as minimizing the
area of the working face, minimizing the period of exposure of the working
face to winds by application of daily cover and by minimizing disturbance of
waste deposited on the face by limiting equipment operation to periods of
low winds. Prohibition of open dumping must also be enforced vigorously to
control blowing litter. Beyond these standard operational measures, a vari-
ety of other methods can be utilized. These include periodic clean-up
operations, utilization of sheltered alternate working face locations, and
utilization of litter fences or perimeter barriers. These are discussed
below.
-38-
-------
a. Clean-Up Operations
Clean-up of blown litter should be performed on a frequent basis.
Because of high winds characteristic of severe climate areas, the clean-up
operation may extend well beyond the daily working face area and should
specifically include the waste receiving area and access routes into the
site. Additional clean-up efforts may be required after excessive wind
events.
b. Equipment Use and Accessories
If possible, compactors, dozers, and front end loaders should not be
operated on the working face during periods of high wind conditions. Equip-
ment operation under these conditions leads to breaking of garbage bags and
results in proliferation of wind blown litter. Where practicable, equipment
operation should be confined to low wind conditions, frequently in early
morning and late afternoon periods.
Equipment accessories include a choice of a number of blade and bucket
sizes. Where high winds are a problem, it is advisable to specify large
blades and buckets to minimize blowing litter at the working face. Greater
compactive efforts, achieved via completion of additional passes or opera-
tion of landfill compactors are also useful in reducing quantities of wind
blown litter.
c. Litter Fences or Perimeter Barriers
Litter fences erected downwind of the working face are helpful in
controlling blowing litter. Preferably, however, the litter fence should
completely enclose the working face and should be re-positioned daily or as
required to minimize litter. Litter fences from 6 to 8 feet in height are
commercially available from manufacturers and have been specifically design-
ed for such purposes. Successful operation requires judicial repositioning
of the litter fences depending upon on-site wind conditions. Tree lines and
other vegetation can also serve as wind buffers and minimize litter disper-
sion.
-39-
-------
d. Alternate Landfill Methodologies
The use of alternate landfill methodologies, such as the valley or
trench method, can assis't in reducing blowing litter by utilizing the re-
sulting contours as wind barriers. The valley method provides wind pro-
tection for refuse placement, as well as landfill equipment operations, by
utilizing the surrounding higher original elevations as wind barriers.
Further protection can be provided by placing a litter fence at the toe of
the operation. The trench method is also commonly utilized. Trenches
should be placed horizontally to the prevailing wind direction. Excavated
side slopes inhibit wind movement along the working face. In any case,
natural changes in topography should be utilized to the maximum extent
possible to minimize blowing litter.
F. LOW RELIABILITY/HIGH MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS
FOR LANDFILL EQUIPMENT
1. The Problem
Freezing temperatures, strong winds, steep slopes, and difficult exca-
vating conditions experienced in severe climates can reduce the reliability
and operating efficiency of landfill equipment, and increase maintenance
down-time and costs. For many of the smaller landfills in Region VIII, which
generally only utilize one piece of landfill equipment, equipment failure
can result in cessation of adequate landfill operation for extended periods.
2. Alternate Approaches
Heated storage, frequent preventive maintenance, and utilization of
cold weather accessories can aid in mitigating these problems. Failing
these measures, utilization of more powerful landfill equipment may improve
reliability and operation. These measures are discussed below.
-40-
-------
a. Heated Storage
A heated storage area is the most effective winter protection measure
for all landfill equipment. It may be beneficial for some sites to con-
struct an appropriately sized maintenance garage where vehicles can be
parked overnight. This option minimizes any morning startup problems that
can be encountered during periods of excessive cold. Storage facilities and
larger maintenance garages are easily constructed of either concrete block
of pre-fabricated steel panels bolted to a steel-trussed frame. The cost-
effectiveness of this option may be realized in minimized equipment downtime
during the life of the landfill. The heated storage area also allows for
ease of equipment maintenance.
Caution must be taken, however, due to potential methane gas migration
into the buildings. Locating buildings away from buried wastes on top of
impermeable foundations and periodic methane tests are recommended.
b. Frequent Preventive Maintenance
Frequent maintenance checks are recommended by the manufacturers of
equipment planned for use in severe cold climate areas. Problems discovered
prior to major breakdowns can save considerable amounts of money in repair
costs, as well as down-time. Maintenance checks include tune-ups, oil
filter changes, track tension checks, fluid level checks, periodic wear
measurements, etc.
Each severe climate landfill should establish a preventive maintenance
program to minimize equipment damage and down-time. At the end of each
working day, the operator should inspect his/her vehicle for any vehicle
damage, and report if any is found. Small repairs are easily performed, and
are less costly than if the damage is overlooked and further aggravated. An
inventory of standard parts such as oil filters, engine parts, radiators,
fan belts, hydraulic parts and ripper teeth should be kept in stock to
expedite small repairs. A portable welding unit may also be beneficial,
since cracked and chipped steel parts are common occurrences in site and
earthwork operations.
-41-
-------
c. Cold Weather Accessories
Cold weather accessories should be specified for all landfill equip-
ment. Accessories available include a cold weather starting kit, AC start-
ers, block heaters and warming blankets for engines, radiators, and hydrau-
lic mechanisms. Landfill equipment should also be specified with higher
specification antifreeze ( below -40° F) and fuel and oil additives. Be-
cause high altitudes are common to cold climate areas, it may also be bene-
ficial to provide turbochargers on the landfill equipment to control the
air/fuel mixture. Heavy duty batteries and crankcases are also recommended.
Special underbody guards and seal waterproofing should be included on all
movable parts to minimize ice formation and cracking of metal parts.
Since it is particularly important to monitor*engine operating perfor-
mance, a series of gauge systems including a tachometer, speedometer, hydrau-
lic oil filter indicator, and oil pressure, water temperature, transmission
pressure, and air/water temperature gauges are beneficial.
d. Alternate Equipment Section
When available, the use of larger equipment is advantageous because the
larger products are more durable, and can be substantially more efficient at
the working face. Large equipment is more capable of handling frozen cover
and difficult wet weather operations, and is also often equipped with cold
weather accessories which are provided only as optional equipment on smaller
models.
G. LOW PERFORMANCE/HEALTH AND SAFETY RISKS
FOR LANDFILL EQUIPMENT OPERATORS
I. The Problem
Landfill equipment operators in mountainous or climatically severe
areas can be subject to a number of health and safety risks which are not
normally encountered in other areas. The severe cold combined with high
winds subjects equipment operators to more difficult daily operating condi-
-42-
-------
tions. Accidents may occur due to the steep slopes characteristic of moun-
tainous areas, slope instability, and the lack of the traction created by
frost action, snow accumulation and/or thawing of frozen ground and snow.
2. Alternate Approaches
A number of landfill equipment accident prevention and operator health
protection measures can be taken at landfills in climatically severe areas.
These are discussed separately below.
a. Enclosed Equipment Operator Cabs
Landfill equipment varies with specific job objectives. However, since
an individual operator spends approximately six to seven hours daily oper-
ating equipment, comfort and safety are prime considerations in equipment
selection. Equipment used for spreading, compacting, and covering daily
waste should be provided, at a minimum, with an enclosed cab as protection
from the wind and cold. In severely cold operating conditions, a heating
unit within the cab is a necessity. Visibility is vital to proper operation
and the heating unit should also contain a defroster fan system. Additional
equipment for operator safety includes screening, sufficient lighting, and
windshield wipers (front and back).
b. Roll-Over Protection
Most domestically manufactured earthwork equipment comes with a ROPS
(Rollover Protection Structure) canopy as standard equipment. If not, the
equipment can be separately installed.
c. Protection from Moving Parts
All hydraulic equipment on landfill machinery is manufactured to mini-
mize safety risks from moving parts. However, landfill operators may spe-
cify additional screening and protection shields on movable parts to mini-
mize the potential injury. These include rear screens for use with winches,
crankcase guards, fan blast deflectors, hinged radiator guards, steering
cylinder guards, engine and power guards, etc.
-43-
-------
d. Back-Up Alarms
Back-up alarms are also standard equipment on all earthwork machinery.
There is substantial activity around the working face with collection trucks
dumping waste, dozers and compactors spreading and compacting waste, and
scrapers spreading and compacting cover. Injuries and accidents can be
minimized in this regard with the use of automatic back-up alarms.
e. Fire Extinguishers
Fire on landfills can be a hazardous occurrence and can result in
substantive air and water pollution impacts. Fires can start when incoming
refuse is already burning or when refuse is accidentally ignited by landfill
visitors or operators. As such, all operating machinery should be equipped
with portable fire extinguishers. The extinguishers should be maintained
and checked periodically for proper operation.
f. First-Aid Kit
As an added precaution, first-aid kits should be on all landfill equip-
ment to treat minor injuries. Landfill operators should also be specially
trained in routine first-aid application.
g. Operator Communication Systems
Operator communication systems are advantageous in severe climate areas
in that they allow the operator to remain in the heated cab while staying in
contact with other equipment operators and with the operations manager or
officer.
-44-
-------
H. SOLID WASTE COLLECTION CONSIDERATIONS
1. The Problem
Rural, sparsely populated areas which are common in severe climate
regions are often faced with collecting solid waste from a very large area.
Additionally, in severe climate regions, land is either unsuitable for
sanitary landfill operations or suitable land is unavailable due to either
prohibition costs or incompatibility with adjacent land use patterns. The
combination of these factors often make it advantageous to transport wastes
out of the area for ultimate disposal. Regardless of the ultimate waste
disposal site, most areas in severe climate regions utilize waste collection
systems involving long haul distances.
The difficulties associated with lengthy haul distances for collection
vehicles often, impact the affected communities' waste collection disposal
budget and as such exacerbate the provision of environmentally acceptable
waste disposal. Because of non-concentrated populations and long haul
distances, door-to-door collection service may be economically infeasible.
Individual collection trucks carrying five to seven tons per trip to land-
fill sites in excess of 50 miles each way makes collection service unaffor-
dable to most rural communities. As a result, illegal dump sites develop
along rural roads, causing aesthetic, health, economic, and environmental
problems.
Additionally, severe climate regions often encounter solid waste col-
lection problems interdependently associated with long haul distances such
as the following:
1) freezing wastes in collection containers and vehicles
-45-
-------
2) operator difficulties resulting from freezing weather
3) access and/or manueverability difficulties associated
with ice and snow and steep and winding roads.
2. Alternate Approaches
a. Long Haul Distances
Alternate approaches to reducing economic impacts of solid waste collec-
tion in large but sparsely populated regions include utilization of transfer
stations, "Green Box" systems, and participation in regional landfill sites.
Transfer Stations. The problem of minimizing long haul distances by
individual collection trucks to distant sites is best resolved by the use of
centralized transfer stations. Individual collection trucks haul wastes to
the transfer stations from which large capacity tandem-axle tractor trailers
transfer the wastes to the ultimate disposal site.
Transfer stations are commonly designed to function in one of two ways
(See Exhibit 8). One method is direct transfer (Direct Dump) of the wastes
from the collection vehicles to the larger capacity transfer trucks. The
second method consists of stockpiling the wastes from the collection vehi-
cles and periodically moving the stockpiled wastes into the transfer vehi-
cle. Generally, in cases involving small daily waste loads on the order of
50 tons per day (TPD) or less, simple collection truck to transfer vehicle
transfers are the most cost-effective. Larger volume transfer stations - 50
to 250 TPD - usually utilize the stockpile method plus sophisticated trans-
fer equipment. Additionally, transfer stations of this size have the poten-
tial to implement limited resource recovery operations (e.g. paper and
aluminum can separation and recycling) to offset capital and operating
costs. Transfer stations with various arrangements of optional equipment
are commercially available from a number of nation-wide manufacturers, some
of whom offer turn-key services.
Regardless of the operational mode of the transfer station, it is in
most instances practical and economical to have the transfer station itself
-46-
-------
_EXHIBIT.faT
TRANSFER STATIONS
DIRECT DUMP TRANSFER STATION
STOCKPILE/FRONT END LOAD TRANSFER STATION
Source: Hegdahl .Tobias. Solid Waste Transfer Stations, •
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report !
(SW-99), 1973. ..
-47-
-------
and/or the transfer vehicles equipped with compaction units to reduce the
volume of the waste. Compaction decreases the number of vehicle trips taken
to the ultimate disposal site, reducing energy usage and costs.
Two types of transfer vehicles are generally used with compaction
equipment. The tilt frame/roll-off type is so named because of the moveable
rail structure which is mounted directly on the truck chassis or separately
on a trailer bed (see Exhibit 9). A roll-off container is collected (drop-
ped-off) by "tilting" the rails and winching the entire container onto (off)
the structure. When the container is to be emptied, the rear doors of the
container are opened and the entire package is tilted so that the compacted
refuse falls out.
Commercially available tilt frame/roll-off transfer vehicles must be
equipped with a separate refuse compactor. Refuse is deposited in a hopper
feeding the compactor, which forces the wastes into the roll-off container.
There is little compaction of refuse until the container is nearly full
since, only then does the compactor exert a significant pressure. A typical
ratio of compacted to loose refuse achievable by this type of system is 1.9
to 1 by weight.
In contrast to the external compactor associated with the tilt frame/
roll-off type of trailer, the transfer trailer type of transfer vehicle has
a hydraulic ejection ram mounted inside the trailer compartment (Exhibit
10). When emptying the trailer, the rear doors are opened and refuse is
pushed out by the ram.
This ram provides a significant advantage for the transfer trailer as
opposed to the roll-off system. The ram allows the transfer trailer to
achieve a much higher density of wastes in one of two ways. If a separate
compactor is utilized, it can work against the ejection ram which is ex-
tended at first and gradually retracted as the volume of contained wastes
increases. Alternatively, the ejection ram can be used as a compaction
device. In this system, wastes are introduced via a hopper into a "top
dumping" trailer just behind the face of the ram. When a certain volume has
been deposited, the operator can use the ram to compact the wastes against
-48-
-------
EXHIBIT 9
TILT FRAME/ROLL-OFF TRANSFER VEHICLE
1. Refuse is inserted into the compactor hopper by
various methods. Loading procedure can be selected to
best suit each installation.
2.Simply activate pushbutton control and your trash is
compacted and stored in a sanitary, closed system.
^^^:rr^/^Wf^KVJ^L^y-;^^-~p4^.;-iJl\:i-^
3. High compaction forces allow large volumes of refuse
to be stored in the smallest space.
4. Your trash is removed by a roll-off truck when your
receiving container is full and your system is ready for
work again.
Source: Dempster Dumpster Systems, Knoxville, Tennessee,
-49-
-------
EXHIBIT 10
TRANSFER TRAILER VEHICLE
Source:Dempster Dumpster Systems, Knoxville, Tennessee,
-50-
-------
the rear door of the trailer. The advantage of this method is that no
separate piece of equipment is required. All that the trailer requires is a
source of hydraulic pressure which can be provided through a "wet-pack"
hookup from the tractor rig or a stationary gas or electric hydraulic pump.
A typical ratio of compacted to loose refuse obtainable by this method is 3
to 1 by weight.
Developing a transfer station involves a number of important design
considerations that must be analyzed for each specific waste collection
area. The primary considerations are: (a) service area; (b) population
dispersement; (c) present collection methods; (d) system economics; (e)
existing and projected design loads; (f) optimal location; (g) waste types;
(h) seasonal variation in daily tonnage; (i) available vehicle types; (j)
building design; and (k) facility layout.
Green Box Systems. For rural and small urban areas where individual
door-to-door waste collection service is not available, an economic solid
waste collection alternative is the satellite collection system which is
commonly called a "Green Box" system. This system consists of locating
several small collection containers ("green boxes") varying from 3 to 8 cu.
yds. throughout sparsely populated areas (See Exhibit 11). These containers
are placed in locations which are readily accessible to the public including
intersections of local highways, recreational areas, previous dump sites,
and in or near small communities.
Stringent rules must be implemented and enforced by the appropriate
authority to ensure proper operation of a green box system. Most im-
portantly, the type of waste deposited in the green boxes must be controlled
as follows:
a) Green boxes can accept
-residential household waste
-light commercial waste
-yard trimmings
-51-
-------
EXHIBIT 1]
GREEN BOXES
Source: George Swanson & Son, Inc. Arvada, Colorado.
-52-
-------
b) Green boxes can not accept
hot or burning materials
dead animals
industrial.waste
bulky waste (stoves, refrigerators, etc.), construction
debris, tree trunks, etc.
These container systems can be designed such that the waste in the
containers can be emptied into either a front loading or rear loading waste
collection vehicle. (See Exhibit 12) By use of these specially-equipped
vehicles, the containers are emptied periodically and the waste is then
transported to either a transfer station or directly to an ultimate disposal
facility. In many rural areas, a green box system has replaced several
small indiscriminate dumps allowing for an economical waste disposal method
which is in compliance with all local, State, and Federal laws.
Regional Landfill Sites. In a small number of cases selection of a
landfill site or sites different from the existing landfill(s) can reduce
problems and costs associated with long haul distances. Combining new
centrally located landfill sites with optimally designed green box and/or
transfer station systems can often result in significant cost savings for
rural areas.
Additionally, large regional disposal sites may also replace a large
number of individual facilities. Economies of scale at regional sites are
realized in most aspects of landfill design and operation and are reflected
in a reduced overall cost of disposal per ton of refuse, assuming that
potential increases in transportation costs do not outweigh reductions in
disposal costs. Large regional sites can often also incorporate more sophis-
ticated disposal approaches such as incineration and resource recovery
activities. Environmental, economic, and legal considerations of regional
sites are discussed in more detail in Chapter IV.
b. Freezing Waste, Operator and Access Difficulties
Freezing Waste. Waste collection vehicles and storage containers
often have problems with freezing wastes in severe climate areas. This can
result in loss of available capacity within the vehicle or container, deteri-
-53-
-------
EXHIBIT 12
FRONT AND REAR-LOADING GREEN BOX COLLECTION.VECHICLES
Source: Perfection-Cobey Go., Gallon, Ohio.
Source: Dempster Dumpster Systems, Knoxville, Tennessee
-54-
-------
oration of the equipment, and, in extreme cases, equipment breakdowns.
Generally, two operational procedures are utilized to minimize problems
associated with freezing wastes:
1) ensuring that the collected or stored waste does not remain in the
vehicle or container for the period of time required for the waste
to freeze
2) if the waste does freeze, manually removing it from the vehicle or
container by using a rake, shovel, or similar instrument
Operator Difficulties. Environmental conditions such as freezing
weather, drifting snow, ice storms, and gusty wind conditions can make the
already difficult job of collection and disposal operations even more diffi-
cult. Certain procedures and modifications can be implemented to minimize
operator problems encountered in severe climate areas. These include using
automated collection vehicles such as front or side loading compactor collec-
tion trucks, ensuring that operators are outfitted with cold weather attire,
and providing insulated cabs and heaters and heated shelters for the collec-
tion and disposal operators.
Access Problems. Deep snow, ice, mud, and steep and windy roads
present problems to collection vehicles in completing their collection
routes and entering and exiting disposal sites. Most of these problems
exist because the vehicle is not matched to the conditions or the vehicle is
not properly equipped, i.e., it lacks snow chains, mud and snow tires,
improper gear ratios, etc.
To minimize access and manueverability difficulties, collection vehi-
cles must be initially properly selected or fitted with the necessary acces-
sory equipment to be able to function in adverse conditions whether empty or
loaded with waste. The operational advantages and disadvantages of front-
wheel drive versus rear-wheel drive versus 4-wheel drive collection vehicles
must be evaluated under the conditions which the vehicle will be utilized.
Optimizing access considerations must be compared to the extra capital and
operating costs associated with specially geared vehicles and accessory
equipment. Additionally, optimizing vehicle usage during the winter season
should not be done at the expense of incurring access and manueverability
difficulties during the spring, summer, and fall seasons.
-55-
-------
I. HIGH SEASONAL VARIATIONS IN WASTE VOLUMES
1. The Problem
Due to their rugged terrain, natural splendor, and abundant natural
resources, severe climate areas offer excellent outdoor recreational oppor-
tunities, as well as large-scale resource activities such as mining opera-
tions. These areas often serve as seasonal vacation spots and are therefore
subject to very substantial seasonal variations in solid waste generation.
This seasonality of waste flow creates problems for landfill operation in
terms of properly disposing of the peak waste volumes and in terms of achie-
^
ving overall efficiency and economy of operation.
2. Alternate Approaches
a. Temporary Equipment and Personnel
If landfills consistently experience seasonal variations in solid waste
generation volumes, it may be beneficial to hire operators and equipment on
a part-time basis during high generation months. Construction equipment is
often available on a rental basis from local dealers and contractors in
almost all parts of the country. Similarly, landfill equipment may also be
available. Collection trucks and drivers can be employed on a seasonal
basis to handle additional loads. Scheduling is an important procedure in
providing efficient solid waste service in high generation periods.
b. Alternate Equipment Selection
When landfill equipment will be called upon to perform a large variety
of operations due to highly varying quantities of incoming waste, initial
equipment selection should consider optimizing landfill operations via
selection of equipment types suitable for several uses. For example, drag-
lines and backhoes are generally only suitable for soil operations. Tractors
with large capacity buckets can be utilized for both soil and waste movement
operations.
-56-
-------
c. Transfer/Storage Stations
Transfer stations can serve as an alternate approach when waste volumes
vary seasonally. Transfe'r stations provide a reasonable way of controlling
the rate at which refuse is delivered for landfill ing. When refuse genera-
tion is high, the transfer station can be designed to operate as a temporary
storage facility for the waste.
For health related reasons, however, temporary storage of municipal
wastes should not occur for periods in excess of one or two days. This
approach is most useful in smoothing weekend versus weekday operating peaks.
d. Operations Sequencing
Operations sequencing involves the rescheduling of landfill equipment
and personnel assignments to perform tasks in a way that minimizes the
displacement normally caused by a seasonal waste flow to the landfill. These
techniques, for the most part, are dependent upon site-specific require-
ments, however, a number of basic common options are available to all land-
fill sites.
For example, site preparation functions can be performed by equipment
and personnel during low volume months. These operations include grading,
trenching, berm construction, drainage control, and cover stockpiling.
Access roads can also be regraded and resurfaced.
Stockpiling cover is probably the most useful function that can be
performed during low volume months. Because cover material is required
throughout the year, and severe climatic conditions can hinder the availa-
bility of cover, proper stockpiling is beneficial and necessary in areas
where cover would otherwise be unobtainable during the winter.
e. Alternative Landfill Methodologies
The valley method of landfilling provides advantages in situations of
seasonal waste flows in that the surrouding topography can be used to mini-
-57-
-------
mize site construction requirements. Instead of constructing trenches,
natural valleys or gullies are used at working faces. The waste is depo-
sited directly into the valley where it is compacted and covered, as re-
quired. The valley meth'od minimizes both construction equipment use as a
well as required daily cover. However, the method is limited to regions
where the natural contours allow for such operation. Specific disadvantages
include more difficult surface runoff control and costs of access road
development.
The trench method is also applicable in areas where high seasonal
variations in waste volume are evident, because the trenches can be con-
structed during low volume months by otherwise idle operators and construc-
tion equipment.
-58-
-------
IV. ADDITIONAL ALTERNATE SOLUTIONS TO
LANDFILL PROBLEMS IN CLIMATICALLY
SEVERE ENVIRONMENTS
In cases where existing landfill sites are not suitable for upgrading
to meet local solid waste disposal requirements, alternative sites might be
evaluated and selected for landfill development. In cases where alternative
sites may not be available within the local wasteshed, materials or energy
recovery alternatives may reduce the requirements for land disposal.
A. ALTERNATE LANDFILL SITES
Prudent landfill siting can aid in minimizing the risks and costs of
landfill operation in severe climate regions. The factors considered in
siting any landfill include waste composition and quantities; a number of
natural environmental factors, such as site hydrogeology, soils, and
topography; planning, zoning and other legal constraints; and various cost
factors. The following discussion focuses on the opportunities and con-
straints the natural environment poses for cold climate landfill design and
operation.
Selection of a locally available site, which may permit closure of an
existing inadequate site, requires consideration of a number of natural
environmental factors. These include availability of large quantities of
suitable soil, depth to groundwater, topography, proximity of surface
waters, prevailing wind direction, natural vegetation, site accessibility,
etc. The selection process should thoroughly evaluate alternative sites
with respect to minimizing costs as well as potential environmental de-
gradation. Perhaps equally important, the chosen site should be capable of
meeting all local, State and Federal regulations and, in severe climate
areas, should be specifically selected to minimize severe climate operating
difficulties.
-59-
-------
For example, specific factors which might be considered include:
selection of valley or lower elevation sites with developed
soils
selection of sites protected from prevailing winds by natural
contours or vegetative barriers
selection of sites with short access routes and minimal
slopes
selection of sites with surface drainage patterns requiring
only minimal modifications
selection of sites which are readily adaptible to seasonally
varying incoming waste loads
Regional landfills can also be considered when a number of individual
sites exhibit the same types of operating problems. Regional landfills are
generally more cost-effective on a per-ton basis, depending on population
density in the surrounding wasteshed. Naturally, selection of alternative
regional sites must consider the same factors associated with any sanitary
landfill siting process.
As distance to the landfill site increases, waste transport cost can
eventually increase to the point where operational cost savings may be
negligible. Then, the options of either a transfer facility or a system of
two or more regional landfills should be considered.
B. WASTE REDUCTION
a. Source Separation
Source separation involves the segregation of waste products at the
point of generation. The concept requires available markets, some volunteer
labor, a central collection point and other subsidized amenities in order to
function in Region VIII. Glass, paper, plastics, steel and aluminum cans
are placed in individual containers or bins. Waste oil can also be recycled
by taking it to waste oil collectors, usually gas stations. Separated
-60-
-------
wastes can then be sold to manufacturers who recycle the material and sub-
stitute this material in lieu of virgin raw material for product manufac-
turing. It is expected that demand for these wastes, especially waste oils,
will increase. Source separation in severe climate areas would be bene-
ficial in reducing quantities of waste generated and consequently the volume
required for landfill operations.
b. Materials Recovery
Materials recovery is similar to source separation in that specific
wastes are separated from the waste stream, resulting in disposal volume
reduction and decreased demands on severe climate resources. However,
materials recovery generally incorporates high .technology processes at a
centralized collection point, rather than voluntary separation at the point
of waste origin. A variety of processes are available for sorting ferrous
metal (magnetic separation), paper (shredding, wet and dry processes), glass
(optical sorting and froth flotation), aluminum (eddy current separation),
and other non-ferrous metals (mechanical separation) from mixed municipal
waste streams. While there is considerable interest in materials recovery
in Region VIII, high costs, unproven technologies, and the lack of available
markets severely limits materials recovery processes at most severe climate
sites.
C. ENERGY RECOVERY
Once solid waste is buried in a landfill, the energy potential con-
tained in the waste is virtually lost. Average municipal solid waste has a
heating value of approximately 4500 Btu per pound, or approximately one-half
of the caloric value of coal. Obviously, this waste is a valuable energy
resource which can be utilized and recovered through a number of alternative
recovery systems. The feasibility of energy recovery is dependent upon the
existence of markets for the recovered energy. Each energy recovery system
must be analyzed in terms of economics as well as environmental, safety, and
health impacts. Five categories of state-of-the-art energy recovery systems
are discussed in the following subsections.
-61-
-------
a. Incineration
Unprocessed municipal waste may be burned in waterwall furnaces, or
for smaller daily waste quantities in modular incineration units. The re-
sultant steam is further converted into either electric power, hot water, or
chilled water. The uses of recovered steam through waste incineration is a
common practice throughout the world, and a number of incinerators are
commercially available for almost all applications. Modular prefabricated
units anywhere from 10 to 1000 tons per day are available and can easily be
included in a waste management program at large or small scale sites. In-
cineration is a cost effective process if a suitable local demand is avail-
able for use of recovered energy. Several modular units have potential ap-
plicability to a limited number of severe climate sites. (See Exhibit 13.)
b. Pyrolysis
Pyrolysis is a thermal process in which solid waste is destroyed at
elevated temperatures in an oxygen-deficient atmosphere. The resultant
product is a mixture of combustible gases, solid residues and/or liquids,
which are usable as fuel or chemical feedstocks. Pyrolysis products vary in
character with changes in duration of burning, process temperature and
pressure, oxygen content, particle size of waste, catalyst types, and
auxiliary fuel types. The fuels produced under various conditions include
low Btu gas (100-150 Btu/ft3), medium Btu gas (300 to 400 Btu/ft3), and
liquid pyrolysis oil (10,000 Btu/lb). The process itself is complicated and
expensive. While a number of systems are currently in the developmental
stage, pyrolysis is generally not a suitable alternative for Region VIII
severe climate sites..
c. Refuse-Derived Fuel
Refuse-derived fuel (RDF) is the organic combustible portion of muni-
cipal waste which has been removed using a wet or dry process. The re-
sultant fuel product can be either fluff RDF, densified RDF, or dust RDF.
RDF is commercially produced at several plants throughout the country, and
-62-
-------
.EXHIBin.13
SMALL MODULAR INCINERATOR
Source: Frounfelmer. Richard. Small Modular Incinerator Systems
With Heat Recovery: A Technical, Environmental, And Economic
Evaluation. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report
(SW 797), 1979.
-63-
-------
with resolution of some operating difficulties, the system shows promise as
an efficient resource recovery system. However, given the high capital and
operating costs and the large waste volumes required, the process is gener-
ally not adaptable to Region VIII severe climate sites.
d. Composting
Composting is a process that utilizes natural waste decomposition
processes to reduce putrescible waste volume and concomitant disposal
volumes. Composting systems can be operated in a passive mode or can be
accelerated by waste mixing, bacterial seeding and/or utilization of
moisture control and aeration systems. Only limited success to date has
been experienced with composting in the United States largely because of the
limited market for the product, which is best utilized as an agricultural
additive. Due to the low seasonal temperatures in Region VIII, the lack of
available acreage required for composting operation, the severe winds com-
monly encountered throughout the region, and the lack of available moisture
in some areas, composting systems have very limited applicability for severe
climate operations.
e. Methane Gas Recovery
Solid waste buried in a landfill results in natural biological decom-
position. Anaerobic decomposition processes result in methane and carbon
dioxide generation on a one to one ratio. In properly designed landfill
cells, methane gas can be collected through piping systems and treated to
remove moisture, hydrogen sulfide, and other contaminants leaving a quality
methane gas. This methane gas is marketable and, if further treated, is
equal in quality to natural gas. However, the treatment process is expen-
sive and is generally not considered commercially available. Gas utili-
zation requires a nearby market or an accessible gas distribution system.
Untreated methane gas is readily usable on site primarily for building
heating purposes.
In Region VIII, several factors conspire against methane recovery.
First, few landfills exist in areas which provide for sealed conditions.
-64-
-------
Thus, methane gas can escape and atmospheric oxygen can intrude into the
waste mass. Second, most landfills are too shallow and too small to make
methane recovery economical. Third, methane recovery systems are most
efficient when constructed in new, rather than existing landfills.
-65-
-------
V. SITE-SPECIFIC CASE HISTORIES
The following sections are intended to provide the results of the field
trips and waste disposal analyses completed for several landfill disposal
sites impacted by severe climate operating conditions. In each case infor-
mation, where available, is presented relating to disposal methods, opera-
ting problems associated with the site, and recommendations relating to
severe climate operation. Where applicable, other solid waste issues, such
as impending regulatory impacts, on-going planning efforts, and financial
options are also presented.
Sites with potential operational problems were selected as a result of
contractor, State and EPA suggestions. For each site, varying impacts due
to severe climate conditions were experienced and are documented as follows.
A. PAGOSA SPRINGS, COLORADO
1. Site Location
The Pagosa Springs solid waste site is located two miles south of the
town of Pagosa Springs, in the county of Archuleta, Colorado. The site has
been designated a county landfill site. The Colorado Department of Health
File # is 04016.
2. Operational Description
The Pagosa Springs solid waste landfill is a 20 acre site located two
miles southwest of the downtown area on a ridge consisting of an outcropping
of Mancos Shale and Dakota Sandstone. Most of the wastes received at the
site are delivered directly by town and county residents. However, one
local trash service collects from the downtown area and the more densely
populated areas primarily along Route 160.
-66-
-------
Access to the site is a steep, paved all-weather road off Route 160.
The on-site access is a dirt road leading up and into previously filled
areas.
The waste received at the site is essentially municipal and commercial
in character, with a significant portion of construction waste. (Septic
tank pumpings are hauled to the Pagosa Springs sewage treatment lagoons.)
The operation basically is a dumping area where wastes are deposited on
the edge of a twenty to thirty foot embankment built up by previously deposi-
ted waste. Cover is applied irregularly (perhaps two to four times per
month by town road and bridge crews and consists primarily of waste road
construction materials (primarily air-eroded shale). Bulky wastes are
scattered along and below the embankment area. A landfill operator is
generally not present. A total of approximately $5000 is spent annually on
site operation by the town and county. In addition, about $20,000 worth of
"in kind" funding comes from the town in equipment and labor.
3. Waste Quantities and Projections
Waste is currently received from an average baseline population of
4,000 county residents. Summer tourism results in contributory wastes from
an estimated additional 500 persons. Approximately 85% of the county popula-
tion lives within ten miles of downtown Pagosa. Population growth has
averaged approximately four to five percent per year since 1970.
Incoming quantities of waste are not recorded at the landfill site.
Based upon a statewide average of 4 Ib. per person per day, total annual
tonnage to the site would be approximately 3000 tons.
4. Hydrogeologic Data
As previously indicated, the site overlies an area of Mancos Shale and
Dakota Sandstone. Surface soils have been categorized as Valto stony loam,
a shallow brownish sandy soil ranging from ten to twenty inches in depth.
The soil type is highly permeable.
-67-
-------
Local water supplies are obtained from the San Juan River and from the
Mancos Shale and Dakota Sandstone aquifers. A number of wells downgradient
and within one-half mile of the site have been drilled into the aquifers or
into the overlying alluvium. Groundwater quality from the bedrock aquifers
is typically poor with high dissolved solids including sodium, calcium, iron
and sulfate. Groundwater flow in the bedrock aquifers is largely the result
of fracture porosity.
Surface hydrology of the site is characterized by a slow runoff rate
easterly towards the San Juan River, approximately one-half mile away.
5. Operating Problems Associated With Severe Climate Conditions
Daily operating problems due to severe climatic conditions are quite
limited on-site. High winds have resulted in some degree of littering.
Access is generally available through the winter months due to regular
plowing operations. Cold conditions are not particularly critical since an
on-site operator is not present and since very little activity, with the
exception of waste delivery and some salvage operations, actually occurs
on-site. Spring runoff conditions result in surface drainage through the
site from a relatively limited acreage.
Three additional problems are evident, however.
a. Existing soil types are not available in sufficient
quantity to provide a source of cover material;
b. Open burning is commonly practiced;
c. A possibility exists that surface and groundwater move-
ment could potentially result in contamination of the
downgradient private wells. Existing data on well con-
struction was not obtained, however very limited well
testing to date (coliforms) has not indicated potential
contamination due to landfill operation (clearly not a
positive test).
-68-
-------
6. Recommendations Relating to Severe Climate Conditions
A number of recommendations have been developed for the Pagosa Springs
landfill site relating to the minimization of operational problems relating
to severe climatic conditions. These include:
a. Collection of all uncovered waste materials, parti-
cularly downslcpe of the embankment, and relocation to
the active face. Regrading of the embankment active face
to a maximum 3:1 slope. Estimated cost is approximately
$2,000.
b. Placement of a minimum of two feet of low permeability
cover material over the active site. Projected cost for
five acres is $35,000. The unit cost of $4.30 per cubic
yard assumes that an appropriate cover soil is available
within a haul distance of two miles. Investigations for
appropriate cover soils should most appropriately in-
clude Soil Associations 53, 56, 61 and 119.
c. Prohibition of open burning.
d. Construction of a surface runoff control system con-
sisting of approximately 1000 ft. of drainage ditch
located upgradient of the site at a projected .cost of
$2250.
e. Construction of two downgradient monitoring wells to
identify potential downgradient aquifer contamination.
Expected construction cost would be on the order of
$6000.
Consideration of the construction of a downgradient leachate collection
system was also considered. However, the shallow depth to bedrock, the
infeasibility of an on-site treatment system, and the potential problems
relating to pumping the collected leachate to the Town sewage treatment
plant (distance, shallow depth to bedrock, process compatibility) resulted
in the development of the above recommendations.
7. Potential Financial Options
Unfortunately, the Town of Pagosa Springs may not currently be in a
financial position which will permit completion of the recommended work
tasks. A number of specific financial options include:
-69-
-------
a. Implementation of a user charge system whereby site
users are charged on the basis of weight, volume and/or
type of wastes.
b. Increase in the general taxing rate for the town.
c. Creation of a disposal district with specific taxing
powers.
d. Contractual cost-sharing with the County.
e. Utilization of Rural Communities Assistance funds as
authorized by RCRA Section 4009.
Unfortunately, a number of difficulties would be encountered in imple-
mentation of any of the above measures. Both user charges and increases in
tax rates have been opposed by local residents and could result in some
degree of indiscriminate littering. Formal County participation would be
useful, approximately two-thirds of the total contributory population lives
outside the town limits. In addition, RCRA Section 4009 Rural Communities
Assistance funds have not yet been appropriated for use at the local level.
8. Other Solid Waste Issues
The State of Colorado is currently completing the open dump inventory
as defined by RCRA Section 4004. The Pagosa Springs solid waste site will
in all likelihood be categorized as an open dump. Further analysis relating
to the potential health impacts of the site would clarify whether the site
would require closure of whether upgrading procedures might be most appro-
priate. However, given the situation, the Town of Pagosa Springs should
evaluate the following items:
a. The potential closure requirements for the site and
expected costs;
b. The potential for remedial clean-up and continued use of
the site;
c. The potential for utilization of another site in close
proximity to the town;
-70-
-------
d. The potential for utilization of a central transfer sta-
tion with final disposal of the waste at the Durango
landfill or some other site.
With respect to the first item, potential closure requirements would
have to be negotiated with the State Department of Health.
With respect to the second item, the option would, at least temporari-
ly, eliminate the need to site a new facility. In addition, landfill im-
pacts would be limited to one location. A specific disadvantage for con-
tinuing use of the present site is that the acreage, should it become avail-
able to private investors, is a prime area for residential development.
With respect to the third option, the town has completed a preliminary
investigation of alternate sites. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Manage-
ment lands occupy a large portion of the county and are not available for
landfill purposes. In addition, one-third of the county is an Indian Reser-
vation. One potential site, located in the Mill Creek area, has been in-
vestigated in detail and would appear to be potentially suitable. However,
the site is controlled by the Board of Land Commissioners and previous
applications to utilize the site have been denied by the Board. In addi-
tion, development costs could be high. The site would require substantial
clearing, grading, and access development. Capital and operational costs
under RCRA regulations have been estimated as high as $20.00 per ton for
this size landfill. Given the potentially high cost of development and the
possibility that the Board of Land Commissioners will not permit the applica-
tion, it would appear that the town should re-evaluate existing private
lands within five to ten miles of the downtown area, with particular focus
on areas having soils most suitable for landfill development.
The fourth option has not been previously evaluated by the town. Po-
tential requirements would include a covered unloading station, a stationary
compactor, and a transfer trailer with cab. Total expected capital costs
would be approximately $60,000.
-71-
-------
B. GUNNISON, COLORADO
1. Site Location
The landfill which serves the City of Gunnison, the town of Crested
Butte, and other municipalities and federal facilities in Gunnison County is
located just outside the limits of the City of Gunnison.
2. Operational Description
The landfill owned and operated by the City of Gunnison is a 43 acre
site on a bluff overlooking the Gunnison River Valley. The bluff is com-
posed of sorted and non-sorted fluvial and alluvial deposits, a conglomerate
composted soil cap, and glacial till. The bedrock is sandstone.
Wastes are hauled by City trucks, private haulers, and individuals.
Varying rates are charged to non-residents based on incoming volumes. The
County currently has no involvement in regulating or operating the landfill
but plans to become involved at the City's request.
Access to the site is provided by a dirt access road which travels at
an 8 to 10% grade. A paved road connects this dirt access road to County
Highway Route 135. Residences have been built on either side of the land-
fill site in recent years and along the route to the landfill from the
County Highway.
All waste types are received at this site with the exception of sewage
treatment plant sludge which is lagooned. Industrial waste is only mini-
mally generated in the area. Through the summer of 1980, Crested Butte will
operate its own construction/demolition waste site, with commercial, resi-
dential, and bulky wastes being hauled to the Gunnison landfill. After
1980, all waste from the Crested Butte - Mount Crested Butte area will be
hauled to the Gunnison landfill.
-72-
-------
The landfill operation is a ramp type whereby wastes are deposited at
the toe of the working face and pushed up to the head. The width of the
working face is over 40 feet. Each cell is excavated 15 feet into the
ground and waste is piled 35 feet high above the original ground surface.
One cell is laid atop of another as the landfill moves south to north while
cover material is excavated from a nearby hill. The Public Works Department
provides the services of its equipment for excavation and the stockpiling of
cover material when needed. Cover is applied daily and consists of glacial
and alluvial deposits. When cover soil freezes in the winter, sawdust and
woodchips are used. During high winds, additional cover is scattered over
the waste on an as needed basis. Most of the construction or demolition
waste is separated and placed to the north of the landfill. Bulky wastes
are dumped at the working face where they are compacted by an Allis-Chal-
mers - 16 dozer with a trash blade and ripper. The site operator is per-
mitted to scavenge bulky wastes. The existing operating budget is $29,426.
3. Waste Quantities and Projections
The population which generates residential, commercial and construction
wastes in Gunnison County, is 9,300, based on projections for 1980. The
current census should assist in establishing the baseline population. Total
County acreage is 3,200 square miles. The City of Gunnison has a population
of roughly 7,500 persons including those in attendance at Western State
College. Recreational winter visitors swell the County population an aver-
age of 2,000 per day with peaks of up to 3,800 additional persons per day,
most of whom congregate in the upper end of Gunnison Valley at Crested Butte
and Mount Crested Butte. In the summer, the waste stream is augmented 10%
by contributions from the National Forest Service which maintains nearby
Blue Mesa Reservoir recreational facilities.
No records are kept of waste volumes and types accepted at the land-
fill. However, unofficial estimates were provided by the Director of Public
Works. Calculations by the contractor, using the estimates of the City,
yield an annual tonnage of roughly 13,500 tons including construction
3 3
wastes, and a daily volume of 130 yd in winter to 150 yd in summer (at 500
-73-
-------
3
Ibs./yd ). The operation, in 1970, completed one "ramp" or cell every three
to four days; currently, the landfill completes one ramp per day according
to both the operator and the director of Public Works.
4. Hydrogeologic Data
The landfill sits atop glacial till with a conglomerate cap, below
which are river alluvium including clay strata. The bedrock is sandstone at
about 150 feet depth. Existing wells, located within Gunnison in the Quar-
ternary Valley fill and glacial deposits, can yield 200 to 1,000 gallons of
water per minute.
Surface runoff is to the west, downhill from the landfill site towards
the Gunnison River. In general, ground and surface water quality is good
due to the location of most aquifers in the glacial and alluvial materials
of the Gunnison Valley.
5. Operating Problems Associated With Severe Climate Conditions
Gunnison exhibits several problems with the collection system and
landfill disposal of solid wastes. Collection problems center around wea-
ther, animals and the choice of collection containers. The City packer
trucks traverse narrow alleys between blocks and often are prevented from
completing routes by snow accumulations. Gusts of wind knock lids off or
blow over cans, at which point the contents are available for scattering and
consumption by local dogs and other vectors. The residents do not cooperate
with the City in either clearing away snow or cleaning up scattered refuse.
When access to the waste is blocked by snow, the trucks can not complete
their routes, and the wastes pile up in the alleys or in public containers
on main thoroughfares. In addition, "pirate" disposers collect trash and
charge customers in place of the licensed P.U.C. haulers. These pirate
haulers disrupt the rate schedules in effect for commercial waste generators
and the P.U.C. haulers who collect within and without the City limits.
-74-
-------
The City faces closure of its current landfill site within 3 to 5
years. This implies a siting problem even though an EPA study in 1975
identified 17 potential sites. The politics of selecting the new site have
not been favorable. In regard to severe climate related problems, wind has
caused trash to blow around the site on occasion but this is an unusual
occurrence. Cover material is stockpiled and used in winter mixed with
sawdust and woodchips; should the soil be frozen beyond use, woodchips alone
are used as cover material. The landfill operator has a small shed which
can be used for protection from the elements in winter. The difficulties
expected from severe climate conditions on this site are not extensive.
The problems for Crested Butte and Mount Crested Butte involve trans-
portation and the lack of an adequate solid waste disposal site in the upper
Gunnison River Valley and Slate River Valley. Sunshine Trash Co., the
licensed P.U.C. hauler, faces the difficult task of collecting wastes in
deep snow for a five month period, and hauling the waste roughly 30 miles to
the Gunnison City landfill. After 1980 when Crested Butte closes its con-
struction/demolition waste dump, the bulky wastes will also have to be
hauled to the City of Gunnison landfill site for disposal.
6. Recommendations Relating to Severe Climate Conditions
The following recommendations have been developed for the City of
Gunnison landfill .which will mitigate the impact of those few problems
identified stemming from severe climatic conditions:
(a) Seasonal cover material stockpiling at the landfill to
minimize blowing litter and lack of cover availability;
and
(b) Phasing in a side loading waste collection pickup system
to minimize the problems associated with the narrow
alleys and wind blown trash. A side loading system is
high in initial capital costs but has relatively low
operating costs as a single operator can both drive the
vehicle and remotely collect the waste. Additionally,
the collection containers themselves are less prone to
being knocked over by winds or dogs.
-75-
-------
7. Potential Financial Options
An optimistic note relating to the financial status of the Gunnison
collection and disposal system was struck recently when the County of Gunni-
son decided to support the operation of the landfill and the ongoing replace-
ment site selection process. The County has been made aware of its responsi-
bility, from the public health standpoint, for disposal of solid wastes.
Also, since increasingly greater portions of the total waste stream are
contributed by the population outside the City, the County has recognized
the service performed by the City and its responsibility to assist in the
disposal effort. Some county funds will be appropriated for operation of
the existing site and more will be budgeted for the selection, construction,
and operation of the new landfill site. The new landfill will be a joint
City/County enterprise.
Given those circumstances, a county-wide charge for the landfill should
be assessed all homeowners in the County. All commercial establishments
should pay for the landfill either directly by the volume of waste disposal
or indirectly via the commercial hauler who will charge for his/her ser-
vices. However, this is a political decision to be made by the County
Commissioners. Generally, local support exists for safe, environmentally
sound disposal of waste.
C. MEEKER, COLORADO
1. Site Location
The Town of Meeker is located in the eastern part of Rio Blanco County
in the Northwest corner of the State of Colorado on the White River. This
area is high, rugged, and very arid with a dispersed population, most of
which lives in the small towns of Meeker, Rangely, and Rio Blanco. Tremen-
dous growth has been projected for this part of Colorado due to the valuable
deposits of oil shale. Growth will be constrained by lack of public ser-
vices such as waste management, water supply, and distribution.
-76-
-------
The Meeker landfill is located 4 3/4 miles south of town, 1/4 mile east
of Colorado State Route 13 on private lands. The permit is listed as File
No. 52026, M S-6, Category B (less than 5,000 population). The 12 acre
landfill serves the town" of Meeker and surrounding rural population, but is
managed by the County Department of Health. The County also has the res-
ponsibility for the Rangely landfill and is assisted by the state District
Sanitarian. The County Commissioners act as the County Board of Health and
both landfills are operated in loosely defined join venture with the towns.
No person has had responsibility of the landfills for at least five years.
The current landfill, constructed in 1979, is "new" and is under the
authority of the County Engineer.
2. Operational Description
The Meekar landfill is a 12-acre site, located between two sandstone
and conglomerate scarps, where intense weathering has left considerable
amounts of sandy-clay soil. Most of the waste disposed at the site is
hauled in by residents, with the P.U.C. hauler, Valley Sanitation, hauling
the commercial fraction. The landfill itself is a large, wide trench about
30 feet deep which has been dug into a hillside. There is no daily cover
nor compaction of the wastes. At the time of the site visit several piles
of refuse were burning and there was evidence of prior burning. Downhill
from the trench, there were two large pits into which sewage sludge had been
disposed. The site was enclosed by berms and diversion ditches and there
was evidence of runoff from the sludge lagoons into the diversion ditch to
the west of the site, downhill, which becomes an intermittent stream. There
is no fence around the site, but there was no evidence of blowing trash due
to the wind break shelter provided by the scarps, the hillside, and trees.
The site is listed as open most of the day (8am-6pm) but it was locked for
several hours on the day of the field visit. Access to the site is a
graded, dirt road, with gravel placed on its surface when conditions are
wet.
All wastes are received at the site, and only the sludges are segre-
gated from the solid waste and are disposed of in separate lagoons.
(Industrial wastes are usually not generated in the area.) Estimates of
daily tonnage center around 8 to 10 tons per day. There is no
-77-
-------
separation of bulky or construction wastes from residential and commercial
wastes. The County Road and Bridge Department occassionally covers the
refuse piles with soil under windy conditions, upon receiving complaints or
when the fires get out of control. The Department developed this site in
1979 at a cost of $90,000; no operational costs have been calculated for the
intervening 12 month period.
3. Waste Quantities and Projections
No landfill records are kept for this site, but estimates based on
population estimates suggest about 8 to 10 tons of waste are generated
daily. Also, a great deal of controversy exists over population projections
by the Regional Council of Governments which has been projecting extreme
growth, due to oil shale development, for many years. However, the Sani-
tarian and County Engineer assured the contractor that the current Meeker
area population does not exceed 4000 persons.
4. Hydrogeologic Data
Meeker is located in a very arid zone on Colorado's Western Slope and
receives roughly 16.5 inches of precipitation per year of which 8 to 10
inches are snow.
The topographic relief in the area varies from gentle to relatively
steep (32%) with most of the area sloped moderately. Drainage channels in
the landfill area carry water only intermittently. Most of the landfill
area is covered by scrub brush and grass with trees and bushes on the slopes
to the east.
The site is located on steeply dipping sedimentary rocks of the Williams
Fork Formation, composed of sandstone and shale. The sandstone forms a
prominent hogback immediately east of the site. Part of the site will
occupy a valley where the shales have been eroded away. The soils in the
area are mostly gravelly, clayey sand with occasional silty layers and
cobbles. There is generally 20 feet or more soil cover over the bedrock.
There is sufficient clay matrix material in the soil so that when compacted,
the soil will be relatively impermeable.
-78-
-------
There are no perennial streams through the landfill area. The main
channel, a dry wash, occupies a gully that is 14 feet deep in places, drains
an area of about 161 acres and normally carries large quantities of runoff
during intense rainstorms. Most of the area, however, is not heavily
gullied, and the predominant form of runoff is sheet wash.
Groundwater is not present in the surficial deposits. Permeabilities
of the soil from test borings ranged from 7 to 1200 feet per year, indi-
cating that some infiltration of surface waste will occur during storms.
This will normally be in the form of percolation through unsaturated soil.
5. Operating Problems Associated With Severe Climate Conditions
There are only limited operating problems at the Meeker landfill asso-
ciated with severe climate conditions. The size of the population and its
waste volume are so small that a lack of concern about waste management is
the more critical problem.
Clearly, however, the general operation of the site, apart from con-
sideration of severe climate conditions, needs to be upgraded. Several
inadequacies exist. They are:
1) lack of daily cover
2) inadequate fire control and control of dumping of burn-
ing items
3) lack of machinery for compaction or cover
4) lack of a sequenced operation plan
5) lack of consideration of the potential problems to be
incurred due to oil-shale and other energy growth
These operational issues stem from the low priorities set for solid
waste management at local and county levels. It has been the custom that
disposal was a matter of "dump and burn", and this custom was reinforced by
the local climatic and geologic factors.
-79-
-------
6. Recommendations Relating to Severe Climate Conditions
While specific problems associated with the landfill are primarily due
to the lack of proper emphasis on proper solid waste management rather than
severe climatic conditions, a number of recommended improvements can be
made. These include:
(a) utilization of daily cover (at approximately $.50 per
cubic yard or $0.40 per ton of waste disposed based on
conditions at the landfill and assuming on-site soil
suitability);
(b) cessation of open burning;
(c) provision of at least part-time availability of a craw-
ler dozer;
(d) improvement of the sludge disposal operation by mixing
the sludge with the residential and commercial wastes
and/or applying and incorporating it into a level piece
of ground; and
(e) development of a detailed operational plan including
provisions for significant increases in annual or sea-
sonal waste quantities.
Any operational plan should follow, as a minimum, the guidelines and
regulations of the Colorado Department of Health. For example, the plan
should include the name of the person(s) in charge, a listing of equipment,
the hours of operation, methods for controlling fires, provisions for com-
pacting and covering the wastes, and means to control litter, rodents, and
insects. The plan should also include details of the different disposal
practices for sludge and bulky wastes.
7. Potential Financial Options
The County Department of Health should consider implementing a county-
wide charge for waste services for home owners and commercial establish-
ments.
-80-
-------
D. LARAMIE, WYOMING
1. Site Location
The City of Laramie is located in southeast Wyoming, 45 miles west of
the State Capital, Cheyenne and 30 miles east of Medicine Bow National
Forest and the Snowy Range. The University of Wyoming is located in the
City, which is a railroad center and focus for energy and recreational
developments in Albany County. Laramie is one of the largest population
centers (30,000) in the state (400,000) and manages the disposal of wastes
from most of the settlements in Albany County. The City is currently seek-
ing cooperation and financial support from the County for the services
provided.
The landfill site is located one mile north of the City limits on the
extension of Ninth Avenue onto incorporated County lands. The City of
Laramie owns and operates the 90 acre site and has an interim permit from
the State, awaiting the formulation of the State Solid Waste Management
Plan.
2. Operational Description
The 90 acre landfill is owned and operated by the City of Laramie. for
the benefit of its residents and the unintended benefit of the County. The
site is located on very thick deposits of alluvial clay and sandy, silty
clay, and has only limited potential for groundwater problems. The City, at
one time, contracted out the excavation of trenches and the stockpiling of
cover materials but currently handles those operations with city personnel.
Bulky wastes and construction and demolition wastes are disposed of in a
separate trench, oil and solvents are disposed in a pit, and there is a
separate area for junked automobiles. The non-residential/commercial wastes
comprise approximately 30% of the total waste stream. The landfill is open
seven days per week, nine hours per day, and is closed on holidays. A
vehicle counter sits in a movable shed at the entrance to the fill and
records traffic flow into the landfill.
-81-
-------
The landfill operates large trenches, about 100 feet wide and 40 feet
deep, which are laid out in parallel. The currently utilized trench is just
north of the older cells and the new trench for late 1980 and 1981 use has
already been excavated. "Unfortunately, the cells are aligned roughly east
while the prevailing winds are from the west and northwest. This means that
the cells are operated with the open ends facing the wind.
Several trash haulers, including the City, dump at the site, as well as
individuals, construction contractors, and the University. Laramie acts as
the receptor for all wastes in the area (except sewage sludge) including
potentially hazardous wastes such as used oils and spent solvents. A single
groundwater monitoring well, left in place for 18 months beginning in 1977,
showed no evidence of contamination, however.
3. Waste Quantities and Projections
Population projections for the City of Laramie currently show 30,000
persons in 1980; the 1980 census counted 28,700. These figures included the
student and faculty of the University of Wyoming. The wasteshed is the area
around Laramie in Albany County. The operator estimated that 1000 to 1500
homes outside the City are served by the landfill with individuals and
contractors hauling residential and construction wastes from as far away as
Bosler and Centennial. The wasteshed population is estimated at roughly
40,000. Growth has not been explosive in the past decade but projections
suggest a rate of growth greater than the previously recorded 4.3% over the
next decade, perhaps reaching 10 to 15% between 1980 and 1990.
Good estimates exist for residential/commercial waste quantities dis-
posed at the landfill. In 1970, about 14,500 yd were disposed. This had
grown to 29,000 cubic yards by 1978 and is currently running at an annual
rate of 43,500 yd . Construction, demolition and bulky wastes are projected
to reach 20,000 yd3 annually in 1980.
The City began to charge for waste disposal in 1967 when it instituted
an annual charge of $1.25 per household. Currently those charges are broken
down into landfill charges and collection charges and are assessed quarterly
-82-
-------
in advance. The landfill charge is $10.00 per year per household and the
dump fee is $7.80 per quarter per household or roughly $2.60 per month.
This service covers three 20 gallon cans twice a week plus bound waste such
as newspaper. Commercial establishments are charged more for servicing of
containers ranging from 2 cubic yards ($16.84 per quarter) to 6 cubic yard
($39.84 per quarter). There are 140 containers in service by the City. The
University pays the City $1200 per year for dumping privileges while the
National Forest Service pays only $500 per year.
The City budget for collection in 1979 was $266,686 of which $250,000
was used. The actual revenue collected was only $240,000, indicating a
$10,000 shortfall. The landfill budget for 1979 was $140,097 which matched
the amount spent while revenues were projected at $130,000. Budget deficits
are made up by general revenues.
4. Hydrogeologic Data
The landfill is located on thick deposits of alluvium and loess. The
soil types are tight, red clay and a yellow-brown, sandy, silty clay. The
former is difficult to work and operate upon in wet weather conditions. The
latter is preferred as cover and base material. There is very little sur-
face or shallow ground water flow in this area (annual precipitation is 14
inches) due to arid conditions; the snow cover in winter blows off to the
east. The Laramie River runs to the north about \h miles west of the land-
fill; local water supplies are taken from surface impoundments upstream.
5. Operating Problems Associated With Severe Climate Conditions
The major climatic problem faced by the operators of the Laramie land-
fill is continuous high winds; minor problems include snow and extended
periods of freezing temperatures. Wind velocities approach 70 miles per
hour and have blown trash several hundred feet into the air above the site.
Trash fences do not aid in keeping airborne paper from leaving the site due
to the altitudes achieved. The City constructed, from old collection equip-
ment, mobile trash nets which are pulled around on the crest of the berm
surrounding the working face. The fence units extend about 6 feet above the
mobile dumpster units, but have not had success in trapping blowing litter.
-83-
-------
The City has recently constructed "fence-sleds", with 6 inch pipe and
cyclone fencing, which are about 10 feet in height. It is hoped that these
fence units can collect the refuse blowing from the working face. The
alternative of closing the landfill on severe windy days has not worked
because individuals continue to haul refuse to the site and, finding the
landfill closed, dump their waste on the roadside leading to the landfill.
The snow cover causes problems of traction for haulers, while freezing
temperatures make excavation of cover material and the landfill trenches
difficult. Also, upon encountering ice of any thickness, the compactor unit
digs itself down into the ice either until the steel wheels reach ground or
have dug themselves into the ice to the height of the axles. This has
occurred several times at the Laramie site. Thawing of snow but not ground
frost causes ponding at the site. The State issued violations to the City
for this and for blowing litter as recently as March 5, 1980.
6. Recommendations Relating to Severe Climate Conditions
A number of potential alternatives are available to minimize on-site
operational difficulties. These include:
(a) re-orientation of new trenches to minimize wind impact;
(b) increasing surface runoff controls (via berms, diversion
ditches, etc.) to minimize surface ponding;
(c) increasing access road maintenance particularly during
snowfall conditions;
(d) utilizing built-up cells for windbreaks;
(e) utilizing cover stockpiles as wind breaks;
(f) planting vegetation barriers;
(g) sprinkling cover material on the working face throughout
the day to confine wastes;
(h) covering and compacting wastes late or early in the day
during low wind conditions;
(i) utilization of nets over the trench operations as litter
control devices; and
-84-
-------
(j) minimizing the area of the working face.
7. Potential Financial Options
The City of Laramie could generate additional operating revenue and
capital funds by 1) tightening its collection of assessments to City resi-
dents and commercial establishments, 2) researching costs and making the
assessments fit better to collection and disposal costs, and 3) most im-
portantly, charging those haulers and individuals who bring in refuse from
outside the City limits a fair price for the privilege of disposal. This
latter proposal implies the cooperation of the County in rewriting or-
dinances and the support of the County in making assessments to residents
outside City limits.
Alternatively, since the tax base is not yet strained, and the assess-
ment has not yet attained its constitutional maximum, the mill-levy could be
raised. This, however, is an action of last resort, considering the slack
in the utilities assessment and the free disposal given out-of-town haulers.
More importantly, political resistance to raising taxes is very great and
could prove counter-productive to solid waste management activities.
8. Other Solid Waste Issues
Other solid waste issues relate to the adequacy of the current oils and
solvents disposal site, given upcoming State and Federal regulations for
hazardous waste disposal. The City should initiate consideration of up-
grading the particular disposal approach, developing an alternate disposal
site and/or encouraging recovery and/or reuse.
E. BISMARCK. NORTH DAKOTA
1. Site Location
Bismarck is one of the larger cities in North Dakota and is the State
Capital. Of the states dominated by agriculture, North Dakota is fortunate
-85-
-------
also to have reserves of energy resources in its western part which contri-
bute to prosperity and growth. Bismarck has planned for future needs in
solid waste management by expanding its site and developing collection and
disposal operations which are flexible enough to adapt to regional develop-
ment.
The landfill is adjacent to the east side of the City, immediately
south of Interstate 94, off Exit 37. The site is owned and operated by the
City of Bismarck, and is located in Section 25 of Township 139N of Range SOW
and Section 30 of Township 139N of Range 79W in Burleigh County. The Permit
Number is 017.
2. Operational Description
The site encompasses approximately 461 acres of rolling grasslands.
The site is located above a variety of clay and shale strata with inter-
spersed but infrequent sand lenses. The active portions of the site and all
boundaries along private property have been planted with trees, both coni-
ferous and deciduous, to slow the wind, catch trash, and hide the site from
view. The site has a seasonal stream next to waste disposal cells but, no
water supplies are threatened. The landfill has a gate operator who col-
lects fees from haulers and residents of Burleigh County who live outside
the City. Commercial and industrial wastes are hauled in by the individual
or by District Sanitarian Service, Inc. or Dakota Sanitation, Inc. Access
is provided by a paved road to the gate and then an all-weather road leading
to the various disposal areas. From April 16 to November 14 the landfill is
open 7 days per week from 7 am to 6 pm and Sundays and holidays, noon until
6 pm. From November 15 until April 15, the landfill is closed Sundays and
holidays and is open 7 am to 4 pm six days per week.
Almost all waste types are disposed at the Bismarck landfill with the
following exceptions:
all liquids uncommon to normal household refuse
septic tank pumpings
-86-
-------
raw or digested sewage sludges
hazardous wastes, unless specifically approved
material originating outside Burleigh County
Drinking water treatment plant sludges are accepted, however.
Ramp, area, and trench methods of landfill disposal are employed by the
City, depending upon the season, weather and waste. On the day of the site
visit, the trench method was in use because of the high winds. A working
face, perhaps 40 feet wide, was protected by a berm and a large natural hill
which would eventually be cut for cover material. Disposal cell trenches
vary in length from 100 to 1000 feet and in depth from 8 to 16 feet. The
usual disposal site was not in operation except for the disposal of filtra-
tion wastes from the drinking water plant. Construction debris was sepa-
rated from the residential/commercial fraction and disposed in its own area
next to Apple Creek. Engine oil wastes are deposited in an underground tank
and then collected by a commercial recycling firm. Yard wastes were mixed
into the municipal waste stream since the same trucks and haulers pick up
both types. It was evident that several areas had been built up over the
years by adding cells on top of older cells in specific areas. The building
of elevated areas aids in controlling, to a degree, the impact of the con-
tinous winds. There is an abundance of cover material and several stock-
piles were serving as windbreaks. As areas are excavated, the overburden is
used as cover for closure of completed cells. The operation is well managed
and shows the results of long-term planning and concern for environmental
and aesthetic values.
The landfill equipment in use had been purchased new, obtained as
surplus or bought in a used condition and brought back into service. Speci-
fic items include:
1 Caterpillar 956 Rubber tired 4 yd0 front end loader
1 Cat D-7 dozer
1 Cat 619 scraper
1 Cat 621 scraper
2 Clark 290 rubber tired dozers
-87-
-------
On the day of the site visit, the equipment was constantly in use. The
City employs one director of operations, five persons at the landfill, and
26 persons on the collection routes. Landfill personnel include three
equipment operators, one fee collector, one assistant foreman, and one fore-
man. The City operates eight compactor trucks in the winter and nine in the
summer with one driver and two laborers per each vehicle. In addition, two
paper pickers are employed and fill in on the collection routes when needed.
Landfill charges to users were recorded from December 1976 through
April 1978 by the City. The total for the year 1977 was $142,560 or $11,880
per month. The traffic shows a definite seasonal trend with a high in June
($21,640 collected) and a low in December ($7,150 collected). The major
contributors for the high months June and May were the industrial haulers
who logged 71.2% and 75.7% of revenue respectively those months. The total
landfill charges for the fiscal year July 1979 to June 1980 were $178,940 or
$14,910 per month.
3. Waste Quantities and Projections
The population of Bismarck, based on 1975 data was 41,500; the City
study (1978) measuring waste volume used a figure of 44,000 persons to
calculate per capita generation. The waste generation figure is probably
higher since the landfill serves the surrounding parts of Burleigh County.
Projections into the next two decades vary from a low of 55,000 to a high of
79,500 persons by 2000 A.D.
Figures from the City on waste generation show differences between
waste volumes generated in 1977 and 1978. The total waste generated per
capita, based on summer volume (week of July 10, 1978) was estimated at 4.77
pounds per day for the residential/commercial fraction. If construction
debris, trees and dirt, and water treatment plant sludge were to be figured
into the residential/commercial data, then the per capita figure jumps to
15.93 pounds per day, with construction waste contributing the bulk of that
(8.55 Ibs/per capita per day). The per capita residential/commercial frac-
tion generation rate for 1977 is 4.58 Ibs/day or 100 tons per day received
at the landfill.
-------
The figures for July of 1978 reflect summer waste volumes and are not
representative of the yearly pattern. Figures for 1977 are based on counts
of domestic loads hauled and recorded in 1977 and volume estimates of 20 yd
per load, based on the "capacity of the packer trucks at a density of 535
pounds per cubic yard. Other figures were derived from landfill charges
which were recorded at the landfill gate and back calculated using average
capacity and density figures. As such, the figures for 1977 and 1978 can
give only a rough outline of actual waste generation rates. The landfill
operator estimated that the landfill accepts between 115-120 tons of resi-
dential and commercial wastes each day.
4. Hydrogeologic Data
The City engineer reports that the site sits atop generally impermeable
clay and shale; silty sand and clayey sand appear as lenses throughtout the
clay deposit. The topography can be described as rolling hills with inter-
mittent and perennial creeks cutting down through the erodable materials.
Apple Creek runs through the site but is enclosed and covered by five feet
of compacted clay along some of its length. Runoff from the site is di-
verted from the Creek by means of diversion structures. Two drainage ditches
carry runoff; tests indicate that leachate is not present in either of these
ditches nor in a so called "coulee" which is located to the south of the
site. Some trash, however, does blow into the "coulee" at times. The State
believes the potential for surface water contamination is minimal at this
site.
Local water supplies are obtained from the Missouri River and are
treated at the City water treatment plant which dumps its waste sludges at
the landfill. Clay deposits tend to isolate the shallow, perched aquifers
from the deeper aquifers; the State DEWMR is not concerned with the low
potential for groundwater contamination due to the deep soil profiles.
o. Operating Problems Associated with Severe Climate Conditions
The major problem in site operations is associated with the continuous
wind movements across the Northern Great Plains. Problems of secondary
-89-
-------
importance include frozen cover and frozen garbage.,. The wind problem appears
to be potentially more severe here than in other locations of Region VIII
due to the long "fetch" over which the wind can flow in traversing Canada
and the Great Plains. The winds rarely cease to blow and only then to
change direction. Winds average speeds of 17 mph in winter, usually blowing
out of the northwest or west. Trash can be blown a hundred feet or more
into the air creating litter problems in surrounding areas, if not managed
properly.
Cold temperatures cause problems with cover and with garbage. Cover
can be frozen solid and rendered unusable if not properly managed. Garbage
can be frozen and kept cold enough for long enough over the year to sub-
stantially limit the biological decomposition processes normally occurring
in landfills elsewhere. Cold temperatures and wind also have a great impact
on landfill operators and equipment.
6. Recommendations Relating to Severe Climate Conditions
The City of Bismarck has approached the severe climate problem of high
winds in a unique way. Rather than employing one trench location for dis-
posal and trash fences for containment on days of high winds, the operators
of the landfill use a variety of techniques to mitigate the impacts of wind
on the operation. These techniques include:
1) shifting the disposal of waste from the main operation
of an area method to one of several trench operations
2) utilizing one of several trench operations oriented in
different directions to minimize wind effects
3) using built-up cells as wind breaks by planning their
placement initially
4) using stockpiles of cover material as wind breaks
5) using natural bluffs, planted trees, and other features
as windbreaks and trash catchers
6) sprinkling of cover material throughout the day to hold
waste down until it can be compacted and covered
-90-
-------
7) covering and compacting wastes late at night or early in
the morning after the day of disposal
For example, normally the fill operation is an area method. On days of
high wind, the working face of the area fill is covered, the disposal trucks
are rerouted, and the front end loader is moved to one of the trenches
already in place around the site. Next, depending upon wind strength, dura-
tion, and direction, one of the cells is utilized for disposal. The choice
is based on the orientation of the cell and on which windbreaks would be
most helpful. As outlined above, the windbreaks include a variety of natural
and man-made features. With regard to cells placement, the first cell to be
built in a row of cells is aligned crosswise to the prevailing wind direction
and cells are added in the row downwind. The next level begins again at the
leading edge upwind. Stockpiled cover is constantly being excavated and
moved around to provide both a windbreak and to minimize freezing. Cells
are located at the foot of steep embankments on large natural features which
are a benefit at this particular site. Planted trees disrupt wind flow
upwind and perform an excellent job of catching ground hugging blown litter
downwind of the working face.
On especially windy days, as trash is disposed of on the working face
of that day's trench, the equipment operator will distribute a thin layer of
cover material over the waste to hold it down. The operator will not com-
pact the waste until late in the day as winds slow or until early the next
morning when winds should be at their slowest. The State sanitarian and the
landfill foreman indicated that wastes were compacted and covered daily even
if it meant a very early operation the next morning. This practice met the
State landfill requirements for daily cover. Apparently litter fences have
not been suitable for operations of this type.
With regard to extended periods of low temperatures, the practices used
to mitigate freezing impacts are simple= Cover material is excavated,
stockpiled in the sun to dry in summer and roughed up into ridges throughout
the fall. It is worked over constantly throughout the frost periods. In
order to keep wastes from freezing solid, they are covered as soon as prac-
ticable and other wastes disposed on top to provide insulation and lower the
-91-
-------
length of the period of exposure to the cold. To the greatest extent possi-
ble, the working face is kept dry. The equipment is stored in a sheltered
area protected by trees and in a large shed. The landfill operators have a
heated workshop and shed" on site while the gatekeeper has a heated house at
the landfill entrance. Most pieces of the equipment have electric engine
block heaters.
F. SUMMIT COUNTY, COLORADO
Summit County is the focus for extensive all-season recreational devel-
opment. As a result, the resident population has been growing at 10 to 12%
annually since 1970 and the seasonal influx of tourists, skiers, boaters and
second-home owners increases each year. The County supports four downhill
skiing areas, Dillon Reservoir (a summer boating area), several mining and
touring towns, and much National Forest land. The County is the first
encountered after passing through the Continental Divide and so, attracts
much attention. It serves as the gateway from Denver to Vail and Eagle
County and to Leadville and Lake County, since the major Interstate runs
through the center of Summit County and a number of State Highways cross it.
The conditions being as they are, there is increasing pressure on the exis-
ting solid waste management system. Complicating the pressures of growth is
the land-use related mandate from the National Forest Service (NFS), on
whose land the Summit County landfill is located, to limit waste imports.
The order, issued to the County in November 1979, requires that the volume
of municipal solid wastes disposed at the county site be reduced by 50%
based on the waste volumes disposed in 1978.
1. Site Location
The Summit County landfill is located 1/2 mile north of U.S. Route 6, 1
mile west of the Keystone Ski Area and Village on National Forest Service
land. The landfill site is permitted by both the Colorado Department of
Health and by the U.S. Forest Service. A sludge disposal permit was granted
in late 1978.
-92-
-------
2. Operational Description
The Summit County landfill occupies 22 acres of National Forest land on
a shoulder of a foothill to the Continental Divide, overlooking the Snake
River and Blue River Valleys and Dill on-Reservoir. The site is operated by
the Summit County Road and Bridge Department and employs two full-time
personnel, an equipment operator and a landfill gate attendant. Most of the
residential/commercial waste stream is disposed by Summit Disposal, Inc.,
from the town of Breckenbridge, Keystone, Dillon, Silverthorne, Frisco, Blue
River, and Wheeler Junction, but many rural individuals haul to the landfill
and are charged on a basis of volume as determined by vehicle type size.
Construction wastes make up a large fraction of the total waste stream and
are often hauled privately.
The County Engineer labels the operation a "progressive slope method or
a modified trench/cell design". The landfill is open 8 hours a day, seven
days per week, and daily cover is provided. A Caterpillar D-8 bulldozer
strips and stockpiles topsoil and then digs a trench 15 to 20 feet deep or
until the soil becomes too difficult to work. The waste is dumped at the
top of the working face, and is spread up the face and compacted by the D-8.
Cover material for the pass over the face is obtained from the progressing
trench, excavated from immediately at the toe of the working face. Upon
completion of a trench, the stored topsoil is spread over the fill and
compacted. The final depth of the fill ranges from 20 to 25 feet. Some-
times the County Road and Bridge Department scraper is used to clear off
topsoil and loose subsoil.
Access to the site is provided by a winding, steep all-weather dirt and
gravel road. On-si.te access is a shale road leading up and over filled
areas and down to new cells and the sludge lagoons.
All types of waste are accepted at the landfill, but only sewage sludge
is currently separated, although recommendations have been made to separate
construction/demolition wastes from the residential/commercial fractions.
-93-
-------
The current (1979) landfill budget is estimated at $81,000, of which
$30,000 is labor and fringe. Equipment operations and maintenance costs,
plus depreciation, are approximately $44,000 per year and the rental of the
scraper unit costs about $7,000 per year.
3. Waste Quantities and Projections
The most recent census records by the Colorado Division of Planning,
Demographic Section, have indicated the Summit County permanent resident
population has increased from 2,700 in 1970 to 5,500 in 1975 to 9,400 in
1979. Projections for future years predict a decrease, however, to 7,500 in
1980. The county planner indicated that this projection is in error as
building permits, water and sewer hookups, etc. have increased this past
year as much as in recent years. There has been recently a proposed morato-
rium on and then an increase in new sewer hookup charges in order to pay for
construction and capital costs of new treatment plants. The approved in-
crease mandated a change in fees from $1200 to $3500 in order to keep pace
with growth. The County expects a resident population of 10,500 to be
recorded in the 1980 census. In addition, the skier/boater/recreation
population seasonally swells the county population. With four major ski
areas in the county, the daily peaks can reach nearly 12,000 persons using
the slopes and another 2,000 to 3,000 persons in recreation housing.
County estimates of waste volume for 1979 center around 40 tons per day
on an annual basis. Construction, yard waste, and spring cleaning wastes
boost summer waste totals as ski wastes increase winter volumes. This bi-
modal distribution totals about 14,600 tons per year (1979 estimates).
These estimates are based on the calculation of volumes in vehicles as
recorded by the gate attendant, and may be inaccurate. The County estimated
the average bulk density of wastes disposed at its landfill to be 250 pounds
per cubic yard.
4. Hydrogeologic Data
The landfill is sited on a shoulder of a glacially scoured valley. The
soil at the altitude of the landfill is very thin. This thin soil, the
-94-
-------
southern exposure, and the arid nature of the area once the snow has melted
encourage only a sparse vegetative growth around the landfill. The soil
profile is comprised of gradations of weathered shale; this fractured rock
serves as cover material'for the landfill. At depths of 20 to 25 feet, the
Mancos shale becomes too difficult to rip with the D-8 Caterpillar dozer and
serves as a bedrock liner for the landfill. However, numerous faults can
potentially conduct percolating water down through the strata to deep
aquifers.
The 40 inches of annual precipitation is mostly in the form of snow
which moves as runoff during thaws to Dillon Reservoir. The mean length of
the frost free period in Summit County is 30 days.
5. Operating Problems Associated with Severe Climate Conditions
The major operations problems stemming from severe climatic conditions
are the long periods of freezing temperatures and snow cover. Continuous
low temperatures affect nearly every facet of the landfill operation. Cover
material and the solid waste itself tend to freeze and become unworkable.
Equipment wear increases. Landfill personnel are also severely affected by
the cold. Snow cover makes operations difficult for hauling and dumping the
waste at the site. Snow gets mixed in with the waste during compaction and
covering, thus increasing the volume of material to be covered. During the
spring thaw, the water contained in the landfill cell percolates down
through the solid waste and forms leachate.
6. Recommendations Relating To Severe Climate Conditions
Suggestions for modifying the operation at the landfill face include:
(a) shifting the dumping location during periods of snow cover to minimize
traction problems; (b) utilization of a trash compactor to compact the
municipal waste to a 4 to i ratio to minimize volume requirements; (c)
utilization .of summer and fall stockpiling of cover material; (d) better
placement of trenches, access roads, and trench access ramps; (e) segre-
gating construction wastes in a separate trench.
-95-
-------
7. Potential Financial Options
With the growth of the resident population and the throughput of the
recreation economy, there are opportunities for revenue generation to sup-
port the landfill operation. In February, 1980, the rate schedule for
dumping was revised to reflect operational cost increases; the new rates are
comparable with those at other landfills.
8. Other Solid Waste Issues
In an attempt to resolve the volume reduction requirements of the
National Forest Service, a citizens' report on the situation of the required
volume reduction and the status of the recycling program was completed in
April, 1980. This report was reviewed in October, 1980 by Fred C. Hart
Associates, Inc. under a Technical Assistance Panels contract. The citi-
zens' report recommended the purchase of an air curtain destructor for
burning wood, paper, and yard wastes and possibly municipal wastes, and the
expansion of the recycling program. The Hart report, however, came to the
conclusions that an air curtain destructor, if used, should not be used for
municipal waste and that the recycling program should continue only if
markets were defined and funding continued. Instead, it was recommended
that the depth of the landfill be increased and that there be better
planning in the placement of wells, access roads, and trench access ramps.
In addition, it was recommended that increased compaction be achieved
through use of a steel-wheeled compactor, gentle working slopes, and very
thin (less than two feet thick) landfill lifts.
Another solid waste issue at this site is the presence of the Roberts
Water Supply Tunnel located 470 to 600 feet below the surface. This tunnel
carries water used for drinking purposes. The tunnel, however, is concrete
lined and pressure fed and the potential for contamination appears small.
-96-
-------
G. TELLURIDE, COLORADO
1. Site Location
The Town of Telluride is in San Miguel County in southwestern Colorado.
It lies in the narrow and nearly straight valley of the San Miguel River,
which flows westward out of the nearby San Juan Mountains. Near Telluride,
the valley floor averages about 2000 feet in width and about 8750 feet in
elevation. Access to the town is from State Highway 145 from the south and
northwest. The economy of the area is based primarily on tourism, mining,
and agriculture and is also entirely dependent on vehicular transportation
modes. Due to the surrounding mountainous terrain, there is little poten-
tial for development of alternative transportation modes in the future. The
town of Telluride originally requested this technical assistance panel's
effort.
2. Operational Description
Currently, there is no existing landfill in the Town of Telluride. A
perviously utilized dump site has been closed for approximately five years.
The old site, which was located in an area of high ground water levels, is
currently being utilized primarily as a parking lot for the ski lift area.
The present method of refuse disposal for the Telluride region requires
that refuse be hauled out to a. site near Norwood, Colorado, a round trip
distance of 120 miles. Burbridge Trash Service currently hauls the waste on
a twice weekly basis to this site run by San Miguel County.
A summary of Burbridge Trash Service accounts in Telluride is as
follows:
a. Number of trash customers within town corporate limits:
329 Residential, billed $5.00 per month $19,740
57 Commercial, billed on volume (see below) 14,891
$34,631
-97-
-------
The actual cost from the hauler is $4.50 per household per
month for 2 cans per week @ 30 gallons each for 2 pickups per
week. The town charges $0.50 per household per month for
administration; $0.25 is charged for each additional con-
tainer per week.
3
b. 3 Truck loads per week in low season @ 20yd 3compactor
4 Truck loads per week in peak season @ 20yd compactor
c. Special Rates
Seasonal residents: ^ monthly rate
Senior citizens: ^ rate but pick-up every other week
Two major summer events are handled through separate "special
call" contracts @ 22.00 per hour, portal to portal.
d. Monthly commercial charges are as follows:
Container Collections Per Week
Service (1) (2) (3)
1 ydg container $18.00 $27.00 $36.00
2 yd- container 20.00 30.00 40.00
3 yd^ container 22.00 33.00 44.00
4yd container 24.00 36.00 48.00
3. Waste Quantities and Projections
Waste is currently received from an average baseline population of 500.
Summer tourism results in contributory wastes from an additional 1500 per-
sons. Winter tourism results in contributory wastes from an additional 3500
persons. Seasonal growth peaks have been relatively recent and have in-
creased steadily since the opening of the ski area in 1969. Very substan-
tial increases in both residential and tourist populations are projected in
the near future due to the areawide growth of.the ski industry.
Based upon a statewide waste generation average of 4 Ibs. per person
per day, the Telluride area currently produces a range of from one to seven
tons of waste per day.
4. Hydrogeologic Data
The valley bottom is underlain mainly by unconsolidated deposits of
alluvium. The alluvium is highly permeable in places, but in turn is under-
-98-
-------
lain and bounded laterally by ,sedimentary rocks whose permeability is prob-
ably several orders of magnitude lower than that of the alluvium. The
permeability of the alluvial deposits is underscored by the problem of hex-
aval ent chromium contamination in certain ground and surface waters in the
valley.
5. Operating Problems Associated with Severe Climate Conditions
While the town of Telluride does not currently operate its own landfill
facility (and while that particular option is being considered), a number of
problems relating to severe climatic conditions have impacted solid waste
disposal servies. Winter weather conditions and the long travel distance
traversed by Burbridge Trash Service trucks have resulted in a level of
service which many town residents feel is inadequate. Specific problems
include inconsistent scheduling, spillage, trash dispersal by wind and
vectors, potential public health concerns, and potential sharp increases in
trash pickup and disposal costs.
6. Recommendations Relating to Severe Climate Conditions
Since the bulk of the severe climate related problems are an outgrowth
of the lengthy haul distances to the landfill site, several solutions center
around reduction of the travel distance. These options include development
of a Telluride landfill, utilization of a transfer trailer scheme which
would require few travel trips to the Norwood site, or installation of a
modular incinerator system for potential energy recovery and volume reduc-
tion.
The first option has been examined in some detail by the City of
Telluride. A consultant of the town assisted in the identification of nine
potential landfill sites. Eight of the sites were located in the Mancos
Shale formation which exhibits moderate permeability rates on the order of
105 cm/sec. The sites, however,, all generally located at elevations of from
9000 to 9400 feet, posed potential land use conflicts with existing or
-99-
-------
planned ski areas, required significant access development costs, and are
currently privately owned.
The second option consisted of development of a transfer station/com-
pactor trailer scheme which would reduce the number of required trips to the
landfill site. Currently, this approach would reduce the number of truck
trips to the landfill by approximately two trips per week and would also
require storage of the municipal waste stream for two to four days at the
transfer station. This could potentially present a health and odor hazard
during the summer months. While less attractive as a disposal option in the
immediate future, should population growth projections be achieved, this
option would become more amenable in later years.
The third option to install a modular incinerator would eliminate the
waste transport problems assuming a method for disposing of ash residues
could be developed. This option, however, would require:
(1) a capital investment of at least $100,000 for the incinerator
equipment;
(2) development of a town-operated collection service with one to
two compaction trucks; and
(3) operating costs ranging from $15 to $150 per ton, depending
on system selection, system efficiency, disposal costs,
collection costs, etc.
To resolve uncertainties associated with each of the above options, a
more detailed analysis should be completed for each of the options identi-
fied. Each option should be investigated for technical and environmental
feasibility and should include definition of expected disposal costs in both
the short and long term.
-100-
-------
7. Potential Financial Options
The town of Telluride may be in a position to capitalize on increasing
revenues available as a result of increasing tourism in the area. As such,
a number of financial mechanisms might include:
a. Implementation of a user charge system whereby site users are
charged on the basis of weight, volume and/or type of wastes.
b. Increase in the general taxing rate of the town.
c. Creation of a Disposal District with specific taxing powers.
d. Contractural cost-sharing with the County, particularly since
County residents are not currently for waste disposal.
H. SILVERTON. COLORADO
1. Site Location
The Town of Silverton is located in the north-central portion of San
Juan County. The landfill disposal site is located immediately north of the
town on Route 110.
2. Operational Description
The Silverton disposal site is a five acre site located at the edge of
a much larger active mine tailings pond. All types of waste are received at
the site with a separate disposal area available for bulky wastes and con-
struction debris. On-site access is a dirt road paralleling the edge of the
mine disposal pond. Since the tailings disposal site increases in size and
depth yearly, it is expected that the present location will last another one
to two years. As both tailings and solid waste disposal continue, the
actual location of solid waste disposal will gradually move upslope from the
tailings pond.
-101-
-------
The operation consists of delivery of residential wastes by the local
residents, twice weekly compaction by an Allis Chalmer HO-11 or a Cater-
pillar 950 Loader. Cover is applied generally once yearly in the early
Fall. A site operator is available approximately one-half time for spread-
ing and compacting of wastes.
Total annual cash outlays for site operation are approximately $1,000
per year.
3. Waste Quantities and Projections
The site receives wastes from approximately 800 residents per day. At
a per capita generation rate of four pounds per day, approximately 1.6 tons
per day or 11 tons per week are received at the site. The town is currently
experiencing little or no growth.
4. Hydrogeologic Data
No site specific data is available on subsurface conditions, although
general geologic conditions would suggest alluvial deposits over less perme-
able sedimentary rocks. The site's location, immediately next to the tail-
ings pond, as well as surface runoff from upland areas, generally results in
wet operating conditions.
Limited investigation of the potential for leachate migration through
the soil substrata to the immediately adjacent Animas River also indicates
the potential permeability of subsurface soils.
5. Operating Problems Associated with Severe Climate Conditions
The most obvious problems associated with the present site include lack
of daily cover and inadequate surface runoff control. A more minor problem
relates to on-site access, particularly during Spring thawing conditions.
-102-
-------
6. Recommendations Relating to Severe Climate Conditions
If the Silverton site were hydrogeologically separate from the mine
pond tailings disposal site, a number of specific recommendations should be
considered. These could include more frequent application of cover materi-
al, improvements in surface runoff control, and improvements in on-site
access. Since the magnitude of any potential leaching of contaminants from
the mill pond far exceeds potential pollution from the landfill site, it is
suggested that only the later two recommendations be implemented.
7. Potential Financial Options
The limited amount of upgrading required (i.e. , construction of approxi-
mately 500 feet of diversion ditch to improve site operating conditions, and
improvement of the access road via crushed shale or gravel application)
would not generate a need for large capital or operating outlays. Should
the town be in a position to consider recovery of solid waste costs from
Town and County residents, two specific options are available. These in-
clude users fees and increases in ad valorem tax rates. While Town resi-
dents have apparently indicated a preference for users' charges rather than
an increase in the tax base, a user charge system for such a small popula-
tion would require significantly higher operating costs, since personnel
would have to be assigned to the site full-time.
8. Other Solid Waste Issues
The potential pollution of the Animas River by the mine tailings pond
far outshadows potential impacts due to the Silverton waste disposal facil-
ity.
-103-
-------
I. DELTA. UTAH
1. Site Location
Delta, Utah is located in the northeast corner of Mi Hard County, Utah,
which is in the west-central portion of the state. Delta is roughly 150
miles south-southwest of Salt Lake City. The high desert climate and physi-
ographic conditions sharply limit the agricultural and economic activities
in the Sevier Basin. The 40 acre disposal site is situated one mile north-
east of Delta. The town and county and provide periodic cleanup and fire
protection at the site but no operational routine exists. One trash collec-
tion service is available for commercial and residential pick-ups.
2. Operational Description
The one trash hauling service, Don's Sanitary Service, hauls the waste
from the town's 80 residential and 20 commercial customers to the town site
in an open pick-up truck. Most often, individuals haul and dump their own
wastes at whatever location they choose since the town provides no operator.
Occasionally, the city will use a backhoe to bury dead animals as they are
disposed, but often the number of dead animals and wastes from the nearby
rendering plant exceed the capability of the backhoe operation. The county
provides a bulldozer on occasion to relocate wastes when the access road
becomes impassable. At times, city or county workers will clean up the dump
area by removing blowing trash. No cover is provided. Sewage sludge is
also disposed at the site.
3. Waste Quantities and Projections
Delta's 1980 population stands at 2,387 and has been increasing approx-
imately 5% per year since 1970. Based upon the Intermountain Power Project
Study, which analyzed power plant generation requirements, the 1985 popula-
tion is expected to grow to 5,728. (The MX Missile development was not
considered.)
-104-
-------
Delta is surrounded by a number of smaller settlements, each of which
contributes to the total waste volume. Total additional population is on
the order of 1,500.
Waste quantities generated in the Delta area would be consistent with
the national averages (a total of four to five tons per day currently),
except in the categories of old farm machinery, feedlot and corral waste,
demolition debris, and pesticide containers. Large volumes of discarded
baling wire are also common, as well as dead farm animals, especially cattle.
4. Hydrogeologic Data
The Sevier Desert region is situated over ancient lake laid silts,
clays and sands with a slope of 0 to 3 percent. The soil is heavily alka-
line and permeabilities are low. Groundwater is generally located four to
eight feet below the surface but groundwater levels adjacent to the site
vary due to a salt removal tile drainage system installed in the 1920's and
1930's and abandoned in the 1950's. The system currently operates inter-
mittently.
5. Operating Problems Associated with Severe Climate Conditions
The disposal approach is generally an unplanned operation. The aridity
significantly slows down waste decomposition processes with little volume
reduction over time. Winds are a critical problem, as is fire.
6. Recommendations Relating to Severe Climate Conditions
The existing fill operation should be consolidated to the minimum area
possible and it is recommended that a minimum of twelve inches of final
cover material be applied to completed sections to minimize water infiltra-
tion, blowing litter, and rodent and insect problems. Continued operations
should be governed by an operational plan which should be developed and
-105-
-------
should include a cell construction schedule, provisions for securing and
applying daily cover, provisions for fire fighting capability and provisions
for segregation of animal carcasses to a separate disposal cell.
7. Potential Financial Options
The city should consider implementing an ad valorem or user charge fee
system for both residential and commercial customers.
8. Other Solid Waste Issues
The city should initiate development of a contingency plan due to
potential development of the MX missile facility.
J. FORSYTH. MONTANA
1. Site Location
In 1976, the City of Forsyth decided that operation of its existing
disposal site was not economical. It initiated construction of the transfer
facility which was completed in 1979. However, the rate of growth in the
Forsyth area is so large due to coal mining and power plant operation that
it is feared that the capacity of the facility will soon be exceeded.
2. Operational Description
The City operates the enclosed transfer station from noon to 7:30 pm
weekdays and 9 am to 5 pm on Saturdays. The city operates two 20 cubic yard
rear loading packer trucks which dump wastes on the tipping floor. A skid-
steer bobcat dozer is used to push the refuse into the hopper. Wastes are
compacted in a 70 cubic yard compactor trailer which is hauled on the aver-
age once a day to a landfill site located in Miles City, Montana. This site
-106-
-------
is permitted by the State. Since opening in January, trips to the dump have
increased substantially; from 10 in January, 14 in February, 16 in March, to
24 in April. The city does not levy a fee for dumping but assesses the
citizens of Forsyth and other towns participating in the use of the station.
Opertional costs are currently averaging $34,000 per year for the
collection system and about $4,000 per year for the transfer station. This
charge is distributed proportionately among the communities using the trans-
fer facility based on the records of the station operator and his estimates
of volumes dumped at the facility by the residents and/or trucks of the
surrounding communities.
Capital costs for the transfer station included $88,000 for the
building, $32,000 for the trailer with compaction ram and $10,000 for the
bobcat skidder. The dump costs at the landfill are $83.00 per load for 75
cubic yards.
3. Waste Quantities and Projections
The estimated 1980 population of Forsyth is 2,800, up from 2,476 in the
special census of 1976. Continued growth is expected due to the constant
expansion of Montana Power Company in coal mining and electric power gener-
ation. The collection wasteshed includes Forsyth, Ashland, and other parts
of Rosebud and Treasure counties. The disposal rate in April was roughly 75
cubic yards of compacted wates hauled daily.
4. Hydrogeologic Data
The transfer station is located on the Yellowstone River alluvial
deposits well out of the floodplain. No contamination via leachate is
anticipated from the transfer facility.
-107-
-------
5. Operating Problems Associated with Severe Climate Conditions
Freezing of the compactor unit and the trailer occurs fairly often.
Wastes also freeze in the containers placed in the rural areas. Other
problems not associated with severe climatic conditions include the disposal
of bulky items in the green boxes assigned for residential and commercial
solid waste. These items are separated from the municipal waste stream at
the transfer facility by the operator.
6. Recommendations Relating to Severe Climate Conditions
Several alternatives have been tried and several suggested. Pending
more detailed analyses, a small disposal site located three miles northeast
of town on high bluffs just off of a dirt and gravel road could be reacti-
vated. The surrounding area is sparsely populated and consists largely of
ranches. A new landfill, located in an abandoned part of a coal mine in
Colstrip, is being developed at this time. Monitoring wells are being
installed and necessary finance agreements are being worked out. Should
continued growth tax the capacity of the transfer station, one of these
sites should be considered for solid waste disposal or the transfer station
capacity should be increased.
In order to handle the problem of equipment freezing, oil should be
sprayed periodically in a thin layer over the equipment parts most likely to
be frozen.
-108-
-------
VI. CONCLUSIONS
Chapters III and IV present potential technical solutions to the pro-
blems of landfill waste" disposal as they relate to severe climatic con-
ditions. Chapter V presented a variety of information on ten specific case
studies and presented a series of recommendations for each site relating to
resolution of severe climatic problems.
Exhibit 14 provides a summary of the most commonly experienced problems
and the potential solutions that owners, operators, designers, and regulatory
authorities should consider when trying to resolve severe climate-related
disposal problems. However, in the completion of this analysis, it has be-
come very evident that a number of additional general conditions impinge on
successful waste disposal in areas of severe climate. These include:
(1) the general lack of capital and operating funds due to low
watershed populations;
(2) the difficulty of providing adequate collection and disposal
due to natural transportation problems (weather, geography,
etc.) and the sparsely settled but large wasteshed areas;
(3) the predominance in some areas of State and Federal lands
which are often unavailable for waste disposal; and
(4) the availability of a variety of natural resources (i.e.,
minerals, steep slopes, aesthetic attractions, etc.) which in
the last few years has led in many locations to drastic
increases in seasonal populations and corresponding demands
for services in all sectors.
Both the severe climatic problems identified in Chapters II and III,
and the more general characteristics identified above, go hand-in-hand; and,
in fact, are mutually prevalent in Region VIII. This combination of con-
ditions would suggest that additional consideration be given to resolving
-109-
-------
some of the solid waste disposal problems induced by those general charac-
teristics noted above. More specifically, consideration should be given to:
(1) providing • additional technical and financial assistance to
rural communities impacted by the above conditions;
(2) reconsidering policy decisions relating to State and Feder-
ally-owned lands; and
(3) regulating or alleviating growth impacts and increased
demands for services at the local level due to local tourist
or industry generated population growth.
-110-
-------
EXHIBIT 14
SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL CLIMATIC ALTERNATIVES
Problem Areas
Maintaining Adequate Cover
Supply and Type
Equipment Function
Surface Runoff & Erosion
Groundwater Pollution
Blowing Litter
Equipment Failure
Low Performance and Health
& Safety Risks for Operators
Lengthy and Difficult
Haul Distances
Seasonal Variation in Waste
Volume
Waste Volume Reduction
Potential Solutions
A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H
F,G,I,J,K,L,M,N
B.O.P.Q.R
L.S.T
H,I,U,V
H.W.X
H
Y,Z,AA
H,I,Y,BB,CC
DD,EE,FF
Key to Solutions
A. Reduce Cover Application Rates
B. Alternate Cover Design
C. Additional Compaction
D. Dewatering
E. Chemical Modification
F. Off-Site Cover Procurement
G. Alternate Cover Types
H. Alternate Landfill Equipment & Accessories
I. Alternate Landfill Design
J. Alternate Cover Handling Operations
K. Stockpile Covering
L. Surface Runoff Controls
M. Inclement Weather Reserved Area
N. Snow Removal
0. Top and Side Slopes
P. Surface Treatment and Vegetation
Q. On-Site Drainage Features
R. Off-Site Runoff Features
S. Raising Landfill Base
T. Leachate Control
U. Cleanup Operations
V. Litter Fences
W. Heated Storage
X. Frequent Preventative Measures
Y. Transfer/Storage Stations
Z. Satellite/Greenbox Systems
AA. Maintenance of Access Roads
BB. Temporary Equipment and Personnel
CC. Operations Sequencing
DD. Source Separation
EE. Materials Recovery
FF. Energy Recovery
-------
VII. REFERENCES
Brunner, O.R.; and D. J. Keller. Sanitary Landfill design and operation.
Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1972. 59p.
Bureau of Reclamation. Earth Manual: a guide to the use of soils as foun-
dations and as construction materials for hydraulic structures; first edi-
tion-revised. Denver, U.S. Department of Interior, 1968.
Chian, E.S.K.; andF.B. DeWalle. University of Illinois. Evaluation of
leachate treatment, volume 1, characterization of leachate. Cincinnati,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, September 1977. 210p.
Chian, E.S.K.; and F.B. De Walle. University of Illinois. Evaluation of
leachate treatment, volume II, biological and physical-chemical processes.
Cincinnati, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, November 1977. 245p.
Cold regions engineering. John Burdick and Philip Johnson, eds. Proceed-
ings: the Second International Symposium on Cold Regions Engineer!ng7
University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska. August 12-14, 1976. Cold Regions
Engineers Professional Association, May 1977. 597p.
Critchfield, H.J. General climatology, second edition. Englewood Cliffs,
N.J., Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966.
Davis, S.N. ; and R.J.M. De Wiest. Hydrogeology. New York, John Wiley and
Sons, Inc. , 1966.
Flint, R.F. Glacial and quaternary geology. New York, John Wiley and Sons,
Inc., 1971. 892p.
Geiger, R. The climate near the ground; revised edition. Cambridge, Mass. ,
Harvard University Press, 1965. 611p.
Fred C. Hart Associates, Inc. Draft environmental impact statement on the
proposed guidelines for the landfill disposal of solid waste. Washington,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, March 1979. 186p.
Hegdahl, T.A. Solid waste transfer stations, a state-of-the-art report on
systems incorporating highway transportation. Cincinnati, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, 1973. 160p.
Los Angeles Department of County Engineer and Engineering Science, Inc.
Development of construction and use criteria for sanitary landfills. Wash-
ington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1973. 147p. plus Appendices.
Office of Technology Assessment. Materials and energy from municipal waste,
resource recovery and recycling from municipal solid waste and beverage
container deposit legislation. Washington, Congress of the United States,
July 1979. 284p.
-112-
-------
VII. REFERENCES (Continued)
Pohland, F.G. (Georgia Institute of Technology). Sanitary landfill stabili-
zation with leachate recycle and residual treatment. Cincinnati, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, October 1975. 106p.
Sanitary landfill ing; report on a joint conference sponsored by the National
Solid Waste Management Association and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Kansas City, Missouri, November 14-15, 1372. J.E. Delaney, comp.
Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1973. 190p.
Shilesky, D.M.; et al. Solid waste landfill practices, draft final report.
Sterns, Conrad and Schmidt Consulting Engineers, Inc. , September 1978.
219p.
Sowers G.B. ; and G.F. Sowers. Soil mechanics and foundations, third edi-
tion. London, The Macmillan Company, Collier-Macmillan Limited.
University of Wisconsin-Extension. Technical guide for solid waste
management. June 1973. 62p.
Winfrey, A.J. (Division of Solid Waste Disposal). Developing local solid
waste service systems. Kentucky State Department of Health, June 1972.
38p.
Zausner, E.R. An accounting system for transfer station operations.
Washington, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1971. 20p.
Assorted manufacturers' brochures.
-113-
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO. 2.
908/6 81-001
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAJV
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL IN CLIMATICALLY SEVERE
3. RECIF
5. REPO
I REPORT
] AREAS 6. PERF
7. AUTHOR(S) 8. PERF
S. CARETSKY, N. GRUNDAHL, B. LOKEY, F. LORINCZ,
J. ROGERS, W. TUSA. AND T. VAN" EPP
9. PERFORMING ORG 'VNIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
FRED C. HART ASSOCIATES, INC.
530 FIFTH AVENUE
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10036
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
WASTE MANAGEMENT BRANCH
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1860 LINCOLN STREET
DENVER, COLORADO 80295
10. PRO
11. CON
13. TYP
14. SPO
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
-lENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
RT DATE
MARCH 1981
ORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
ORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
GRAM ELEMENT NO.
1 HAUT/iiRANT NO.
EPA 68 01 4942
E OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
FINAL
NSORING AGENCY CODE
16. ABSTRACT
This report characterizes' the operational problems of solid waste- landfill
disposal in severely cold, mountainous, or plains regions typical of the States
of Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming, and offers
alternative approaches to these problems. An extensive literatrue search on
the climate, geology, soils, and hydrology of climatically severe areas was
conducted and ten landfill sites in climatically severe areas of U.S. EPA Region
VIII were visited.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
SANITARY LANDFILLS
WASTE TRANSFER STATIONS.
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELAEASE TO PUBLIC
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDE
PAGOSA SPRINGS, GL
MEEKER, TELLURIDE,
SILVERTON, COLORAI
DELTA, UTAH;
BISMARCK, NORTH Df
FORSYTH, MONTANA;
LARAMIE, WYOMING
19. SECURITY CLASS (This J
UNCLASSIFIEE
20. SECURITY CLASS (This f
UNCLASSIFIEE
D TERMS c. COSATI Field/Group
JNNISON,
AND
XD;
^KOTA;
teportj 21. NO. OF PAGES
> 119
>age) 22. PRICE
)
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
------- |