REPORTS OF STATE AND EPA REGIONAL
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
HEADQUARTERS/REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT MEETING
WASHINGTON, D.C.
February 20-21, 1975
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SUBJECT: Region I Solid Waste Report DATE: February 10, 1975
FROM: Dennis Huebner, Chief
Solid Waste Program 1 $ 0 4 b
TO: Ralph Black, Director
Regional, State and Local Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
In your memo dated January 3? 1975 you requested that we prepare a written
report concerning state and federal outputs related to the Environmental
Protection Agency's guidance documents. I am enclosing three attachments
which respond to your specific questions.
1. Memo dated January 17, 1975 concerning state demonstration grant
funding.
2. Table entitled "Region I Commitments"
3. Grant work programs and progress reports for each state.
To assist the states in developing their,grant application, meetings were
held with each to discuss l) the contents of the guidance document and
2) a list of sample tasks (attachment k) that had been prepared by the
Region. All applications contain
1. A work plan with objectives
2. Tasks with planned outputs
3- Man power allocations
4. A schedule
The guidance documents have been extremely effective in helping to develop
the grant applications. Please note that all grants recently funded in
Region I were demonstration grants and therefore do not necessarily cover all
state solid waste program activities.
In general, I have been satisfied with each State's grant performance.
Three states (Connecticut, Fhcde Island and Massachusetts) have taken innovative
approaches in implementing environmentally acceptable alternatives focu
on resource recovery. Four States (Maine, Vermont, Connecticut and Rhode
Island) have promulgated or are strengthening sanitary landfill, regulations.
During the past year EPA with state assistance has initiated enforcement action
against five incinerators in Massachusetts (including Boston) ^d ib involved
with a major dump enforcement case. In general all are demonstrating positive
results. During January a very successful hazardous waste meeting was conducted
for states in Regions I and II- All of our states in Region I are initiating
hazardous waste programs.
In the future, the general nature of the economy may slow down the anticipated
progress of the state solid vaste activities in Region I. In some of EPA's
programs, program support monies have betn returned due to a lack of avail-
able matching funds (a result of state budget cutbacks). Hiring freezes will
also effect program performance and outputs. In order to alleviate the finan-
cial burden that would be placed on small communities., many of our state
legislature are considering authorizing open burning of refuse at small dumps.
Encloeuree 3
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
State Grants for Solid Haste Management
January 178 1975
Merrill S. Hohman, Director
A1r and Hazardous Materials Division, Region
I
J. Blacks, Director
Regional, State, and Local Affairs Staff
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
In response to your memorandum dated December 17S 1974, we estimate
that the states in Region I will require a total of $295,000 in
fiscal year 1975 Federal funds to maintain fiscal year 1976 program
activities < t current levels. The attached table summarizes
funding activities for fiscal years 1973 and 1974, and our needs
for 1975. Of the fiscal year 1974 funds allocated to support fiscal
year 1975 activities ($420,000) $297,863 has been awarded to date;
the remainder will be awarded prior to the end of this fiscal year.
In general, each of our states has made progress 1n accordance
EPA guidance documents. Unfortunately, due to the status of the
economy, each state's operating budget is constrained to the extent
that any cutbacks in grant monies may necessitate personnel cutbacks.
In our opinion, none of our states are self sufficient, and the
funds Indicated absve are essential for a "hold-the-line" operation.
The following is a brief status report concerning State funding
and major program accomplishments.
Massachusetts
The State received a $62,000 grant on Hay 'nl, 1973. The grarrc period
has been extended to February 233 1975 and will require furthar extensi
to iccornplish some project goals, objectives, and outputs and -co
exp^nu the money. Time delays 1n hiring new staff have necessitated the
extensions. Funding allocated to the region this past flsca'a year
($106,000) will be utilized for program activities in fiscal year 1976.
As a result no new monies are being requested.
The State recently issued an RFP to construct a resource recovery plant
In Haverhill, Massachusetts. Recently signed legislation mil place
all the environmental agencies under one Cabinent level office,
hopefully enabling better coordination than in the past* This re-
organization should result in the strenghtem'ng of their hazardous
waste program.
CONCURRENCES
Svt/f
-------
New Hampshire
The State received a $17,513 grant on May 11ป 1973 but could not
provide trie necessary matching funds. The grant has been extended
to June 30, 1975 1n hopes that matching monies will be made available.
In addition, funding allocated to the region this past fiscal year
(516,132) will be available for program activities in fiscal year
K76. No new monies are being requested.
The State continues to function with Its (one man staff) obviously
inadequate. Recent meetings with the Governor's staff will hopefully
enable us to fund the grant and make possible the development of an
adequately staffed program.
Connecticut
The State received a $195,510 grant on February 28, 1973 that terminated
August 31, 1974. Federal funds ($1529659) were awarded this past
fiscal year with a project termination date of August 31, 1975. We
are requesting $150,000 to continue the existing program Into fiscal
year 1976.
The State is continuing to work closely with the Resource Recovery
Authority in providing environmentally acceptable alternatives to open
dumping. Sanitary landfill regulations are being strengthened
and a sizable hazardous waste program initiated.
Rhode Island
The State received a $45,953 grant on June 21, 1974 which vdl*
terminate June 30, 1975. Ue are requesting $45,000 to continue
the existing program 1n fiscal year 1976.
With EPA funding for fiscal year 1973, the State plan was prepared
recoirjnending the creation of a Statewide Corporation, and enabling
legislation was recently passed. The Governor is being encou:"c.(je'J
to allocate en operating budget for the now corporation. Sanitary
landfill regulations are being strengthened and a hazardous v^ste
program is being initiated.
Maine
State re:e1ved a $49,256 grant June 21, 1974 which will terminate
June 30, 1975. We are requesting $50,000 to continue the existing
program in fiscal year 1976.
A State law ?as recently passed granting authority to prepare sanitary
landfill repjlatiors which are to be effective Julys 1975. These
new regulations hava now been promulgated and tfee State is currently
Initiating an active enforcement program (currently only one disposal
site meets regulations). A hazarcous waste program is being Initiated.
-------
Vermont
The State received a $50,000 grant June 21, 1974 which will terminate
June 30, 1975. We are requesting $50,000 to continue the existing
program in fiscal year 1976.
Currently the sanitary landfill regulations are being strengthened
and a statewide hazardous waste program and waste oil recovery
program in ChUtenden County are being Initiated.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with this information
at this early date. These preliminary budget estimates, if accepted
and fundedป will allow for the attainment of EPA goals in each of
our states.
EPA:lAH:swp:DHuebner:pv
cc: M. Hohman
-------
PA-T3IU 11!
;'OE 0?
LEG I Bl AT 3
13,3
imn
liป'U
-------
..,.,,- >r--._, p p
. ... i < ;.-: . . Ut I, i
fr-' i f.-r-."r <--<
l':..-^;?.^.^-..-..-' .,;,
L
17
-
-------
s./-\ t. f. *''-<", o*
- i < i ,* i ( f1 '^ *'-, - ' ""-"v v *v- p- pซ, " f,,-r--* n>~ป*. f ''-, ^^ "" M' f-'7~'ฐ> ? y3**?1 ^\T
\~- .'>.'' .- ' .'>LLL'v .;.:,:,.' t'J ir,^ FiVt; SiaifcS f-,,J tn-i LJtlM.-uCT 01"
[
?.. I;
, .. - . , vป
:_ II " i.Ji^iJ l'\,-., t,, ,.ป-_? / 4 tit i'jC.v;.1 .,'jj-
irr o;;^ o= c:?; STATES,
--','-! ^ r-A -',-: --"-; r-,7c! q -p - T -,- ~ .' /-"''ซ ?
l.i . . . . v.---^-..' i --' i ,.<-,' I I -,,.-_,-Uo i: . .' !;,.(,-' ' ,-!'3
I v;, . . i::"j.s r .'."_:o r.~:;.r- .. "MT!^:1'1-. fion::"; i:' ?-V 76
TO c: T. i r,-.-. ;:-;!?Ti[.3 c- . :r:. in c ;',::,; TO K,;avij,.i A I^TA
i'rTr'i r ,-ii FlTi'J, v.'Z M '"'ป"] vi-OU3 L-.oii; UllJic-L'JlCJo
... f , y ,., (-".-;: r? ') v '' : ' ''.-vn ic; ) .''?( I CITT? tf-j
^ . ..- . . - K- ' .l.Y t .<..ซ.. .;. : . . , . .< - .'j^.Jป,7 LJ . ...-1 l.'-.L >Jii., tl*
N..31C'i! i(i i.ฃC'TL:.'D IN L1 1XTT/ .>,ซ Vlu^HiJ/.t li-,c SITS
;;.',$ C'"- ""jij-.Y sn.rcTi-s r ; i,isic. ;ฃD so IV;\T IT KT$
ivi. ' f!7.!j,Y : :;'.;T, IT is ITCVTSD IN CLAY-U;^ sosu
is r..:.. ;:;< Y c : ::.).. u;c,Y.a:) /' ^Y pr^-i A HIG^Y PC?I]UTED
/.'ciA /',,;3 f ., slti f/ปl !ซ-i3 bY i.u\ii.^ r LซRฃj^v, ijd.,ซ
-------
GxuuAi. CHANT -.V:-DS
Tiae ri-
% A.
,
t ^ f, ~ .. J
ฃ-0,030
$ 24C.CCO
23,500
30,525
42,920
12 Months
12 Months
Budget Period
18 Months
Budget Period
1C iv.5.iths
Bvdget Period
1C
-------
1, DEFINE i,r',.--i CONSTITUTES A
2, DEVELOP /, I;;;.USTRIAL WASTE
5, CLASSIFYING livjvoo'js
AND DESIGNATING V.HICH
FE
-J BE
6, DE\'ELC;3 PLAM FOR EMERGENCY
SITUATIONS
7, DZTEP.VII;:E NEED FON STATE
C/^JED U'^r DISPOSAL SITES
8, EVELCD i; .'ENTORY OF I;ON-
S DISPOSAL PRACTICES
-------
ST-TF
- ' ' ' " " m -..-'..-(
r-(|___ B | _.(r_
MM*.")
a.-i;>:- '3-01-0
PU"::.:MV.\?>IA
;.'i \ ;:. ' MT n
;. i_""v.'..;.. -' U.i. u
te-QL-0
IrAt-'yYi ' AV'n
i, L_UvJ.^V.:. vJ.L U
A
YES
YES
. YES
YES
yro
^
G/23
8/7
10/18
9/27 .
6/19
8/15
C
7/9?
7/22
7/22
D
7/31
10/24
10/7
7/15
" 8/22
E
11/25
11/25
PRELIM,
1/3/75
8/5
pPPER^
^
_f
12/10
-i
- 1/10/75
8/12 .
i
DISTRICT e:-~ COLL;:BIA
.',| _/ \'\.': ..I j_l 1 ] _[ "l
NO F.UT
RE REV ID'/
7/17
_
7/22
12/30
1/20/75
i!
D - kEcio;:ALKrr'SEivT..(i!/1Z',Ri:G!is HASTE)
L ~ :\1T X._ i'ji\i iED TO ''(EGIONAL UEFICE
;~ FOR PRULKIIKARY PROPOSAL F - APPLICATION RP/IEV/ED AJID NEIIT TO >./>J)
G - A-PLICATIOM /APPROVED A:O btfif T: ' "P:EE
1! - APPLICATION KETUR;;ED WITH UR/VJIEE'S SIC::ATURE
I - FIRST PAYMENT HADE
11/7
?/'' / "/T;"i
// j-/ / ^* !
i
i
-------
MHtSiL'T r.:;';..:
LU i L
i . . i . > .
HAH .-::.-3
2,
3,
LAV;
5,
6,
7,
8,
D:V: _c? PL;:! For. E;-;E;RG:;;CY
SITL JIG:;S
rr -..Tii- ;'~rri co!
DJI 1 1- 'i!;-,;~. i.__L-J i >-.v
rv\ *::--. | i"~) ]>; Q- ";.:.'! ", TT'~S
V'M] Al __ J 1_J w <-J -L'.lv. V-^J ^^- *-'* I ^
DEVE .0? Hs\7N7C7Y C.:v :J''i~
!I\Z/. DCU3 DJSrOfAL f"~ .C7ICFS
-------
!;r.'v.;v.^j;;; \- :,;-] srjr.
52
k II ,'
f'j-'jS- rj^A *
IV t!
n~2S-74
-------
I,
V,
-------
IB:. JCALJ
A, COLKIS AND Ha',":! 37 1C f:0!JTIi -3,
1, PlTmtJRG-1, Frt,
2. IJASHINGTCXv, I), C,
3, UA-.CR rtftiu TCV^JP, Fft,
B, PROYlDIN-3 TEtYiNICAL BFHRTITE TO GTKIR FEEERAL AGS^CIES IN SOLID WASTE
1 !V.^ .'5 r'i it ? ''. ' (--"ir*. '-TO c,r'~j
.It Uv. I ;,t;.ui.;- ; --.. ^.,.-^,10 rx 1
LOi Lii% ^ i , ',ซ }
2, TV,', AHC, F-?.\ cc^DirAitT) Fi^iK3 VENTL^S (LB^
;;CL L^VELC :-, V^T ivi silver.),
3, REVIEW E.I.S,
C, \'.T"IC-.^L FEC'rrja FACILITIES SECTION IN IMPLEMENTING E,0,
U/^ A;;D u3 CiftcuLAs A-i05.
1. FORT STO^Y.. VA,
2, Rft.D?o;tD AHHY A'^JNITION PL/^rr^ VA,
-------
!-x> ..:?
Pff(.
ff^j \A!
' * ^
ฅ
A-
i~*
*ป*'?
/'I
/
>
-------
URc
f J
V--
1
I
1
1
& CO
f f'
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Report of State and Regional Activities in Solid DATE: February 19, 1975
Waste Management
4A (Regional Administrator)
Mr. Roger Strelow, Assistant Administrator for Air and Waste Management,
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D. C. 20460
SUMMARY
Attached is a Summary of Regional Solid Waste Management Activities
as requested by the OSWMP letter of January 3, 1975 and a state by
state summary addressing the topics requested in your letter of
December 23, 1974. Also included is a copy of each Region IV
State Hazardous Waste Management Profile for your information.
ACTION
None
BACKGROUND
Your letter of December 23, 1974 and OSWMP's letter of January 3,
1975.
fck E. Ravan
S
Attachments
-------
REGION IV
SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES IN SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
The status of hazardous waste management in the states in
Region IV is documented by the attached Hazardous Waste
Profiles. Each state has solid waste management regulations
issued and these are used in varying degrees to control other
residuals.
The outputs in the Regional Guidance and Program Plan for
Region IV have the following status:
Output l(a) - Resource Recovery facilities are under
construction in Nashville, TN and
Charleston, SC (2 of 3 projected).
Output l(b) - Resource Recovery systems in operation
(14 of 15 mainly paper, some may have
stopped due to market).
Output 2(a) - Seven states are reported as having some
formal recognition of the problem and actively
exercising some control over hazardous wastes.
This means, generally, that the generator or
hauler has to ask for permission of some sort.
From whence comes the phrase "on a case-by-case
basis." The states do not specifically segregate
public sites. Some states segregate private sites.
Most states are reluctant to start a real campaign
for a hazardous waste management law which they
suspect will be pre-empted by Federal legislation
soon.
Output 2(b) - Centers with acceptable facility/site (2 of 6).
The ambiguity of this output is such that the
quantity value is meaningless.
Output 2(c) - Percent of population served by sites in compliance
(74 projected 70). The majority of the work in
this area remaining to be done is in Florida,,
Kentucky and Mississippi.
Regional enforcement actions presently active are:
17 each active cases
2 each administrators orders issued
1 each case referred to U.S. Attorney
During the first two quarters of FY 75, ten new cases have been
initiated.
The Region has met with regional representatives from the
-------
-2-
Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration to
work out proper coordination for condemned foodstuffs, drugs, etc.
disposal.
A memorandum of coordination procedures has been drafted between
the Air and Hazardous Materials Division and the Water Division to
lay out procedures and facilitate coordination of proper disposal
of wastewater treatment plant sludges, water treatment plant
sludges and planning activities related to such. Continuous
coordination will be maintained in Region IV for maximum interface
so as to use the Clean Air Act, the 1972 Water Pollution Control
amendments and the 1974 Drinking Water Law to promote acceptable
and safe waste management which will protect public health and
welfare the the environment.
-------
FY 75
r-U-ij f.i.Mg, jiucgot ar,d Proqran Activities
A. P{-.rjiv..i < :r. : 5
r<. State.- ^j. rlr*: ฃ66,993
r.PA Gv:iju. >'.0 , 0_U_0 (planning grant)
?B6,yO"3"
G. Prog?: . i /-.ctivir-ios
.1. Tcv'l';1 ic'l assistance (incluclo;: surveiJ !l v>nce,
l-r.-iijii.jig, iTispection and evaivjation, public
n, and cjencral acs. is Lance) .
x. Prov.i dc af.ni.stancp. in disposing of pesticodes
air."! )i:'.r--:nt notivitieB as IGRT. harsh efforts
fail.
Slate Lsgislotive Developments
A Legislature meets, every other year. Legislation
to be f.-.ubwitted tlsis year for a nev; solid war- to
act to clarify intent and obligation of parts of
present lav.'. Other minor pieces of legislation
are exr.v'-cte.i to be introduced.
F -Lor cement 'u:tivities
]\ Enforccnont ut^i'/ing state attorney general's
office- is usual!;: a last resort effort. State
Health Dcpartr-.r.T.t. issues warnings and holds
he a ri ;'].' :-*s nn interr;odic-te step hotvoen
uLi .Li"..ii"-ij attorney general's office and fieJd
ini;poc'-.:i on, evaluation and assistance effort, s.
Unuoual or Jnlcinsting State Projects
7\. Acli.i cvi i:<_; r'lli.-i'-'j.t ' r-oi i.d \vcปstc; collection and
dir:po:;'il i ''>'-: the citi;. .-ns of Alab;;r.ia and ti-o.
protoc; Ion Ou pnblac health and welfare. Although
-------
-2-
such activities may not bo as glamorous as some of
i. he resource recovery schemes, the program has
.T efrainod from promoting ersatz solutions.
Thirty-nine, county-wide, house-to-house collection
.nysto;n;;, nineteen county container .systems,- and
one cc\vb:-nation are in operation. Eight counties
do not have a county collection system. State
consider.'; 96% of the population is receiving
adequate collection. Eighty-nine percent of the
popu 1 a U:; >'>n is served by state-approved sanitary
landfills meeting at least minimum standards.
State Fundinq
A. Amount provided: State $66,993
EPA 20,000 (planning grant)
$86,993"
B. Specific Results to be Accomplished
1. Utilise enforcement provisions of existing
regulations to bring legal action against
continuing violation of regulations.
2. Implement provisions of state's interim rules
and regulations for disposal of pesticides,
pesticide containers and other hazardous arid
toxic wastes, and identify major generators
of such wastes and present methods of disposal
or processing.
3. Develop competence in the field of hazardous
and toxic wastes to adequately respond to
requests for assistance on special disposal
prob i.ems.
4. Increase the awareness of solid waste handling
and supervisor/ personnel in the safety problems
involved in solid waste management, and reduce
the high incidence of accidents in this industry.
5. Develop increased capability to offer technical
assistance and instruction, provide surveillance
and maintain and improve competence of solid
waste supervisors and equipment operators.
6, Throuqh technical assistance and instruction
incro.tse the nunber of solid waste disposal
operations in full compliance from the present
44?> to 807. of total operations.
-------
Assori.snent of Sfate's Per .tor mancc of the Work that
Uti.l'i'/.od Federal Funds
1. C-;r:int was a1,-proved as of October 1, 1974 and.
.Si. tie was later not! Tied. Recruitment of
i'.cnviduul v,>as completed on January 1, 1975.
2. < i.'.'roemc:,1'! t Action b.Bought to successful
co.: c i i '\ s i o;; .1; i \\ashi n c; i. cj n C o u n -'cy. County
v,c...,' )neet.ij;;) le Couaty and preliminary action
4. Ot'-j.r/ objectives are cither a continuing action
o r a r e b e i r >. g initiate d .
D. cloin"; -,- '..o on the Relevancy and Effectiveness of the
Guic -i ;'.:ซ.: Document to the StcJ te Program
1. Created "little or no effect on basic goals of
ฃ!-,- to prccrra.a.
-------
py 75
t
!-. (.-.I j r ing, l:u:';:u:t and Program Activities
/.. Positions: 17
);. BudgeL: $244,000
C. Pi ogre:,;, Activities:
1 . PI ajj-'-jj :;g
(a) >'rogrsrn development
(b) Legislation
(c) Regulations
(d) State plan updating
2, Lisiron
(a) State agencies
(b) Federal agencies
(c) FDPC HQs and FDPC Regions
3, Technical Assistance (All Aspects of Program)
(a) Local programs
(b) Consultants
(c) Rogion.il planning councils
(d ) Comnmni t j os
4. Inspection
5. Permitting
6. Enforcement (See Section III)
-------
II. State Legislative Developments
The Florida Resource Recovery and Management Act
was passed July 1, 1974. A nov rule pursuant thereto
(Chapter 17-7) was adopted effective October 1, 1974.
"Chapter- 37-7" provides, in'part, for use of milled
refuse without daily cover if 70" of the v?aste can pass
i hrouch a 3--inch screen. Final cover required for
r ill--:: ills is one (1) foot.
tit. State J:;nfore::iv:e.nt Activities
ecj-v.Mt is initiated _as inspections and complaints
dictate. Aci. ' vi ty through the first half of FY 75 is
s uii'n : ic; r .i z c : d a s foil ow s :
1. Site Inspections 758
2. Sites Properly Closed " 163
3. Inventory Forms Completed 95
4. Counties \/ith Inventory Completed 49 of 67
(ircluderj compliance schedules)
5. Conference!; with Local Supervisors - 278 ..
6. Conferences with Local Programs 91
7. Keetingi; \vith County Commissioners or 134
City Councils
0. Solid Wa::/U: Meetings' Attended 75
S. Site Approvals Issued 80
10. Sites Qualified for Approval 105
11. Letters of Notice 72
12. Warning Notices 18
13. Pro-enforcement Summaries ' 4
14. Notices and Orders 6
15. Cases .Sett' led Without Court Action 3
16. Suits Filed 4
17. S u .its Settled 4
18. Solid Waste Mileage 45,783
IV. 'Unusual or Interesting Slate Projects
1. FDPC is developing "Resource Recovery and Management
Program." Communities will have two years to develop
plans in accordance w.i. th the program.
/. The Florida Resource Recovery and Management Act
authorises the appointment of a 13-member Advisory
Council with a staff of four. The Council will
work primarily on resource .and/or eno;rgy recovery,
Findings and recommendations are required by lav,7
to be submitted periodically to the Governor and
tli e 1 eg i s 1 \ t u r e .
3. The City of Tallahassee is considering heat recovery
incj i cr>:ti ,)ii in conjunction v;ith FSU, Florida A.^M
and i lie :>r ;te Capitol Complex.
-------
4. Metro Hade County has solicited, and received bids
for an overall re'source recovery facility. They
are presently evaluating the proposals received.
5. Fort LauderdaJe has a proposal (20-year contract)
from Environment Resources Corporation, Darien,
CT, 1 o handle the City's v.;aste in a resource
recoxcry facility. The process would separate
the LC-.SL cellulose fiber for use in the paper
.industry, the remainder to be used for some sort
of fi.ol. Metals recovery would be included.
6. The new Act provides that the Florida Department
of General Services will collect and recycle all
wast : paper from State offices. FDPC is working in
coop-ration with FDGS on this, using Tallahassee as
a pr/ol c.ity.
7, The City of St. Petersburg implemented "Operation
Responsible," resulting in a dramatic reduction
in their accident rate among collectors.
8. The: University of Florida has conducted K&D on
accelerating the growth of pine seedlings using
compost from the>. Gainesville/FPA Demonstration
Compost Plant. More recently they used milled
refuse on .111 experimental basis. On a test
plot over 'i period of IB months, "control seed-
lings'1 without compost grew 18-24 inches, while
"experimental seedlings" with compost grew 6-7
feet.
9. Shredding with.mill-fill is being done at Pompano
Beach (V^aste Management, Inc.) and is planned by
Brevard County.
V. Si:ate Funding
A. Amount Provided: $100,000 over FY 74-75
$ 40,000 FY 74, $60,000 FY 75
B. Specific Results to be Accomplished
1. To bring up to acceptable standards all solid
waste disposal facilities as soon as possible.
(a) Surveillance/Inspection
(b) Permitting
(c) Enforcement
-------
-4-- '
L
(d) Dump closures
f
(e) Technical assistance
2, "Public Involvement: Liaison will bo initiated
and continued with Jocal public officials
charged with the responsibility of supervising
solid -was le facilities, local and regional
planning agencies as they develop and imple-
ment sound solid waste management plans,
related and involved state agencies, private
collection and disposal companies, civic
organisations and others having a sincere
desire-^, to assist in the improvement of our
environment through proper solid waste
management pjracticcs .
C. Assessment of State's Performance of the Work that
iL'.ed Federal Funds
paes performance has been excellent. Federal
funds allowed expansion of field operations which
had a tremendous impact, particularly in the
j_i i ^ P'CJ o L- j_ O;.: / '-/i i ..- O'-L~C erne] i c , ce Ci .ill -.. c a j_ assistance area.
(Sec Section III for statistics) . Also the State
is rur-i];ing a strong move in the resource recovery
effort c\s evidenced by their planning/liaison
activities on the Resource Recovery and Management
Advisory Council; this activity would have been
severely hampered without the additional personnel
afforded by the grant funds.
D. Comments on the Relevancy and Effectiveness of the
Guidance Document to the State Program
Guidance, largely coincided with state activity,
but did not affect the determination of program
act:i vity areas .
-------
GEORGIA
FY 75
.C. Staffing, Budget and Program Activities
A. Positions: 35
B. S tcto Funds: $2,000,000 (St at e Cra n t Ai d Prog ra m)
Stat-e Funds: 577,000 (Operational Funds)
EPA Grant 100,00_0 (Demonstration - Continuation)
$2,6T7TO"00
C. Program Activities
1. Technical assistance and state plan maintenance.
a. Guidelines for hazardous waste, hospital
waste and latex waste.
b. Assistance to political jurisdiction
through grant-in-aid program.
c. Public affairs and data center.
d. Resource (materials and energy) recovery.
e. Survey to update state plan.
2. Enforcement
a. Continuing surveillance and evaluation of
disposal operations.
b. Consultation and warning of offenders,
c. Legal referral to State /Attorney General's
office.
3. Training courses at various locations throughout
the State, one about every six weeks.
4. Hazardous waste disposal and processing
Channeling such waste to acceptable si_es or
processors. Conducting survey of generators
on a chemical-industry basis.
i;j-. State Loui^lalive Developments
A. Legislature now is session and no direct major
solid \-!i)C, to action is anticipated. Some type
-------
of bill encouraging resource recovery may be
introduced. Present law forbids governmental
ent.i Lies from entering into contracts beyond
one; year with private industry. Some legisla-
tioi: allowing such is scheduled to be introduced.
III. Enforcement Activities
A. FY 74
Evaluation of known sites: 684
Location of previously unknown sites: 150
Consultation \vith local officials: 368
Legal reconsultation: 51
Letters of notification: 97
Legal orders issued: 7
B. Results
Dumps closed: 55
New sanitary landfills begun: 24
Sanitary landfills in planning stage: 50
Dumps converted to sanitary landfills: 80
IV. Unusual or Interesting State Projects
A. h pilot paper recycling project was initiated in
the Atlanta office to measure the amount of
recyclable waste paper available and revenue
produced resulted in a proposal to the Georgia
Building Authority to recycle all waste paper
generated in State Office buildings. The
Governor endorsed their proposal and the program
is operational.
V. State Funding
A. Amount Provided
State Funds: .$2,000,000 (State Grant Aid Program)
State Funds: 577,000 (Operational Funds)
EPA Grant: 100,OOP (Demonstration - Continuation)
$2,677,000"
B. Specific Results to be Accomplished
1. Semiannual inspection of 500 disposal sites.
2. Locating 100 previously unknown disposal sites.
3. Consultations concerning 295 disposal sites.
-------
3
4. Locja.l 'action concerning 115 disposal sites.
5. Approval of 60 disposal sites for receiving
hazardous weiste-
;
6. Assistance in initiating 'or upgrading 50
collection systems.
7. Preparation or publication of new laws,
regulations, guidelines and solid waste
reports .
C. Assessment of States Performance of Work that
Utilized Federal Funds.
1. Continuation of grant was approved and awarded
at the end of October 1974, giving a three
month delay. This delay slowed activities
during first quarter of FY 75. However, the
following was accomplished. Refer to specific
results - V,B
V,B,1 - G84
V,Bf 2 - 150
V , B , 3 - 368
V,B,4 -- 155
V,B,5 - 12 (approved sites, processors, and
sites pending approval)
V,B,6 - Continuing Operation
V,B,7 - Continuing Operation
D. Comments on the Relevancy and Effectiveness of the
Guidance Document to the State Program.
1. The pre-established state program priorities
were consistent with the subject strategy
document .
-------
KENTUCKY
FY 75
I. Staffing, Budget and Program Activities
A. Positions: 25 (Includes 4 positions to be
filled in FY 75.) (This is
for Division of Solid Waste.)
B. State ]'iii-ids: $443,800 (Division of Solid Waste)
EPA Grant 60,000 (Demonstration, Division
of SpeciaJ Programs)
State /hatching 6_0_,_0p_0_+(Division of Special Programs)
$563,800
C. Program Activities
(1) Division of Solid Waste
a. Lc.nd Di.sposcil -(includes surveillance,
technical assistance, plan approval
permit issuance, etc.)
h. P,r\forcempnt (See Section III) .
c. Source reduction and resource recovery
(primarily work with communities consid-
ering such action and grant activities
in Division of Special Programs).
d. Hazardous waste management (implementing
new lav; requiring permits for collecting,
transporting and disposing hazardous
waste).
e. Training and public affairs.
II. State Legislative Developments
a. State legislature does not me'et in 1975.
III. Enforcement Activities
a . This .i s a continuing activity which is strongly
related to surveillance and technical assistance
efforts. During FY 74:
24 dumps closed
4 dui;:;.'H converted to sanitary landfills
4 dumps had action pending
118 specific inspection or meetings on 42
enforcement cases
-------
-2-
IV, Unusual or Interesting Projects
a. EF7\ "rant under Section V.
b. In 1(174 KRS 224.890 was enacted and provides
that no person engaged in collection, hauling,
and disposal oil hazardous wastes on a seasonal
or continuing basis shall dump at any permitted
or u.,permitted disposal facility without first
obtaining a permit from the Department for
Natu:al Resources and Environmental Protection.
Hazardous waste id defined as, "any substance
or combination of substances, the depositions
of which may create a threat to public health
or to 'animal and aquatic life forms." Regulation
and implementation of this law is now underway-
V. State Funding
a. Amount provided
(1) State Funds: $443,800 (Division of Solid Waste!
EPA Grant: 60,000 (Demonstration, Division
of Special Programs)
State Matching: 60,000+(Division of Special
Programs)
$563,800
b. Specific Results to be Accomplished
(1) Ultimate, purpose of the project is to improve
the overall solid waste program in the State
by recovering as many junked automobiles as
possible on a state-wide basis.
1 (2) Objectives summarized:
o Determine need for adequate legislation
and prepare and recommend needs.
9
o Improve? health conditions by removing the
jinked and abandoned automobiles whicr.
become or are dump areas for most other
tipes of waste. Dump areas to be eliminated
as automobile hulks are removed thereby
eliminating breeding environment and
harborage for vectors.
, o Recycle a valuable resource.
o Eliminate causes of water pollution fro;r.
junked automobile, areas.
-------
-3-
o Carry cut the foregoing in fifteen (15)
counties throughout the State with a
recovery rate of 3000 automobiles per
month in cooperation v.'ith the Division
of So3..id Waste? as both divisions concen-
trate their efforts to achieve adequate
and ongoing solid waste management
systems in the primary project areas.
o Preparation of a final report.
(3) The Division of .Solid Waste will participate
in the project through technical assistance
and in an advisory capacity. This grant to
the Division of Special Programs provides
for Division of Solid Waste personnel to
concentrate a more intensive effort in an
unplanned for, but legislatively required,
hazardous waste permitting program.
C. Assessment of States Performance of the Work
That. Utilized Federal Funds.
(1) Grant was approved to commence on 1/1/75
and no specific results reported to date.
D. Comments on the Relevancy and Effectiveness of
the Guidance Document to the State Program.
(1) Effect on state program minor. Relevancy
only when it corresponded with present
program priorities.
-------
MISSISSIPPI
Staffing, Budget and Program Activities
Staff:
Budget
Activities
6 full time, 3 part time
$105,612
Hazardous Waste Survey
Training for Operators
Regular Inspections of Existing Sites
Site Approval for Proposed Site
Enforcement with EPA Assistance
New Law and Regulations Passed
Legislative Developments
During 1974, the State legislature passed the MS Solid
Waste Dispose 1 Law of 1974 with subsequent approval of
regulations <-;uthorized under the Law.
Enforcement Activities
The State has requested enforcement assistance or the
threat of it on several occasions (Gulfport, Biloxi,
Jackson, Meridian Naval Air Station).
Unusual or Interesting Projects
Statewide hazardous waste survey is being conducted.
State personnel have conducted hazardous waste disposal
experiments. It is expected that at least one site will
be included in the HQs leachate monitoring project. The
State had to dispose of several million contaminated
chickens during a short period of time.
Funding
a, $35,000
b. Completion of comprehensive hazardous waste
survey-
c. To date the State has performed satisfactorily
under the grant arrangement. Progress has been
slower than anticipated because of initial
reluctance on the part of industry.
d. The State has shown an interest in more effectively
managing its residuals especially in the hazardoas'
wastes field. With its new legislative and regula-
tory authority, the State can be expected to take
a more vigorous role in residuals management.
Although resource recovery is of concern to the
State and because of a limited staff, the more
pressing problem of hazardous waste management
has taken precedence.
-------
^ORTH CAROLINA
1. Staffing, Budget and Program Activities
Staff - 14 -(3 BQ, 1 Secretary, 7 Regional,
3 Vector Control)
Budget - $191,418
Activities - Development of County Solid Waste Plans
Establishment of County Sites
Site Approval for Proposed Sites
Resource Recovery Bill Drafted
Regular Inspection of Existing Sites
Finalization of State Plan
2. Legislative Developments
During the 1974 General Assembly, a Resource Recovery
Bill and Dottle Legislation Bill were introduced, but
both failed to pass. The General Assembly did pass a
bil1 giving the NC Department of Transportation
authority to collect junked automobiles. A bill
authorizing placement of waste containers ori highway
rights-of-way was passed.
3. Erforcement Activities
The State conducts its own enforcement activities and
neither seeks nor desires any Federal assistance,
4. Unusual or Interesting Projects
Weyerhauser is building a waste paper house adjacent to
the City of Raleigh's landfill and evenually plans to
build a $22 million paper recycling plant in the State.
The City of Clarlotte is using the infield area of the
Charlotte Motor Speedway as a sanitary landfill site
with good success.
5. Funding
a. $0 ($20,000 allotted)
b. -
c.
As far as can be determined, the FY 75 guidance
document has had little o.r no impact on State
policies or priorities- Some limited work has
been aimod -it the promotion of resource recovery,
but the qr.' :~tion of hazardous wastes management
has reccivo ' no real attention other than problem
rec jqniti oi:.
-------
SOUTH CAP.OLIN7
FY 75
Staffing, Budget and Program Activities ?
A. Positions: 24
B. Budget: $309,GG5
C. Program Activities:
1. Design Review
2. Permitting
(a) Domestic and industrial landfills
(b) Waste collectors (primarily private haulers
of industrial v?aste)
(c) Shredder.s
3. Inspection
(a) Open dumps
(b) Closed dumps
(c) Domestic disposal sites
(d) Industrial disposal sites
(e) Industrial management systems
(f) Groundwator monitoring
(g) Grc en box systems
4. Enforcement
(a) Domestic and industrial sites
(b) Procedures
(1) Inspection reports
(2) Registered letter
(3) Magistrate's court action
(4) Followup
-------
5, Training
(a) Operators
(b) So.1 id waste officers *
(c) Vector control personnel
(d) Public information
6 . T e c h n i c a .1 Ass i s t & i; c e
(a) M u n i c i p a 1 s y stems
(b)' Indu.strial systems
(c) Hazardous v,7aste disposal
(d) Initiating resource recovery projects
7. Planning/State Plan Update
II. State Legislative Developments
A. The State solid waste agency is developing legislation
on hazardous waste management and plans to introduce
it in 1975.
B. The Board approved "Solid Waste Management Rules
and Regulations for the Disposal of Waste Pesti-
cides and Pesticide Containers" on January 14, 1975.
III. State Enforcement /activities
See Section I.C.^. Enforcement is initiated as
in.".poetions and corr.pln i nl s dictate. Legal support is
provided through counsel. (Mujoged by the Hoard and
through assistance from the Office of the Attorney
Go n era.I.
IV. Unusual or Interesting State Projects
1. Rules and regulations governing milled or shredded
refuse disposal sites were adopted in February 1973.
2. Four counties now operate shredders.
3. Artificial coastal reefs have been made from old
auto tires to stimulate sport fishing.
-------
4. Greenville County has applied for a Chemical Waste
iandfil.1 Demonstration Grant. The project area is
Hreenviile County and Cpartanburg County.
5. /vbout 500,000 tires were shipped from Charleston,
SC to MG for recycling. The effort solved a
severe mosquito infestation problem.
6. Technical assi.stance was provided in disposal of
hazardous wastes from two separate chemical ware-
house fires (Kings tree and Charleston) .
V - S t a t e fund:, n g
A. .Amount -Provided: Grant covers two years (FY 74 and
FY 75) at $60,000 per year, $120,000 total.
B. Specific Results to be Accomplished
1, Surveillance: Inspection of open dumps and
permitted disposal sites once per month.
Evaluate and designate hazardous waste sites
by type of waste to be accepted.
2, Enforcement: State regulations will be enforced
by inspections, notifications by registered mail,
and court actions.
3. Technical Assistance: Throughout inspection and
enforcement, technical assistance will be pro-
vided to liel.p bring facilities into compliance.
Technical assistance will also be furnished on
request and in conjunction with complaints.
Schools and seminars will be held from time to
time.
4. Public Inform.ition and Involvement: Liaison
will be continued with public officials
responsible for supervision'of solid waste
facilities and involved State agencies,
private firms, and others interested in
improving solid waste management. Educational
materials will be disseminated, news releases
made, and presentations given.
C. Assessment of State's Performance of Work that
Utilized Federal Funds
Federal funding was directly responsible for
increased manpower allowing expansion and emphasis
in program activities. The table below shows this
'effect in grant, years (FY 74-75) versus the previous
-------
year (FY 73). Particular areas where the grant
impacted most are indicated by asterick (*).
f FY 75
FY 7_3 FY 74 Projected
No. dump5; closed 115 72 350
No. J.nsp,, domes, d.isp. facil. - 513 1058 1200
'No. Insp. in i.. disp. fac. 0 250 500
'No. m^rr-hrs, pubJ ic info sessions 0 210 240
Ko. Man-hrs, train j.mj operators and 144 774 5'00
sw officers
No. vector control projects undertaken 0 85 50
Ko. trainee';, vector control 0 17 4
i\'o, r.vcyelJ ng projects initiated 0 0 10
''Ko, industries .inspected 0 594 275
N o. co]. 1 e c t o r s p e r; n .i 11 e d 0080
D. Comments on tlie Relevancy and ]"ffectiveness of the
Guidance Document to the State Program
Guidance largely coincided with state activity,
but did not affect the determination of program
activity areas.
-------
TENNESSEE
FY 75
I. .Staff. :mg, Budget and Program Activities f
A. Positions: 16
B. Budget: $333,040
1 C. I'.rogroia Activities :
1. Site evaluation and geological investigation
2. Revicv,' feasibility studies.
3. Review design/construction plans.
4, Registration of facilities.
5. Solid Waste Grant Program.
6. Resource Recovery Program
(a) Regulation development
(b) Plan of action
(c) Administration of loan program
7. Hazardous Waste Program
(a) Regulation of "special wastes."
(b) Draft new Inw.
(c) Surveys .md reports.
8. Enforcement (See Section III.)
S. Training
(a) Operators
(b) Public officials
(c) Staff
10. Technical Assistance (all program aspects)
11. Planning/State Plan Update.
-------
I. State Legislative Developments
A, The State solid waste agency is seeking amendments
as follows:
J. Change the definition of "processing" to cover
resource recovery. This would then allow regu-
lation of resource recovery operations.
2. Change the definition of "person" to exclude
corporations. This would eillow regulation of
industries disposing of waste on their own
property who are presently avoiding regulation
as "persons" disposing on their own land.
3. The Stcite solid waste agency has drafted a
hazardous waste management bill but doesn't expect
the Administration to introduce it this session.
o
B. The Governor's office plans to introduce a "Bottle
Bill."
C. The State solid waste agency is working with the TML
to draft a bill that would have the following
purposes:
1. Codify municipal authorities related to solid
wciste in one document.
2. Establisl a Resource Recovery Advisory Committee
to provic e recommendations regarding the imple-
inentatioi of resource recovery in Tennessee,
particul; rly with respect to TVA. The Committee
would ha- e broad representation, i.e., city,
county, :ndustry and waste management industry.
'] . Slate Enforcement Activitio:;
Enforcement is initiated as inspections and complaints
dictate. Legal support i.s provided through counsel avail-
' able to the Burecu of Environmental Health Services. Th
one; attorney assisting solid waste must serve the three
division's of the I ureau
A summary of FY 75 activity is as follows:
Inspections 321
Headquarters Investigations 36
Wa rni ng Le 11 e r s 27
C o: i m i r. s i o n o r ' s 0 r d o r s 4
Lav; Suits 4
Conferences and Informal Hearings 36
e
-------
V. "Unvi.'.ri,:! or Interesting State Projects
/. Stote Grants $3 million for FY 75
I. State Y^osource Recovery Loans $10 million bond limit,
C, NV.nhvil.lo Thermal Transfer Corporation.
D. I'.'l^ns for lioat recovery incinerator at Lewisburg.
E. W.'soteplex, Tnc.; Burnposs Cove
1 c Incineration of. Hazardous Wastes
?., Plan nod Hazardous Waste Landfill
P. Solid WasLc Disposalf Inc.; Newbern Incineration of
Hr-; '/^ardous Vias tos
(]. TVA
.1. Povjor Boilers; wastes as fuel
2. Pyrolysis for hazardous wastes
3, UT; conversion of tires chemically to gas and
oil
H. Large-scslc recycling of textile waste by Steiner-Liff,
Nashville
] . Hazardous Waste Seminar'; Nashville, April 2-3
J'". State solic waste agency has applied for Chemical
Waste Landjill DemonsLrntion Grant. Project are^i
centered .'it Chattanooga.
V, StaIo Funding
. A. Amoun; Pro^'lded: $40,000
B. Specific Results to be Accomplished
1. Work to have 100ฐ6 of the state's population using
registered solid waste facilities and the proper
closure of all unapproved facilities.
2. To have all processing and disposal facilities
operating efficiently and in compliance with
regulations.
-------
.-4-
3. Establish a state resource recovery program
and encourage the u:.;e of economical and
technically feasible resource recovery systems
throughout the State.
.4. Estab.1 ish effective control of the disposal of
hazardous and toxic waste within the State.
C. Assesrii'ient of State's Performance of the Work that
Utilized Federal Funds
The project period started January 1, 1975, and
since then the Governor has had all positions frozen.
Thus, the positions to be established with Federal
funds hi-ve not yot been created nor personnel hired.
It is understood further information regarding the
estab.'U r.bincnt of these positions should be forth-
coming in early February.
D. Po/iiraents on the Relevancy and Effectiveness of the
Guidance Document to the State Program.
Guidance lci.rge.ly coincided with State activity,
but did not affect the determination of program
activity areas.
-------
REGION V
1. Review of State staffing, budget and program activities:
State staffing and budget are fairly well indexed in the January 1975
Waste Age magazine. The figures may not reflect the latest budget cuts
or hiring freezes, but certainly show the relative commitments made by the
States in Region V. Program activities vary as follows:
Illinois: Engaged primarily in enforcing new regulations effective
July 1974 which deleted the "grandfather clause" protecting older
landfills from permit requirements.
Indiana: Writing operating permits for older sites as per new
August 1974 regulations. Designating certain sites for the disposal
of pesticides and industrial waste.
Michigan: Closing open dumps and getting new landfills started.
Budget cut? prevent any new activities.
Minnesota: Closing open dumps and enforcing new regulations which
tighten landfill requirements.
Ohio: Awaiting new Governor's decisions on environmental activities
and draftee legislation which includes resource recovery, hazardous material
control, ai d a tightening of conventional waste disposal requirements.
Wisconsin: Reviewing plans on older landfills in accordance with new
regulations and closing open dumps and poor older sites.
2. State Legislative Developments
Illinc is: Has legislative authority to control hazardous materials.
Has bending authority for resource recovery but needs a State plan.
Planning responsibility rests with the Illinois Institute for Env:'onmental
Quality not with the State regulatory agency.
Indiana: Has a new haulers regulatory role but not able to implement
due to lack of funds.
Michiuan: Has a new resource recovery bill but funds have not been
appropriated to enact it.
Ohio: Drafted new legislation awaiting Governor's decision.
Minnesota: Has given grants to counties to plan for resource recovery
and is now awaiting i he results of the planning. Has regulatory authority
for hazardous materials.
-------
REGION V con't.
Wisconsin: Recycling Authority trying to get first project planned with
the aid of Federal funds.
3. itate Enforcement Activities
This is a major effort for all Region V States. They all have
maturing programs which are now in an enforcement stage. The closing
of open dumps and marginal sites while aiding in the selection of good
new sites are the primary activities of all the States.
4. Unusual or interesting State projects
Illinois - Started enforcement proceedings against forty older sites.
Minnesota - 1.5 million resource recovery planning grant program.
Uisconsin - Planning first resource recovery project.
Illinois, M'nnesota, Ohio and Wayne county have submitted chemical
landfill grant duplications.
-------
REGION V
1. Amounts provided to the States:
Illinois $ 50,000 - 2 Yr.
Indiana 25,000
Miciiigan 25,000
Mini esota 25,000
Ohio 25,000
Wisconsin 31,250 + $75,000 Resource Recovery Planning.
2. Specific outputs that the State agencies were committed to accomplish with
Federal funds:
Ohio
I. Update and expand previous industrial waste surveys.
2. Develop agency policy for the disposal of hazardous waste.
3. Prepare regulations for the disposal of hazardous waste.
Illinois - See attached excerpt from narrative statement accompanying
gran; application.
Indiana - Ditto .
Michigan - Ditto .
Minnesota - DiUo.
Wisconsin Ditt<> .
3. Assessment of Slate's Performance
Grants to ;he Staces were made in the Fall of 1974. The fir;-, juint
progress meetin) was h?ld at the end of 1974 after efforts in developing a
hazardous mater als program had just begun. Performance was difficult to
measure since s .aff haj to be hired or reassigned and become familiar with
the problem of I'azardojs materials. With the exception of Michigan, all
the States now lave at least one person working full time on developing a
hazardous material program. This staff is now drafting legislation,
regulations, or policy statements as appropriate.
Considering that in most States no one was working on developing a
hazardous material program six months ago, performance has been excellent
in surfacing the probl m both to the State agency and Industry. The
remaining year end a h'.lf of this Federally funded project should result in
-------
REGION V con't.
the States obtaining the necessary regulatory authority and implementing a
hazardous material control program. Progress in this area has been slowed
somewhat because three States prepared an application for the chemical
landfill grant. This effort is not necessarily counterproductive as
each State is a generating center which needs a hazardous material disposal
facility.
-------
2. Purpose:
. The purpose of this project is to develop rules and regulations to establish
statewide administrative procedures for the management of hazardous waste
in Illinois. In order to accomplish the purpose above, the following
objectives should be included into the project:
(1) Provide a definition and classification of hazardous' wastes.
(2) Establish a permit system for hazardous waste management facilities.
(3) Establish minimum requirements for transportation, treatment, storage
and handling of hazardous wastes.
(A) Establish minimum siting and design requirements for hazardous waste
management sites.
(5) Determine methods of operation.
(6) Determine minimum pre-burial waste preparation requirements.
(7) Establish monitoring requirements.
(8) Produce a list of hazardous materials.
-------
(C <-/
3. Scope:
The following are included in the scope of the project:
(1) Data Collection:
(a) Regulatory data on hazardous waste management from 'other States
and Federal Agencies.
(b) Data on definition and classification of hazardous waste from
reference books and State and Federal Publications.
(c) Data on hazardous materials which meet established criteria.
(2) Field.Observation;
Visiting hazardous waste management sites to observe field conditions
and interview with managers.
(3) Preparation of Regulations;
Analyses of data collected and field observations will be combined
to prepare regulations.
-------
3. Studies to be made and tasks to "'be- performed include: --.---
(i) Determination of land disposal site characteristics pertinent to
handling various classes of hazardous wastes.
(ii) Analysis of quality of hazardous was.te disposal operations.
(iii) Identify chemically which wastes are hazardous.
/
(iv) Develop criteria for handling methods to be used at sanitary landfills.
(v) Work with the Industrial Waste Section to quantify hazardous wastes
which are produced, those which have gone to refuse disposal.sites ani
may continue to, and define potential hazardous wastes to be acceptable
by sanitary landfill operations.
h. (a) Tasks
(i) Review characteristics of each site to determine those possibly
suitable for hazardous waste disposal.
(ii) List and categorize hazardous wastes.
(iii) Classify sites as to categories of hazardous wastes acceptable.
(iv) Determine handling procedures for specific wastes at each Lite which
can accept hazardous wastes.
(v) In cooperation with the Industrial Waste Section deal with individual
cases of hazardous wastes to assist industries in disposal.
(vi) In cooperation with the Industrial Waste Section issue permits to
industries, haulers, and sanitary landfill owners and operators.
(vii) Enforcement of laws, regulations, and policies.
(viii) Supervision of hazardous waste management program, including attendance
at pertinent conferences.
-------
TTT n , n MICHIGAN
III. Proposed Program
The State would use Federal funds to increase the staff of the
Solid Waste Management Division. The key personnel include a chemist
and Environmental Sanitarian. An estimated budget is attached. These
people would be relied upon as "toxic materials experts". Their
tasks would include the following:
1. Advise the CHIP Committee and Hazardous Wastes
Committee on general problems with hazardous wastes.
2. Expand and revise the list of critical materials
published by the Water Resources Commission to include
all forms of hazardous materials that can be expected
to enter the solid waste stream in Michigan from any
sources.
3. Provide expertise in analyzing alternatives for
disposal of hazardous wastes.
4. Develop where needed statutes to insure an effective
hazardous wastes management and control system.
5. Develop rules and regulations under existing statutes
to control storage, handling, transportation, and
disposal of hazardous wastes.
6. Provide research assistance to determine toxicity
of various wastes prior to disposal.
7. Investigate the methods for and promote the
recycling of hazardous wastes.
8. Compile information on potential disposal sites
based on projected usage of hazardous wastes.
An estimated six student aides will be required to assist the
above personnel in field work and inventorying. Secretarial and
clerical assistance will be provided by the Solid Waste Management
Division of the Department of Natural Resources.
-------
MINNESOTA '
The activities of the statewide planning phase will be the
following:
1. Determine the types and quantities of hazardous waste generated
throughout the state that requires regulation by the Agency.
2. Designate priorities in hazardous waste management and
recommend the handling of those priorities.
3. Analyze hazardous waste processing and disposal facilities
available in adjacent states and Canada and compile data on the needs
relative to the interstate transportation of hazardous waste.
4. Provide a timetable for implementation of the statewide
hazardous waste management plan.
5. Provide a hazardous waste spill contingency plan.
Activities which may require the use of a future consultant are
as follows:
1. Recommend locations for hazardous waste disposal and
reclamation sites and assess the feasibility of such reclamation.
2. Assess whether land disposal of hazardous wastes is needed and
if so, what types of waste can be disposed of in this manner and provide
recommendations as to how land disposal sites should be designed to be
environmentally acceptable.
3. Recommend locations for hazardous waste disposal and
reclamation sites and recommend which treatment processes each site
should have.
Metropolitan Implementation
The staff will carry out the following tasks to implement the
state program:
1. Establish a hazardous waste management advisory committee to
review and direct the program.
2. Promulgate statewide regulations for the identification,
labeling, classification, storage, collection, transportation and disposal
of hazardous waste.
3. Establish central data processing facility for the use of
state and local governments.
4. Establish a legal framework to handle non-complying persons.
-------
MINNESOTA con't.
5. Distribute information for public use and provide training
programs for field and county personnel.
6. Provide technical assistance to counties and local government
when required.
7. Issue Hazardous Waste Generator Licenses in the outstate area
and rexiew metropolitan county issued licenses.
8. Issue Hazardous Waste Transporter Licenses.
9. Issue Hazardous Waste processing and disposal permits.
10. Provide for routine surveillance and monitoring.
-------
Wisconsin Toxic and Hazardous Waste Management Program
Problem Definition and Background
Many varieties of toxic and hazardous wastes are generated in the state.
These wastes result primarily from industrial operations. They are
considered to>ic and hazardous because of their harmful effects on man
and other organisms and on the environment. Examples of these wastes
include arsen. c salts, phenol resins, paint sludges, solvents, chemical
laboratory wastess and many others. 'N
State and Federal programs in air and water pollution control have resulted
in significant removal of toxic and hazardous substances from both stack
and pipe effluents. Howeverป a major effect on these efforts has been
increased dependence on use of land for disposal of these materials. Due
to the characteristics of many of these materials, land cannot handle all
of them in an environmentally acceptable manner or without danger to man
or other organisms.
While technology other than land disposal exists to adequately process or
dispose of toxic and hazardous wastes, the overall coordinated approach to
regulating and managing the wastes and hence, to ensuring use of techno-
logical alternatives, does not exist. Some state and Federal controls
exist now for individual portions of the toxic and hazardous waste
management problem. Howevers existing laws and programs are inadequate to
provide for the necessary coordinated and comprehensive approach needed to
deal effectively with the entire scope of the problem.
Current Efforts Concerning the Problem
The Federal government is currently examining toxic and hazardous wasฃe
legislation. The Resource Recovery Act of 1970 directed the Office of
Solid Waste Management Programs of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency to study the problem and examine Federal appraoches to it. An
EPA Report to Congress which incorporated the findings of several study
effort89 was used to develop a proposed Hazardous Waste Management Act.
As proposed, the Act would require development of Federal guidelines for
hazardous waste managment within 18 months of passage. The Act would
further require implementation of programs by states to carry out the
guidelines.
To prepare for major toxic and hazardous waste programs the Department of
Natural Resources' Solid Waste Management Section has evaluated background
information and existing laws and programs and is currently examining various
courses of action toward dealing with toxic and hazardous waste management
problems. These activities will be further developed in several major areas:
-------
District Hydrogeologist Env. Engineer Administratp
(4800 Total (3000 Total (4000 Total (400 Total
Hours) Hours) Hours) Hours)
ivestigation and evaluation of land disposal and toxic and
lous wastฎ. ' 50
i. Field documentation of toxic and hazardous waste disposal
2ases and problems 1000 400 100
b. Development of disposal site inspection criteria and
inspection report forms. 200 200
. Inspection and evaluation of existing sites licensed for
[land disposal of toxic and hazardous waste. 2000 400 200
d. Inspection and evaluation of'existing sites accepting
but not licensed for toxic ead hazardous wastes. 600 400 200
e. Designation of wastes that asฎ unsuitable for land
disposal. 200
ฃs Licensing of some existing siฃe@ for disposal of
some toxic and hazardous wastesป 400 200 400
of a
by site owners of toxic and hazardous wastes quantities
and types of disposed of at licensed sites.
h. Development of interim guidelines and inฃฉrastiฉE
requirements for establishing toxic and hazardous
wcutf.. sites. ' 400 200
iiorisaikiution tปi existing alteima'civss to land disposal.
a. Development of a list ฉf easts proeessorG (ia-statฉ and
ouฃ-oฃ-t5t:aฃe) aad the types mid qtanafeiCies of wastes
they handle*
app?:ฎpgiate K'epoffSa SPH! ff6ฉ6e.irc
-------
. Inspection of processing facilities.
ralopment of management information systems.
. Use cf existing vistc Inventory Information and data
:orage and retrieval systems.
, Design and Implementation of waste Inventories to
ipplement existing data and to providing a working
ise of information*
. Review and analysis of appropriate research,
achnlcal, and management reports.
imination of existing laws and programs.
, Review, summary, and evaluation of existing laws
id programs for dealing with individual portions of
le toxic and hazardous waste problem.
, Determination of legislative and programmatic
tps and needs.
, Determination and recommendation of Interim
rogrammatlc procedures and approaches to deal with
roblema in short-term.
i. . .
irdlnation of efforts vlth EPA and other states.
, Review of laws an progr< a in other states.
Sponsorship, with University of Wisconsin-
:tensIon, of a multi-state conference addressing
xlc and hazardous waste problems, various
prosehes, and coordination of efforts.
District
(4800 Total
Hours)
400
Hydrogeologist
(3000 Total
Hours)
Env. Engineer
(4000 Total
Hours)
200
200
200
100
100
100
200
100
200
100
Administrate?
(400 Total
Hours)
20
30
60
100
-------
District
(4800 Total
Hydrogeologist
(3000 Total
Hours)
. Review of on-going research (federal, state and
rivate).
finition of additional research needs, and development
ropriate projects.
couragement of advisory input through coordination
ndustrial trade associations and possible development
oxlc and hazardous waste advisory committee.
termination of long-term legislative and programmatic
nd needs.
velopment of state legislation and Department of
1 Resources programs in close coordination with
.1 hazardous waste management legislation and in a
1 that will dovetail department programs with procedures
iplementing any Federal Guidelines.
f these activities have begun, while many others are being
d for the next 1-2 years. At the present time the Solid
Management Section has assigned two engineers to the
pment of a toxic and hazardous waste management program.
rgest portion of effort is being directed at review, summary,
alysis of existing information, development of preliminary
nspectlon forms, and handling of several of the state's
ous waste problems.
dditional staff time will be assigned to meet the demands
s expanding program. In addition, it is expected that
ting services will be needed for selected parts of the
and hazardous waste program.
Bnv. Engineer
(4000 Total
Hours)
100
100
100
100
AOmlnlstrato
(400 Total '
Hours)
20
50
50
400
400
100
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY * taAli
J' ซ &,An '9/g
(EJECT: Region VI Status Report DATE: March 7, 1975
?OM: H. C. Crowe
Solid Waste Management Representative
). Ralph Black
Director
Regional , State and Local Affairs
THRU: Eloy R. Lozano
Director
Air and Hazardous Materials Division
Enclosed is subject reports as requested. Should you have
additional comments or questions, please contact me.
Enclosure
>rm 1320-6 (R v. 6-72)
-------
Arkansas
The Solid Waste Division of the Department of Pollution Control
and Ecology has a staff of four inspectors and a Division Director.
In addition, an attorney and a geologist are available on a part-time
basis,
The main program thrust is toward assisting local governments
define their problems and begin an implementation phase. Enforcement
is initiated on those local governments that slow down in the imple-
mentation phase.
The Arkansas Industrial Survey has been completed. The study
was conducted by MRI and is awaiting publication.
Louisiana
The Solid Waste Section in the State Health Department is
composed of two full-time staff. Part-time assistance from the
headquarters office and the Regional offices increase support by
almost 3 man/years.
The main program thrust is toward local assistance and en-force-
ment resulting in a comprehensive State solid waste program. Specific
solid waste legislation appears to be a major goal along with & survey
of state industrial waste generators. The reduced resources available
will place additional burden on the State program to accomplish these
goals.
The Governors Council on Environmental Quality is responding to
the local demand for improved solid waste management.
The chemical waste landfill demonstration grant application by
-------
2
CEQ appears to be a positive move to upgrade the State solid waste
program.
In general, considering the resources available, the Louisiana
program is expanding to meet the needs of the State.
New Mexico
The State solid waste programs and the hazardous waste program
have seven people assigned at the headquarters level. Another 3
man/years effort can be accumulated from the regional offices within
the State.
The State program is concerned with assistance at the local
level and hazardous waste management. In addition, training is
being conducted at the local level.
Arrangements have been made at two sites to manage hazardous
waste. Technical assistance is available for hazardous waste spills
occurring in the State.
Since most of the population occurs in about 10 cities with
the largest one being Albuquerque, the major goals are to monitor
and upgrade those major existing sites and assist the large,, sparsely
settled counties to develop systems for solid waste management.
The proposed Federal Facilities program is expected to have a
major impact on this State. Indications are that leadership in the
State EIA is aware of the problems and that such problems will be
reconciled.
Oklahoma
The program in Oklahoma has been severely hampered due to lack
-------
3
of resources. A hiring freeze has been initiated by the State Civil
Service Commission. The loss of an engineer to EPA Region X has
not been filled. Hence, the State program is one of monitoring and
technical assistance to local governments.
The State legislature has granted a 2 year extension, from
July 1, 1974, for communities of less than 3,000 complying with the
State compliance schedule.
The State has granted operating authority to two hazardous
waste disposal sites. A state industrial waste survey has been
initiated. These actions are expected to be the beginning of a
more sophisticated hazardous waste program.
Texas
State Health Department
The State Legislature has placed the responsibility for con-
ducting hearings on each existing and proposed site. In the past
the agency has monitored and initiated enforcement actions. Thi?
new responsibility will require all existing manpower. It appears
that a new program may evolve from the hearing program. The V.-xas
Industrial Survey is presently undergoing final modifications
Texas Water Quality Board
The Water Quality Board, having jurisdiction over industrial
and agricultural waste, is instituting an active hazardous waste
program. The need has been established and leadership at the Board
has assured us that adequate sources are being requested from the
legislature.
-------
4
When the Board accepts the current operational program under
discussion, a full scale effort will be launched. The EPA grant
is expected to be finalized before June 1. This grant will support
a pilot operation in the Houston area and will furnish the necessary
data to develop a state-wide program.
The EPA grants are designed to assist in the development and
operation of balanced programs in each State. Each grant is specifi-
cally designed to address the goals identified in the State Solid
Waste Plan and verified by program operations following the publica-
tion of the plans.
Louisiana, Oklahoma and New Mexico are in the final phases of
grant closing. The remainder are in the initial stages. All will
be activiatd prior to June, 1975.
Additional personnel in the Regional Office, Solid Waste Section,
are actively engaged in developing data on the status of the follow-
ing programs, Resource Recovery in Region VI percentage of population
served in Region VI. Evaluation of major Federal Facilities unusual
happenings:
1. Incineration of solid waste for power generation is ^eing
studied by the following cities:
1. Austin, Texas
2. Tulsa, Oklahoma
3. San Antonio, Texas
2. Colmis is being implemented in the Tulsa, Oklahoma system.
-------
5
3. Fayetteville, Arkansas is considering a shredding system
that will lead to an energy generating system by incinerating shredded
waste. Project is in discussion phase.
4. Odessa, Texas has implemented a shredding system where the
shredded waste is tilled into the soil. This project is in the early
trial stage.
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EJECT: Headquarters/Regional Meeting, Solid Waste DATE: February 18, 1975
Management
?OM: Morris G. Tucker, Head, Waste Management Section
Hazardous Materials Branch, ARHM, Region VII
y. Ralph J. Black, Director (AW-562) /""
Regional, State and Local Affairs
Washington, D.C. 20460
[ROUGH: Robert L. Markey, Director
Air & Hazardous Materials Division, Region VII
The attached report has been developed in response to your memorandum
of January 3, 1975. We hope that it provides the majority of the infor-
mation requested.
This memo will supplement the attached report by providing brief
comments on the relevancy and effectiveness of the guidance documents
to the state programs and the tasks to be carried out by the regions.
We have made an attempt to dissect the "Solid Waste Management Strategy"
and extract the portions pertinent to state programs. This has proven
to be confusing and to some degree contradictory. The role of the
states with regard to the protection of public health and welfare and
the environment apparently has three elements:
(1) strengthening the regulation of solid waste disposal
facilities,
(2) development of a hazardous waste program and
(3) development of a state facilitating (?) role.
The region VII states of Iowa, Kansas and Missouri have obtained '-?
first element and Nebraska is awaiting legislation. All four stater
are making progress towards developing the second element. However,
the third element is difficult to define and may be of questionab15
value as explained in the strategy. The state role under the seconc
strategy goal is limited to receiving technical assistance ano deve^D-
ing their own initiatives like the state of Connecticut program. The
definition of the state's role in resource recovery needs extensive
investigation.
We have previously commented on the relevancy and effectiveness
of the Regional Guidance (FY76) concerning both the state and regional
roles defined therein. Attached are copies of our memos of January 22
and 31, 1975. These comments still hold.
Form 1320-6 (Rev. 6-72)
-------
-2-
The tasks established for the Region VII office in the FY75
Regional Guidance do not reflect the primary activities of the staff
and do not effectively report on the state activities taking place
in the region. The number of resource recovery systems that are
under construction or in operation are being achieved by the public
and private sector in Region VII. The number of states that have
issued regulations for hazardous waste management is also being
achieved though none of our states will be prepared for this role
in the coming year. The number of hazardous waste sites which are
acceptable and serve centers of generation are slightly off schedule
due to problems with the Missouri solid waste legislation. The
number of other sites in compliance with state standards by percent
of population is slightly behind schedule, however, this should be
remedied by the end of the fiscal year. Activity indicators should
reflect state program accomplishments, technical assistance to state
and local agencies on collection, special wastes, resource recovery
and other solid waste problems. The concept of developing an analysis,
state guidance and state strategy is commendable. However, for
specific problem areas named, the states must be further into the
planning stage to do an adequate evaluation.
Attachments
-------
Review of Headquarters FY 76 Program Planning January 22, 1975
Guidance ป;
, . ' -' - - - ^ ' ,
Chief, Solid Waste Management Branch ":; . ' - /" " : V ^;
Air & Hazardous Materials Division- - - ,v": .' -
Robert L. Markey, Director ' -,.'"./. / ''",.'.. , "-J '
Air S Hazardous Materials Division ' ,., . ...--,.', . - ,>
We have reviewed the subject guidance as it pertains to solid
waste management. The time allotted for this review has not permitted
us to confer directly with our state agency counterparts. Therefore,
any comments that they may submit must'be considered separately. I
anticipate that they will present any such comments at the regional
meeting scheduled for January 30. This will mean that their comments
will be too late for transmittal to headquarters on January 24.
We concur with the basic strategy presented 1n this planning guid-
ance document. Some clarification and/or amplification is required
on specific components of the document. Comments on these follow and
are keyed to the sections contained in the draft document.
I, B. Environmental Protection. Collection should be specified
as a distinct entity between storage and transport. , . ' , I
I. C. Resource Conservation. Clarification is needed on what
is intended by item 2, par. 2, on "one time seed money'1.. ., ;
II. A. Regional Role and ActivitiesIntroduction. We feel that
technical assistance should also be indicated as one of the priority
activities of the regional office. The headquarters role in this
should be to provide the background and specialized knowledge required
to provide technical assistance. It is wasteful for headquarters to
get involved in providing routine technical assistance on a local
basis since they must first familiarize themselves with state and
local regulations, planning status, politics, etc. For this reason,
the regions should take the lead and provide as much of this type of
technical assistance as possible.
B. State Program Development. We concur that it Is oesir-
able to prepare an analysis of each state program with the subsequent
development of guidance for each state to improve their program efforts,
However, to assist this regional office and to gain uniformity with
all of the regions it would be desirable for headquarters to provide
guidance to the regions for evaluation purposes of legal authorities;
processes; surveillance, inspection and monitoring programs; enforcement
and compliance efforts; and resource analysis.
-------
-2-
3. 2. Phase IHazardous Haste Control. One problem that
1s noted 1n this section deals with the inventory of hazardous waste
as generated and modes of disposal. We have discovered In working
with the State of Iowa for three years that Industrial Information
of this nature v/111 not voluntarily be provided to the state. For
this reasor, Iowa Is presently asking for legislation which will
permit thet: to gain access to this information. I suspect that this
same situalion 1s true 1n all of the states, therefore., the first
state activity related to this effort might be to obtain legislation
requiring cooperation of industry in providing this information.
III. C. Assuring _Compliance wl th Federal _Gu idel 1 nes. Clarifi-
cation 1s needed! on the effort to develop a "total inventory" of
Federal facilities and the relationship of regional office Input Into
this effort. If headquarters does truly mean to inventory all Federal
facilities, which may number between 50*000 and 75,000 owned and
leased facilities in the U.S., substantial increases in regional
office staffing will be required. It would seem to be much more
meaningful to utilize manpower to inventory and.provide technical
assistance to major Federal facilities towards gaining compliance.
Regional Objectives and OutputsObjective I._ Since there 1s
no mention elsewhere/ possibly this objective shouTd~also Include the
term hazardous waste. Otherwise a separate objective should be stated
for this priority effort.
Objective IActivity Indicators. Items 2 and 3 require clarifi-
cation or reference as to which plans and reports are required.
Objective II. Once again it seems Illogical to develop an
Inventory of all Federal facilities just for the sake of enumeration,
It would seem that more realistic outputs would be: (1) develop a
listing of Federal facilities to be assisted and set Implementation
goals for these facilities; (2) number of Federal facilities In com-
pliance with guidelines.
We hope that these comments are found to be useful 1n developing
a more refined program plan for solid waste management. We wouVi be
happy to discuss these.comments with anyone concerned.
Morris G. Tucker
Chief, Solid Waste Management Branch
ARHM:MGTucker:md
cc: Arsen Darnay
-------
Review of Headquarters FY 76 Program Planning k January 31, 1975
Guidance by Region VII State Personnel
Morris G. Tucker, Head, Waste Management Section >-^V
Hazardous Materials Branch, ARHM " r^'^c/
J. W. Hendricks, Chief '
Program Planning and Evaluation, Region VII
We reviewed the subject guidance with the state program people who
attended the January 30 meeting in the Regional Office. Their comments
on the guidance are as follows:
(1) In the area of long-term custodial care for the portion of the
hazardous wastes which are not amenable to recovery or reuse9 the
strategy should indicate EPA direction towards securing sites and/or
facilities to handle these wastes.
(2) Prior to a call for state hazardous waste legislation, the
EPA should provide a clear and agreed upon definition of hazardous waste.
(3) The industry characterization studies are of major importance
in the development of state hazardous waste inventory programs. The'
milestone dates for EPA furnishing the results of these studies should
be Indicated in the guidance.
(4) I. This section was not sufficiently clear. A clarification
was requested on "one time seed money" and the results of the efforts
to improve General Services Administration procurement regulations which
would include increased reuse of materials.
(5) II. 3. It should be rewritten as follows: "to insure that
these objectives are uniformly met, the regions should first prepare
with each state program personnel an analysis of each state program
and then with state program personnel develop guidance for each state
which addresses individual problems of that state."
(6) II. C. The Federal facilities program should be coordir.ated
with the state agencies and they should be kept informed of the progress,
(7) The need for better EPA coordination with Federal facilities
is definitely needed to prevent problems, such as the Federal Aviation
Administration regulations concerning bird hazards. This should be
reflected in the guidance.
We hope that these comments are found to be useful in developing a
more refined program plan for solid waste management. We would be happy
to discuss these comments with anyone concerned.
ARHM:CMCLaugh1in:md
cc: Arsen Darnay
-------
State Solid Waste Management Program
Review for Region VII - 1974 Update
This report encompasses the status of the Iowa, Kansas, Missouri
and Nebraska state solid waste management programs, including present
and projected staffing, state and federal funding, program activities
and legislative developments.
Manpower levels and their relative workload in terms of disposal
sites, sanitary landfills with permits, counties, cities, population
and population served by permitted sanitary landfills are presented
in Table 1. State and federal funding for the years 1968 through 1976
(projected) are located in Table 2. A manpower and funding recapitu-
lation for fiscal years 1975 and 1976 is presented in Table 3.
Program activities are shown in Appendix A; however, the narrative
will provide detail in enforcement, resource recovery and hazardous
waste activities and unusual program projects.
Iowa
The Iowa Department of Environmental Quality, Land Quality Division,
increased their manpower in 1974 from 9 to 13 full-time positions, of
which 11 were filled on December 31, 1974 and offers were pending on one.
Four positions in the permit program are filled, four of five positions
in the enforcement program are filled and two of three positions in the
administration program are filled. The major staffing problem has been
the division director's position, which has had three occupants since
July of 1974. Table 1 and Figure 1 present the manpower levels for the
program and the projections from the state plan. The organization chart
of the division is in Appendix B.
Historical state and federal funding levels for Iowa are shown in
Table 2 and manpower and funding levels for FY 75 and FY 76 (projected)
are shown in Table 3. The federal funding level of $73,200 in FY 75
supports approximately five man years of effort. Maintenance of this
level of funding is requested to assure program stability. The state
funding level has shown a steady increase and should be able to show
independent growth in FY 77.
Commitments of the Land Quality Division for FY 75 are shown in
Appendix A with the milestones of all Region VII states. The activities
of (1) permits, (2) enforcement, (3) inspection and surveillance, (4)
technical assistance, (5) public information and education, (6) planning,
(7) legislation, and (8) hazardous wastes are detailed separately. The
division appears to be behind schedule in permit issuance; however, they
-------
STATE SOLID WASTE EXPENDITURES
FROM FY68 TO FY76*
^\ STATE
,FISCAt\
i YEAR \,
FY63
FY69
FY70
FY71
FY72
FY73
FY74
c.o.
FY75 new
c.o.
FY76 new
(Prel i mi nary
Budqet Lsti
rric\te)
IOWA
STATE
22,500
22,500
23,650
38,000
75,600
94,500
107,600
110,000
130,000
FEDERAL [
PLANNING TOTAL
12,600
29 , 600
73,500
5,000
73,200
2,000
73,000
22,500
22,500
23,650
38,000
88,200
125, 1CW
180.100
188,200
205,000
KANSAS
STATE
13,100
19.300
19,800
20,400
21,200
228000
23,00$
59.000
57,000
FlDEftAL
PLANNING
6,900
17,300
TOTAL
20,000
36,600
19,200 .38,000
11,900 132,300
t
91 PAH
C \ eฃwv
122 ,000
49,500
17,000
51,600
23,000
99,500
125S60C
MISSOURI
STATE
34,000
75.300
76,800
80,100
125.700
112B6QO
135,600
226,000
135,000
FEDERAL
PLANNING
28,700
29,200
32,900
22,300
218000
29,000
73,200
32,000
65,000
FEDERAL
TRAINING
27,400
34,400
5,800
1
TOTAL
34,000
104,000
106,000
NEBRASrji ]
STATE
21,500
FEDERAL
PLANNING
30,000,
,
113,000! 41,000,
148,000
161,000
199,000
305,000
232,000
51 ,900 j 6,500
32,370
75,950
05,000
97,000
27,890
18,970
9,888
19,033
5,000
24,000
V f*\T ป ,
1 0 . *-
1
!
58, OC
60,260
94,92:
134,000
126,000
'Note - Tne FY68 through FY75 figures
and adjustments of reports of
on existing budgets and federal
are approximations developed from conversations with state agency persenne
expenditures to a fiscal ytar basis. Th FY74 figures are estimates based
grant funding.
CO
-------
Existing FY 75 and Proposed FY 76 Funding Requirements for Region VII
State Solid Waste Management Programs
r.e:
FY 75
Carry Over
New Funds
Man Years
FY 76 (Est)
Carry Over
New Funds
Man Years
Iowa Kansas Missouri
State Federal Total State Federal Total State Federal
5,000 5,000
Nebraska
Total State Federal
9O " p
,b?i'0
i ota
110,000 73,200 183,200 50,000 49,500 99,500 226,000 73,200 299,000 104,000 19,000 123,:
78,200 188,200
8 5 13 2.2
(O.J)*
3.0
5.2
14'
19-
5.5
28,900 133,9'
1.5 7.'
720,60
c " no
2,000 2,000 17,000 17,000 32,000 32,000 5,000 5,000 -,,v.
130,000 73,000203,000 57,000 51,600109,600135,000 65,000200,000 97,000 24,000 12:,000 215,00
75S000 205,000 68,600 125,600 97 QOO 232,000 29,000 126,0:^ 683,60
8 5 13 2.5 3.0 5.5 10** ง 15 5.5 1.5
(1.0)*
* Additional manpower hours in Solid Waste Program carried on another program.
** Includes 4 MY in regional office personnel in FY 75; 6 MY of effort in FY 76
in regional office personnel not included.
ฃ>
I
-------
0-
0-
0-
.0-
M
0-
ฐ~
.0-
.0-
,0-
,0-
.0-
.O-N
.0-
,0-
.0-
.0-
.0-
w
a
.0-
,o4
1967
I iqure
STATE SOLID WASTE MANPOWER
EPA EST. OF STATE
MANPOWER NEEDS
REORGANIZATSON
LEGISLATION PASSED
LEGISLATION
EFFECTIVE
PERMITS
REQUIRED
PLANNING
GRANT
STARTED
PLANS
LOCAL
REQUIRED
NEW
LEGISLATION
PASSED
69 70 71
-5-
-------
are obtaining multi-county sites which will reduce the total output
to 35 permits for FY 75. The dump closing activity is moving rapidly
and enforcement activities will be increasing as a result of hiring an
attorney to work half time with the division. Inspections by state
regional office personnel were delayed until their training could be
completed in December. The first quarter of 1975 should provide a
marked increase in surveillance activities. The technical assistance,
training, public information, and planning activities have been reduced
while a concentrated effort is made to increase the permit activities.
The development of legislation including improvements to the solid
waste statutes allowing more permit flexibility (classes), extending the
authority to cover industrial sites on the same property and enabling
the state to conduct a hazardous waste inventory have been developed and
introduced. Passage of the amendments is crucial to program growth. The
hazardous wastes activity is utilizing a "kid gloves" approach offering
technical assistance and holding informational and educational meetings
while awaiting new legislative authority. Two extensive inventory efforts
have resulted in no information during the last year. The resource recovery
activities are now receiving one man year of effort and should begin to
develop the marketing and examples required for the program.
Assessment - The Land Quality Division has suffered from a lack of
direction during the first half'of the year; however, this problem is
remedied and the permit, enforcement and inspection activities are
coalescing rapidly. The hazardous waste efforts are dependent on legis-
lation but should progress rapidly once this hurdle is overcome. Resource
recovery efforts continue to suffer due to the manpower level (filled
positions) being the highest in the region for the program. The Iowa
DEQ growth in FY 76 is concentrated in their district offices and legal
divisions which will provide the Land Quality Division with increased
(indirect) resources. Maintenance of the current level of federal support
is needed to assure program stability and allow for growth.
Kansas
The Kansas Department of Health and Environment, Division of Fnviron-
ment, General Environmental Sanitation Bureau, Solid Waste Program,
increased their positions from 2.5 man years in FY 74 to 5.2 man year^
in FY 75. However, at the end of 197& only 3.2 positions were fiTied
although an offer was pending on the hazardous waste project director
position. The program did not receive clearance to expend fur.us from
the solid waste management grant from the new Governor until January;
however, the state portion of the matching funds were fulfilled. Both
vacant positions should be filled by the middle of March. The history
and projections from the state plan are presented in Table 1 and Figure 2.
Historical state and federal funding levels for Kansas are shown in
Table 2 and manpower and funding levels for FY 75 and FY 76 (projected)
are shown in Table 3. The $17,000 in carry-over funds from FY 75 to FY 76
represent unspent fmds for salaries which will be expended in FY 76
-6-
-------
4G.O-
44.0
42.0
40.0
38.0
36.0
34,0
32.0
30.0
28.0
26.0
24.0
22.0
20.0
18.0
16.0
14.0
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
Fiqure 2
STATE SOLID WASTE MANPOWER
KANSAS
EPA ESI. OF STATE
MANPOWER NEEDS
*
V
NEW
PLANNING LEGSSLATION
GRANT PASSED
STARTED
PLANNING
GRANT ENDED
LEGISLATION
gFFECTSVE
PERMITS
REQUIRED
LOCAL PLANS
REQUIRED
75 76 T
-7-
-------
provided additional manpower can be obtained to complete the hazardous
waste planning project by the end of FY 76. Training and inspection
activities will also be increased with carry-over funds to make up for
the lost time in this activity. Total FY 76 federal funds requested
are $68,000, which A/ill allow state commitments to be met.
Commitments of the Solid Waste Program for FY 75 are shown in
Appendix A with the milestones for Region VII states. Kansas is ahead
of schedule for the permit and enforcement activities; however, they
are falling behind in inspections and dump closures due to a lack of
manpower. The technical assistance, training, public information, and
planning activities have been curtailed to provide manpower for the
other activities. The resource recovery program has completed a salvage
market survey. The hazardous waste planning project director is scheduled
to come on board in February 1975. Preparatory work of familiarization
with Kansas industry, obtaining literature, and development of a contract
for a portion of the survey have been completed. No new legislation is
anticipated in the 1975 session.
Assessment - The solid waste program has finally entered the growth
phase. Permit and enforcement activities are beginning to exhibit progress
with 62 percent of the population served by sanitary landfills. The inspec-
tion, resource recovery and hazardous waste activities will be behind schedule
but the six-month lag in obtaining personnel can be overcome if the level of
funding is maintained. The manpower level by any standard of measurement is
the lowest in the region and the program status is the lowest. Only through
maintained support at this requested level will the program be able to meet
the commitments for the coming year.
Missouri
The Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Division of Environ-
mental Quality, Solid Waste Management Program, increased their manpower
(positions) in 1974 from 11 to 15. However, statewide reorganization in
July of 1974, which formed the DNR resulted in the shift of four ^ositiors
to state regional offices. These positions are to be replaced in the FY 76
state program budget. The major problem of the program has bean hiring i nd
retraining qualified personnel. The low salary scale has resu.ted in th;
loss of six professionals during 1974, leaving only three professionals
in the program as of January 1975. The problem has been repealed1, pointed
out to the Department and Governor, and promises to rectify tha situation
have been elicited. Table 1 and Figure 3 present manpower levels for the
program and the projections from the state plan. The organizational chart
for the program is presented in Appendix B.
Historical state and federal funding levels are presented in Table
and the manpower and funding levels for FY 75 and FY 76 (projected) are
shown in Table 3. The federal carry-over funds from FY 75 to FY 76 will
be approximately $32,000, mainly from salaries of unfilled positions.
-8-
-------
Fiqure 3
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
B.O
5.0
STATE SOLID WASTE MANPOWER
EPA ESI OF STATE
MANPOWER NEEDS
TRAINING
GRANT
STARTED
STATE
PLAN
PLANNING NEW ADOPTED
GRANT LEGISLATION
STARTED PASSED
LEGISLATION
EFFECTiVE
69 70 71 72 73
-9-
-------
Federal funds requested for FY 76 total $97,000 and will be expended to
provide support for five man years of effort. These funds will enable
the agency to make up the time lost by unfilled positions in inspection,
planning, resource recovery, and training activities.
Commitments of the solid waste management program are shown in
Appendix A. The permit program is behind schedule but enforcement,
inspection and dump closing activities were on schedule at the end
of 1974. Technical assistance and training activities were also on
schedule. However, the planning program mandated by law was far behind
schedule, endangering a portion of state legislation. The resource
recovery and regional implementation demonstration program was cancelled
as of January 1975 due to resignation of the project officer. Completion
of the resource recovery report is on schedule. The hazardous waste
pi inning project began in January with the hiring of a chemical engineer
ani it should progress rapidly. Legislative problems have occupied the
majority of the director's time for the last five months. He has success-
fully developed a compromise with the Waste Haulers Task Force concerning
relaxation of the mandatory collection requirement of the law; however,
obsaining passage of the amendments without further weakening provisions
is a continuing effort. New legislation on resource recovery was developed
in 1974 but will not receive serious consideration. Enforcement and legis-
lative efforts of the solid waste management program should receive a sig-
nificant increase with the scheduled obtaining of an assistant attorney
general on the progran payroll this spring.
Assessment - The solid waste management program has suffered from low
salaries while having a high demand for engineers during 1974. Proposed
increases in salary should partially relieve this situation and allow the
program to complete their staff in the spring months. The legislative
challenges have absorbed the director's time and the loss of personnel
has significantly reduced progress. These problems should be resolved
by spring. The hazardous waste planning project has begun and should be
able to make up some lost time if funds and personnel are available,
Resource recovery and planning programs require additional manpower which
is being recruited. The permit and enforcement efforts are progressing
satisfactorily; however, inspection activities are dependent on state
regional offices and will require more training for their personnel.
Maintenance of the requested level of support will be necessary to provide
the manpower to make up for the lost time.
Nebraska
The Department of Environmental Control, Solid Waste Division, in-
creased their manpower in 1974 from six to seven positions, of which six
were filled as of January 1975. Personnel retention difficulties caused
a turnover of three professionals in 1974. The stationing of an environ-
mental specialist in North Platte, Nebraska,has reduced travel expenses
and increased effectiveness. Table 1 and Figure 4 present manpower levels
for the program and the projections from the state plan. The organization
chart of the division is in Appendix B.
-10-
-------
Hqure 4
46.0-1
44.0
42.0
40.0 HI
38.0-
36.0-
34.0-^
32.0
30.0
28.0
26.0-
24.0-
STATE SOLID WASTE MANPOWER
NEW
LEGISLATION
PflOPOSED
EPA ESI.
OF STATE
MANPOWER
..* NEEDS
REORGANIZATION
LEGISLATION PASSED
LEGISLATION
REVERSAL
LOCAL
PLANS
' R E -
PLAWNihSG
GRANT
TARTED
1967 68 69 70 71 72
YEARS
-11-
-------
Historical state and federal funding levels for Nebraska are shown
in Table 2 and the manpower and funding levels for FY 75 and FY 76 (pro-
jected) are presented in Table 3. The federal funding level of $28,900
in FY 75 supports approximately 1.5 man years of effort in the hazardous
waste planning project, enforcement, and planning activities. The carry
over of $5,000 to FY 76 reflects the unexpended salary of the hazardous
waste project director for the first half of FY 75 and a three-month
vacancy in the planning engineer's position.
Commitments of the Solid Waste Division are shown in Appendix A.
The permit activities (first class cities and new private sites only) are
on schedule, as are enforcement and inspection activities. Technical
assistance, training, and planning programs have limited outputs and are
progressing satisfactorily. The hazardous waste project director is on
board and is actively planning his program. An inventory is to begin
this spring. Legislative activities are the key to success of solid
waste division activities. Comprehensive solid waste legislation has
been developed, introduced and a hearing held by the Agriculture and
Environment Committee of the Urn'camera!. The director is actively pur-
suing passage with support from a variety of organizations such as the
Nebraska League of Municipalities. The long lead time in the legislation
(50 months) is the only drawback.
Assessment - The Solid Waste Division has had problems with staff
retention; however, recruitment of new personnel has been successful.
Existing permit,inspection and enforcement programs are adequate.
Pending legislation requires state and local planning for solid waste
management followed by statewide permits for all solid waste facilities.
Passage is absolutely necessary for the development of adequate regula-
tions and the statewide coverage of the permit program. If passed, the
workload for the division will increase markedly during FY 76. The
hazardous waste activities are progressing. The maintenance of federal
funding is necessary for completion of this activity and resource recovery
activities.
Region VII Assessment
Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska are making progress vn all
phases of their activities.
The present and projected staffing levels presented in Fi^re 5
illustrate the remarkable and steady program growth in the region. Un-
fortunately, the amount of authorized funds and positions do not indicate
the actual manpower available. Manpower in the region in terms of solid
waste agency staff positions filled was 26.2 positions with Missouri having
the greatest deficit of nine. However, this does not reflect the estimated
15 to 19 man years of effort from district offices, attorney generals'
offices, and other agencies (Iowa, 7 to 8 MY; Kansas, 2 to 3 MY; and Missouri.
6 to 8 MY). Salary increases in Missouri and Nebraska will greatly alleviate
personnel deficiencies.
-12-
-------
Fiqure 5
STATE SOLID WASTE MANPOWER
CUMULATIVE
TWO
PLANNING
GRANTS
u u
68 69
-------
The funding level for the Region VII states is summarized in
Table 3. The carry over of $54,000 is mainly salaries not spent as
a result of inability to hire personnel or retain others. The apparent
decrease of state funds authorized from $720,600 to $688,600 is actually
an increase because of the transfer of four Missouri positions to district
offices with support funding. Maintenance of $215,000 in federal funding
for the state programs will allow them to hold their current levels of
manpower, work toward filling all their positions and meet the majority
of commitments to EPA (Nebraska legislation passage cannot be assured).
Commitments for the Region VII states are listed in Appendix A.
The permit, inspection and enforcement activities are progressing satis-
factorily overall. Two states will have at least half-time attorneys
available in the near future; local planning program culminates in Kansas
and Missouri, reorganization in Missouri, and realignment in Iowa have
increased the district office personnel available for inspection; and the
permit staff person lei in all states have increased or maintained their
competency. The technical assistance, training and public information
activities were satisfactory despite limited manpower. However, the
state and local planning and resource recovery activities were behind
schedule. The hazardous waste planning projects finally all are underway
with Iowa fighting for legislation and the other states beginning their
survey attempts between three and six months behind. The only state
demonstration in Missouri ended with the resignation of the project
director, thereby terminating the quest for a rural resource recovery
cooperative effort.
Legislative developments range from favorable to unfavorable. Iowa
and Nebraska have developed a strengthening amendment and new comprehensive
legislation, respectively. Missouri is withstanding a severe legislative
assault on their comprehensive act and, with a collection compromise
imminent, the initiative is not with the state agency.
In summary, the; Region VII state programs have made substantial gains
in credibility, hazardous waste planning and regulatory aspects of their
programs. However, without continued federal support at the same level
provided in FY 75, they will lose manpower and reduce their efforts in
the areas where they do not have legislative responsibility. This includes
many aspects of hazardous waste and resource recovery activities.
-14-
-------
REGION VIII
STATE SOLID WASTE PROGRAM
MIDYEAR EVALUATIONS
JANUARY 1975
-------
F,R-IOM VIII MIDYEAR EVALUATION
COLORADO SOLID WASTE GRANT
- Grant Number - L008066
- Grant Period - 7/1/74 - 6/30/75
- Grant Recipient - Health Department
- State Contact - Orville Stoddard
- Man Years Proposed - 8
- Total Project Cost - $171,854.00
- EPA Cost Share - $85,927.00
- Progress to Date - Acceptable
- Comments - The hazardous waste processing and disposal efforts
should be accelerated to achieve a management program
in FY 75. Many hazardous waste disposal requests are
coming in for Colorado - thus necessitating an accelerating
program.
- Anticipated Program Funding for FY 76
- EPA support - $90,000.00
assuming no carryover
-------
COLORADO SOLID WASTE GRANT EVALUATION
ฃ] a n n e d Actjvity
1. Survey, Evaluation,
and Enforcement
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
59 of the state's 265 refuse disposal sites we're
inspected to irs^re compliance to state regu-
lations. The 59 sites covered 25% of the state's
population. Data were developed by the Division
for use ir, Regional Solid Waste Management Planning
Five county-wide and regional management plans were
reviewed. One county plan recently reviewed, is
for a transfer and disposal system. Six such
county-wide systems have been implemented this
year.
22 engineering reports and operating plans for
new disposal sites and conversions of existing
sites were reviewed.
9 hazardous waste disposal requests were re-
ceived and acted upon. A survey form to
evaluate the magnitude of the hazardous waste
problem is being developed with EPA assistance.
The Division is also expending efforts toward a
siting criteria for sites to receive hazardous
wastes. Existing sites were reviewed, e.g., eng-
ineering reports and operating plans, determining
suitability f?r hazardous wastes. More data are
needed on each site. Engineering reports and
operation plans were reviewed for two regional
sludge reuse and disposal facilities.
Evaluation
While 39.22: of the state's
nopulaticr is covered by satis-
factory landfills, the nur.bor is
expected to increase as in-
spection efforts increase m iattei
half of FY 75. Additional work
in regional and county-hide
planning and new site plan review
will in time bring facilities in
compliance with minimum state
standards.
The handling of hazardous waste
disposal requests has shown com-
munication problems which are
being dealt with. Designation of
hazardous waste disposal sites
in the state will aid this
situation and criteria for siting
will increase the designation
process.
The hazardous waste survey data,
when received, will be of value
to develop the total hazardous
waste program.
-------
P 1 a n n e d A c ti y rty
1st & 2nd Quarter
Evaluation
2. Legislation and
Regulations
3. Inters,;ency Coordination
Draft amendments to "Regulations: Solid
Waste Disposal Sites & Facilities1' were
developed to provide engineering report-
ing and design criteria for processing,
disposal and reuse of sewage sludge, in-
dustrial sludge, septic tank wastes, and
hazardous waste materials received at
designated landfill sites. Four public
meetings were held to gacher county and
municipal comments on the draft amend-
ment.
The Division assisted the Denver Regional
Council of Governments in drafting amend-
ments to the State Solid Waste Act. The
amendments provide for improved disposal
facilities to accept hazardous wastes and
encourage resource recovery.
The work expended in this section will be
detailed in sections I and 4 and include:
1) assistance to planning regions and
counties
2) interaction with the Denver Regional
Council of Governments
3} development of the projects "Evaluation
of a Sanitary Landfill Demonstration
Project Adams County, Colorado."
The finalization of these two
regulatory and legislative
packages will open the dcor for
increased emphasis on detailed
solid waste planning and naz^rdcjs
waste handling.
The regulation amendments should be
finalized in FY 75 and the legis-
lation amendments are expected to
be introduced to the legislature
in this session.
The area of effort is progressing,
however increased cooperat": :/n with
other state agencies, i.e., Colorado
Geological Survey, would reap bene-
fits in developing the hazardous
waste program.
-------
& 2nd Quarter Output
Evaluation
4. Technical Assistance
Several efforts were made to assist in
training of local personnel such as:
1) The state-wide Solid Waste Manage-
ment workshop attended by 72 persons,
including local government officials
and disposal site operators.
2) The annual training session for
sanitarians, sponsored by the
University of Colorado and the Colorado
Environmental Health Association, and
attended by 27 sanitarians from 10 local
health departments.
The Division assisted the Denver Regional
Council of Governments by providing data &
encouraging resource recovery projects. In-
formation on salvage and reclaiming industries
is maintained for dissemination to the public.
Several public and private entities consider-
ing innovative waste handling processes re-
ceived assistance. These include:
counties
1. milling waste - 3
2. compacting and transferring
systems - 2 counties
3. resource recovery - DRCOG
4. sewage sludge disposal - 2
counties.
Training is ongoing and v.ill
increase as of^rr.tor tra.,': ing
and staff trainee sessions ar
scheduled for the latter half
of FY 75.
Assistance to localities is
carried out effectively through
engineering report ana operating
Did sites a
market for
becomes more
plan reviews.
being brought up-to-date and
new sites are beginning operation
on a satisfactory note. As
resource recovery
readily available,
the general balance of the solid
waste program will improve.
The assistance program has re-
sulted in several unsatisfactory
disposal sites being closed in
favor of county-wide & regional
disposal programs.
-------
Planned Activity
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
Evaluation
4. Technical Assistance
A special project entitled "Evaluation
or
Project - Adams County, Colorado" was
conducted by the Division with assist-
ance from ฃ local governmental entity.
This project was funded by the State for
$37,000, The Division conducted a
sampling neU'crk at the site to document
possible surface and ground water con-
Lamina ci on.
The special project v/as
completed and will ^i:--
valuable information as to
acceptability of the use of
gravel pits for refuse dis-
posal sites
5. Public Informstion
Many news releases have been provided
to papers s as well as reports to the
Municipal League Magazine and Newsletter
""
to announce workshops"
sessions.
and training
Th
Division has distributed technical
papers and reports to regional 3 county,
and local entities from its Library of
information on special projects, planning,
and guidelines.
Public information is being
effectively districted to
inform the public of programs
available and training. The
development of the hazardous
waste program will draw upon
the resources of this program
for effective implementation.
A special report on the "Evaluation of a
Sanitary Landfill Demonstration Project -
Adams County , Colorado" was written for
"Colorado's Health."
-------
RrTJ'
EVALUATION
e Grurc
- Grant Number
- Grant Period
- Grant Recipient.
- State Contact
- Man Years Proposed
- Total Project Cost
- EPA Cost Share
- Progress to date
L008068
7/1/74 - 6/30/75
Department of Health and
Environmental Sciences
Mr. Terry Carrnody
7
$1,438,078.00
100,000.00
Acceptable
Comments' - The total project cost for FY 75 will be adjusted
as necessary due to the junk auto project being
self-sufficient through the first half of FY 75
Anticipated program funding for FY 76
EPA support - $100,000
no carryover funds anticipated
-------
MONTANA SOLID WASTE GRANT EVALUATION
Activi
I. Hazardous Materials
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
With the analytical cooperation of the Soil
Conservation Service, 43 soil analyses were
performed (16% of total sites) at landfill
sites prior to classification evaluation.
To determine the types and quantities of
hazardous materials on hand, a draft survey
fora v/as developed for
the State. The Solid Waste Bureau, as a
member of an interagency group, has developed
a draft statewide hazardous material accident
reporting response plan. Work has been ex-
pended to acquire an ainniimition bunker
presently leased from the Air Force for
pesticide and chemical storage. Work is
also ongoing to acquire 640 acres of BLM
land for a burial/storage facility for
chemicals and pesticides.
Evaluation
New regulations were written in '-lay 1974
for the classification of landfill.
These regulations have resulted in a
workload of soil analysis &nci clu^si-
fication evaluations for the 338 refuse
disposal sites in the State, L'hile this
effort is just beginning, a greu- deal
of work is anticipated for the 3rd & 4th
quarters of FY 75 to implepient the May
1974 rule. (The classification is
necessary to allow the disposal of
hazardous materials).
The statewide hazardous materials
accident reporting response plan is not
included in the work plan for the grant,
but is felt to be a large step in the
direction of proper and punctual handling
of hazardous wastes in Montana.
While work has been expended for
acquisition for the bunker and lar,J for
chenrical and pesticide storage cr,d dis-
posal as outlined in the narrative work
plaiij this effort is also covered under
a $150,000 grant through the pesticide
program.
-------
Planned Activity
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
Eval uation
'
-------
Plan.'.GO Activity
1st ฃ 2nd Quarter Output
Evaluation
So i "i a i'.'
me P-ureau has updated Its listing of the
State's 338 refuse disposal sites through
12/31/74, This listing Indicates the
availability of soil analysis, status of
State site approval, status of license
cipplicaf.-icn, status cf ro:.."ity license,
age of site, and quality or operation of
the site. Approximately 200 refuse dis-
posal sites have been field inspected from
7/1/74 - 12/31/74. Acceptable solid waste
management practices are r.ow more closely
insured for plannec s^uJivisions cue to a
specially developed form to indicate solid
v/aste plans for the affected area. In this .
line, 17 environmental impact assessment
reviews have been completed for subdivisions
considering specifically the solid-waste
handling plan.
Over the reporting period, 43 dumps were
closed in favor of cooperative disposal
programs or converted to sanitary landfills.
The updated listing of all refuse dis-
posal sites in the State is of increasing
value as the classification cf each site
is undertaken. Soil studies and nydrologic
evaluation will be made on each sir,G jror
TO classification. Ttvis v/crK .vil". c^'.tirjd
through the Soil Conservation Service. A
periodic site inspection scheduled in the
latter half of FY 75, for the purpose of
re-evaluating the site classification.
The Bureau is taking definite steps in
insuring the quality of refuse disposal
in new subdivisions with the newly re-
quired form for reporting solid waste
handling plans. The involvement in the
impact assessment is also in keeping
wren the ventual classification cf
each site.
Efforts expended to update disposal
procedures are necessary in the State
of Montana. Of the 33S sites listed as
of 12/31/745 211 are not properly operated.
This number can be lowered over the .
FY 75 period with continued pressure
from the Montana Bureau. While 211 dis-
posal sites are not properly operated,
76% of the population is covered by
acceptable landfills.
-------
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
Evaluation (Cont'd)
3. Solid vlasta
I he new rules for landfill design a-;j
disposal will result in increased efforts
for soil and hydrology analysis in order
to complete landfill classification.
No efforts to date are seen on t
projects to distribute drop boxe
and
eliminate rural dumps, to recover waste
heat from wood wastes, to dispose of
sewage sludge and septic tank pur.ipings
in near arctic winter latitude, and to
coordinate efforts with the Forest Service,
Montana Department Game and Fish, and
Montana Department of Highways as to
refuse handling. Efforts anticipated
in the latter half of FY 75 will address
these issues more heavily.
4. Junk Auto
Free auto graveyards are operating in 50
of the 56 Montana counties. Operating
plans, budget reports, budget projections
are riv
Bureau.
3d annually by
ror the 2 quarter period, a
Solid Waste
all 50
reviews were completed. The free auto
yards have crushed & shipped 9040 junk
vehicles in the two quarter period.
Work was also expended in assisting the
six remaining counties- to gain site and
budget ripproval. The Solid Waste Bureau
has reviewed funding of the junk auto
proJLd ind expended effort toward the
preparation of a legislative amendment
to set '-< $5000 nrMimum grant to the lesser
Being a repetitive project, the plan and
budget review is done in house with site
visits made when a staff member is ~v, .the
area. The 9040 cars shipped today were
sold for $85,030 and represent in part the
cleanup of non-operating junk car yards.
While six counties were not approved
12/31/74, 3 additional approvals have
subsequently been completed. Continued
operating experience will allow this
program to stabilize itself, both
financially and from the public acceptance
standpoints. To date the project is
progressing very nicely.
-------
Planned Activity
4. Junk Auto (Cont'd)
1st & 2nd Quarter Output. (Cont'd)
populated counties. Also, a legis-
lative proposal was written to reduce
the funding fees for the junk auto
project from $5.00 to $2.50. Meet-
ings were
attended
to clear up pro-
cedure.] differences and misunderstand-
ings as to fee collection by County
Treasurer and the State Motor Vehicle
Division of auto user fees and owner
disposal fees, respectively. These
fees make up the major funding for the
Junk Vehicle Disposal
program.
In response to the Junk Vehicle Dis-
posal Law, the Bureau has licensed
129 private auto wrecking'facilities,
34 of which are new operations for
which an environmental impact assess-
ment was done. Site inspections were
made for the new facilities.
Evaluation (Cont'd)
Approximately 95 of the auto
wrecking facility licenses are
renewed annually. The new
facility impact assessment Dp-car
to be nivoing well. Enforce,'.:,':
action is increasing the B',-
credibility cs a regulatory
Periodic inspection of pri
junk auto yards is just getting
underway as more operations come
under license. The frequency of
inspection will be more confic'ently
established.
5. Training and Public Relations
Several news releases, radio, and tele-
vision spots and interviews have been
made to educate the public as to the
program of the Solid Waste Bureau. Also
a slide series has been developed for
small community operators. J\ Bureau staff
member received training by attending a
state enforcement conference attended by
several County attorneys.
This phase of the program is dj/.-lop-
ing as necessary. More effort will
be expended in the training of site
operators as equipment for showing
the special slide series in a car
becomes available and weather permits,
-------
3Iannod Activity
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
Eva!uation
6. Enforcement
Enforcement action was taker, at 107
locations. The action included complaint
letters and/or field investigations at
92 auto wrecking facilities and 15
ref'uf
G cncpos?
I C.ฐ
"orce-
ment proceedings took place - of which
15 v.'ere auto junk dealers and 4 were
landfills.
received at
conference.
Staff training was also
a state enforcement
The enforcement loaa in the
state can be forecasted to
increase to a peak and drop
off as location;: art brought
into compliance. The licensing
of new facilities and inpur.
assessment of these facilities
will decrease the need for
enforcement action there.
7. Supervision
The program is continuing at an
accelerating pace.
Progress averaged over the
entire program is good. Mora
emphasis on the classification
of refuse disposal sites will
allow the disposal of hazardous
wastes to move forward.
-------
REGION VIII MIDYEAR EVALUATION
NORTH DAKOTA SOLID WASTE GRANT
Grant Number - L008049
\
Grant Period - 7/1/74 - 6/30/75
Grant Recipient - North Dakota Health Department
State Contact - Raymond Rolshoven
Man Years Proposed -2.6
Total Project Cost - $66,000.00
EPA Cost Share - $33,000.00
Progress to Date - Behind Schedule
Comment? As rules and regulations are adopted and the
new staff member is fully oriented, the solid
waste program can be expected to address issues
of hazardous waste disposal and enforcement with
an increased priority.
Anticipated Program Funding for FY 76
- EPA support - $35,000.000
assuming no carryover
-------
NORTH DAKOTA SOLID WASTE GRANT EVALUATION
Planned Activity
I. Public Information Program
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
Equipment was ordered for the Public In-
formation Program. Initial development
of the slide series has been undertaken
by the field personnel photographing
representative activities of solid waste
management in North Dakota.
Several public speaking engagements allowed the
Solid Waste Program to receive needed visibility.
These included:
Evaluation
This program is expected to
increase in priority due to
the aadition of a new full-
time employee with considerable
background in training.
Efforts to be expended in
the latter half of FY 75 will
include collation of slides,
writing of script., d^nor.stration
in pilot areas, fina'lizaticn,
and distribution.
The North Dakota Solid Waste
Management program received needed
exposure. Talks 1 and
.-;,'
'L dealt.
1.
2.
The Annual North Dakota Water
Control Conference (the solid
also chaired an operator discussion group).
with the state program
o r Solid
and Pollution Waste handling, while Talks 3 and
waste director 4 reviewed proposed Solid Waste
legislation.
The Annual Convention of the North Dakota
Leaque of Cities
3. The Executive Officers of District Health
Units
4, The North Dakota Public Works Association
In formatior on Solid Waste handling, recycling, and
hazardous Waote was disseminated to local governmental
bodies and interested individuals.
-------
plenned Activity
2. V.'sste disposal site
evaluation
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
Approximately 120 waste disposal sites were
inspected to determine adequacy uf disposal
methods in use and the site itself.
Field solid waste work is done by district
engineers under contract with the State.
Contracts nave oeen issued for five multi-
county health units and two county health
units.
Evaluatl on
The 120 sites were inspected
and they represent one-third of
the total 360 sites in the State.
to date (12/31/74). 6i> of che
North Dakota population is
serviced by an accc-ctr^1 ฐ -----^c
disposal site. Tnis number cer,
be expected to increase with the
involvement of district engineers
in solid waste management. This
program will accelerate througn
the second half of FY 75 with
the addition of another full-
time staff member.
3. Technical Assistance
Assistance was
involved in
specifics will
the
given to many of the 23 counties
abandoned auto program -
follow in the appropriate section.
he Division met with the North Central Resource
Conservation & Development Office to discuss a
five-county solid waste planning project. Othc-r
assistance involved a countywide incinerator pro-
posal, a shredder for the Air Force Base in Grand
Forks,
a regional landfill
Efforts will continue witn in-
creased staffing to improve
waste handling practices in
North Dakota.
Assistance was given to the Legislative Research
Council to draw up proposed solid waste legis-
lation to provide for solid waste management and
land protection and associated regulatory powers.
This legislation is ccvpleted
and has been subsequently Intro-
duced to the 44th Legislative
Assembly in January 1975.
-------
PJ anned Actl -.n'ty
4. Abandoned Auto Reuse
Prcgrcj,;
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
Five counties have initiated participation
in the abandoned Auto Reuse Program, bring-
ing the total to 23 of the State's 53 counties,
The status of the program is as follows:
Proararn Status
Number of Counties
Eva!uation
Completed
Actively in Progress
(collection & disposal)
Surveys Completed
Surveying
Tc Survey in 1975
Not Organized
TOTAL
1
4
5
5
4
Survey teams receive program orientation train-
ing from the State prior to going to the field.
Of the five counties having completed surveys,
tnree are preparing to let bids, one is accept-
ing bic's, and one contract has been awarded at
$l/95/ton for car removal.
Participation by the counties
is increasing with the lesser
populated counties ba">kir.c; for
financial reasons. The counties
in the collection and disposal
phase are experiencing a 30/i
increase of over tonnage ssv-imai
due to good public infoi-f^iion
work by the county coordinators.
-------
Planned Ac'ci vi ty
5. Hazardous Waste Program
6. Enforcement
1st a 2nd Quarter Output
Survey forms were drafted for use in
compiling data on amounts of hazardous
waste used in the State and shipments
through the State.
A notice of violation was issued to a
private collection contractor for un-
authorized use of a city disposal site,
Evaluation
sluggish, but
will increase in
the latter
a i i cv,' ir.orfe
a viable
program.
This work is
will incre
half of FV , 3
rapid developme
Hazardous waste
Notices are issued under
Division of Hater Supply a
pollution Control and are
coordinated with the solid
waste program within the
Division.
-------
REGICu VIII MIDYEAR EVALUATION
South Dakota Solid Waste Grant
- Grant Number - L008067
- Grant Period - 7/1/74 - 6/30/75
- Grant Recipient - Department of Environmental Protection
- State Contact - Ronald Disrud
- Man Years Proposed - 3.3
- Total Project Cost - $72,081.00
- EPA Cost Share - $26,846.00
Progress to date - Acceptable
Comments - The development of the litter cleanup and anti-
litter grant program - $115,000.00 state allocation
has resulted in the site inspection, training, and
hazardous waste programs being somewhat behind
schedule. These programs are being addressed with
priority in the latter half of FY 75.
- Anticipated Program Funding for FY 76
- EPA support - $28,000.00
assuming no carryover
-------
SOU"
"H DAKOTA SOLID WASTE GRAM
EVALUATION
1. Plan and Specification
Re vie// and Per;nit
Issjance
2. Develop a Program for
Disposal of Hazardous
Hastes
3. Develop Rules and
Financial
for Local
Units
is for
Assistance
Governmental
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
13 reviews were completed. Several
proposed landfill sites were visited
for visual inspection.
Evaluation
Interim guidelines for Hazardous
Waste Disposal were developed by the
state and reviewed by EPA/Region VIII
and HQ. An engineer has been hired
(1/20/75) to have primary responsi-
in hazardous waste disposal.
bility
Completed. Approved 10/31/74, became
effective 11/27/74.
and
sub-
With the completion cf Ru'
Regulations for financial
assistance tc political
divisions responsible for solid
waste disposal, the load of permit
applications will increase. Hot
only will new sites be re v i e} ,v "J ,
but old si tcs \\' i s n i ,' :7 jx_r c cej \jฃ_
_bp_ ifisj) v_ctj3_d .
December 31,
rrating capita!
of
$170,000* remains as
1974. This money will need 10 be
dispersed in order to justify a
pending request for additional
fund allocations.
Much is yet to be done to complete
this program development. Guide-
lines need to be finalized,
hazardous waste disposal sites
need to be designated, and the
classification of hazardous wastes
is yet to be completed.
These funds have spurred interest
in solid waste planning arid land-
fill operation. This interest can
be expected to cause an increase in
activity as noted in the evaluation
entry No. 1.
state funds. Total
$300,000 for FY 75.
appropriated
-------
PoTred Acti v 1
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
Eva!nation
Inspect and Evaluate
Disposal Sites and
Collection Systems
Enforcement of Solid Waste
Regulations
Provioe Technical Assistance
to Local Governmental Units
27 refuse disposal sites and
collection systems were in-
spected.
Collected data on several operations
and participated in two contested
cases involving open burning.
Approximately 20 assistance efforts
have been reported. 23 grants have
been approved to counties and local
governments for litter cleanup and
anti-litter projects. The grants
total $115,000.
396 landfill sires are in operation
in South Dakota. 16 sites ;;ere
visited in the 2nd Quarter and 11
in the 1st. With operation permits
being reviewed annually and a site
visit being required for renai/al,
the 3rd and 4th quarters of FY 75
must include a greatly increased
emphasis on site inspections. The
necessity of these inspections is
increased due to the financial
now available for operations.
aid
As inspections proceed, enforcement
actions can be expected to increase.
Permit procedures will-.cause
compliance to established regulations.
This area has received good effort
and based on the financial assistance
offered to localities for disposal
planning and operation, the requests
for assistance can be projected to
increase.
-------
rlonned Activity
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
Evaluation
7. Public Education
8. Reports to EPA
Only 40 mandays of training have taken
place today (S operators on a 5-day
course). A Training Specialist lias
been hired such that increased
activity is anticipated.
1st and 2nd quarter reports were
received. The format is improvingj
and accomplishments are
recorded.
While news releases and public r;
of grant proposal solicitation w
probably made, no reporting of s
activity was received. More V:G;'
in the training and education is
anticipated for the 3rd and 4th
quarters of FY 75.
once
ere
ucn
-------
REGION VIII MIDYEAR EVALUATION
UTAH SOLID WASTE GRANT
Grant Number S003069
Grant Period - 7/1/74 - 6/30/75
Grant Recipient - Health Department
State Contact - Dr. Dale Parker
Man Years Proposed - 4
Total Project Cost - $87,960.00
EPA Cost Share - $43,200.00
Progress to Date - Acceptable
Cormier its - The development of the Utah Solid Waste Bureau
and hiring of the Bureau Chief, the adoption of
new waste disposal regulations, and the establish-
ment of a hazardous waste disposal site are examples
of the progress being made in Utah.
EPA support - $45,000.00
assuming no carryover funds
-------
1. Planning
2. Technical Assistance
UTAH SOLID i-JASTE GRANT EVALUATION
1st & 2nd Quarter Outputs
1) Three regional districts have created inter-
local government agreements
2) Utah County is studying possibility of establish-
ing a county-wide resource recovery system
3) One county has contracted with a private firm to
handle all of the solid waste. It is hoped that
a major pert ion will be recycled.
1) At least five major projects have involved co-
ordination with BLM, U.S. Forest Service, National
Park Service. Coordination has been achieved with
state agencies and local entities
2) Consulted with Logan City concerning high ground-
water at the city landfill
3) Consulted with Weber County on disposal of con-
struction debris
4) Inspections with Roosevelt City officials con-
cerning proposals for a new landfill
5) Discussions with Sevier County and BLM to improve
solid waste disposal in the county
6) Meetings with Utah County Council of Governments
regarding county-wide recycling program
Evaluation
Ahead of schedule with
development of inter-
On schedule. Technical
assistance requests are
expected to increase as
communities work toward
compliance with new regu-
lations
7} Assisted Salt i.
recycling program
Assisted Salt Lake City in developing a newspaper
-------
Z. Technical Assistance (Cont'd)
3. Surveillance
4. Plan reviews
5. Hazardous Waste Disposal
8) Consultation with Davis County Health
Dept. personnel regarding requirements
for a hazardous waste disposal site
9) Discussions with BLM and Minersville
officials regarding compliance with
federal and state solid waste regulations
1} 85 disposal sites were inspected and docu=
mented with inspection reports and photo-
graphs
a) 272 community disposal sites used by
384 communities
b) 11 sites have been identified,as having
leachate problems
c)
c) No sites have monitoring wells
1) Construction and operation proposals for
new landfills were reviewed. These in-
cluded site visits.
1) 22 major industries in one county were surveyed
to determine the kinds and amounts of industrial
wastes beir.g produced
2) 16 areas in 6 counties of the state have been
surveyed by the consulting geologist. The data
will be used to locate future municipal solid and
hazardous waste sites.
3) Requirements for hazardous waste disposal sites
have been formulated
4) Staff has responded to ten requests for hazardous
waste disposal technical assistance
n
On schedule
Ahead of schedule
-------
6. Training
7. Public presentations
8. Data Storage and
Analysis
9. Laboratory
1) Planning has been completed for a solid
waste symposium to be held early in the
spring for persons throughout the state
who have solid waste responsibilities
2) The Utah State Code of Solid Waste Dis-
posal Regulations became effective Aug. 14,
1974. These regulations have been distri-
buted to state, federal, and local agencies,
as well as to private individuals and in-
dustrial companies.
1) 6 presentations were conducted, including
displays at the Annual Meeting of the Utah
League of Cities and Towns, the Utah State
Fair, and two shopping malls.
1) Site data are updated after each inspection
1) No activity to date
On schedule
On schedule
State has dropped plans
for computerization of
sol id waste data
Since 11 sites have been
identified as to havino
leachate problems, we
this activity shoulJ i
initiated.
fee"
-------
REGION VIII MIDYEAR EVALUATION
WYOM'.NG SOLID WASTE GRANT
Grant Number - L008077-01-0
Grant Period - 7/1/74 - 6/30/75
Grant Recipient - Department of Environmental Quality
Man Years Proposed - 2
Total Project Cost - $63,000.00
EPA Cost Share - $31,500.00
Progress to date - Behind schedule
Comments - A solid waste coordinator has been hired and will
come on board March 3, 1975. This professional
will give necessary technical backup to programs
of disposal site development and hazardous waste
handling and disposal. New regulations will also
be developed.
Anticipated Program Funding for FY 76
- EPA support $30,000.00
Anticipating carryover of approximately $10,000.00
-------
WYOMING SOLID WASTE GRANT EVALUATION
Planned Activity
1. Disposal Site Inspection and
Inventory
2. Standards, Rules, and
Regulations
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
The state solid waste program has
identified 38 solid waste disposal
sites. 159 inspections were made
as follows:
1. air quality enforcement -
130 inspections covering
50 sites
2. water quality assistance -
27 inspections covering
23 sites
In all, 58 sites were monitored
Work has been expended on drafting State
Rules and Regulations. These rules and
regulations are slated to include hazardous
waste disposal and management criteria.
Evaluation
This program is going well
with assistance from the Air
and Water Quality sections.
Much data are being generated
and will be utilized wore
fully following the hiring
of a solid waste program co-
ordinator in March 1975,
Hazardous Waste inventory
surveys have not been made.
Increased emphasis will
come in the latter half of
FY 75.
Work is expected on updating
the statewide solid waste plan
following the Coordinator's
arrival in March 1975.
This work is ongoing and
will increase as the program
coordinator comes on board.
-------
Planned Activily
3. Technical Assistance
4, Pub!ic Information
Program
5. Interagency Coordination
and Liaison
6. Enforcement
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
43 technical assistance requests were filled.
These requests included assistance relative to
site conditions and operating procedures. These
requests were filled as follows:
1. air quality - 16 requests at 11 sites
2. water quality - 27 requests at 23 sites
Work was also expended assisting Laramie County
develop a county-wide solid waste plan.
Public information is being disseminated as op-
portunities become available. Little effort has
been expended in this area to date due to staff
limitations.
Assisted BLM with site selection criteria for new
disposal site in Torrington, Wyoming, considerable
intra-agency work is being received in both in-
spections and enforcement as indicated in those
activity sections.
One cease and desist order was issued by the Air
Quality Section for open burning at a municipal
dump.
Two notices of violation were issued by air quality
for open burning at municipal dump sites and two
notices of violation were issued by water quality
for groundwater contamination at municipal dump
sites.
Evaluation
While this type of
is expected- to incr
3rd and 4th quarter
efforts have been
to date.
assistance
c-cse in the
Good
forth
put
With the hiring of a Solid
Waste Coordinator, this area
of effort is expected to
greatly increase in the
latter half of FY 75.
This effort will increase as
the incoming solid waste co-
ordinator reviews data
gathered by himself or field
inspection teams.
-------
Planned Activity
7. Evaluation
8. Other
1st & 2nd Quarter Output
Evaluation
A ha-iardoi.: ป.,,ite survey
was to be undertake;! in
latter half of FY 75. This
effort will most likely be
carried over to FY 75.
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
jBJECT: Region IX Report for Headquarters/Regional DATE: February 18, 1975
Meeting on Solid Waste Management
ROM: Charles T. Bourns, Chief
Solid & Hazardous Waste Program, Region IX
.Q. Ralph J. Black, Director
Regional, State and Local Affairs Staff (AW562)
Attached is the report compiled at your direction, in your
memorandum dated January 3, 1975, for presentation at the,
subject meeting.
:PA Forn 1320-6 (Rev. 6-72)
-------
REGION IX SOLID WASTE REPORT
The Regional role in the National Solid Waste Management
Strategy falls under two headings:
First, we are preparing ourselves and the States for an eventual
assumption of responsibility over hazardous waste management.
California is already well advanced into this area, thanks in
no small part to our technical and financial help. During the
summer, the Region added to its staff an experienced Chemical
Engineer with twenty-five years experience in the manufacturing
and handling of hazardous chemicals. Also the Region has em-
ployed an additional Chemical Engineer whose work assignment
includes resource recovery also. A well qualified engineer,
Mr. James Stahler, was made available to the California Hazardous
Waste Program under an Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA)
assignment. Mr. Stahler had a part in the inception of the
Program and its success will owe much to his organizational
know-how. When his present assignment runs its course, his
California experience will be invaluable to the Region or to
another State following in the same path.
California now has a hazardous waste statute which assesses
fees on the waste generators. These fees will help support
the activities of the program, which include the surveillance
and enforcement duties all of which are mandated by the statute.
The hazardous waste regulatory programs of Nevada and Arizona
are not nearly so far advanced. Both are initiating surveys
to determine the characteristics and extent of their hazardous
waste problems and the identification of generators. The survey
when completed will help in the drafting and passage of hazardous
waste management legislation by their respective legislatures.
Arizona has a committee working on draft legislation now. Our
help and suggestions with these drafts have been sought and
freely given.
Hawaii and Guam consider hazardous waste of secondary importance
in comparison with solid waste, energy recovery, and pollution
of air and water.
Second, we encourage and support State control over otner types
of solid waste. Our support takes several forms. Primarily
our funding permits a staffing level which would otherwise be
unlikely. We conduct technology transfer sessions which are
instrumental in exposing field personnel to the latest techniques
Demonstration projects are invaluable to prove out laboratory
concepts on a scale which would entail too much financial risk
to be attractive to commercial investigators. The effects of
solid waste disposal techniques are being studied such as the
leachate contamination of ground water.
-------
We act as a clearinghouse for information concerning resource
recovery. This is a volatile field and requires frequent up-
dating to remain abreast of the prices of secondary materials,
recovery centers and source reduction techniques. Energy recovery
is an entire new field which has occupied much of our time and
effort. Two large scale combination resource recovery-energy
conversion projects are being considered of which one, the
Association of Bay Area Government project, is now seeking funding
to initiate a project to encompass the entire San Francisco Bay
Area. The other is a $25 million dollar project, now in planning
stage by the State Solid Waste Management Board, for the Los
Angeles area. The Board also has an active planning and demon-
stration project, just initiated on the use of rice straw.
We play a leading role in the activities of the Western Federal
Regional Council. This body looks to us for guidance in the
disposition of large stores of excess pesticides and other
hazardous wastes. With the other Federal agencies, we have
the responsibility for seeing that proper solid waste manage-
ment is employed on Federal land which includes the bulk of the
land area in our region and in compliance with the EPA guidelines
as required by Executive Order 11752.
The specific program plans for the future and accomplishments
are discussed below for each State and Territory and program
element.
-------
ARIZONA
FY-74 Grant $24,755
Tasks :
(i; Complete the State Solid Waste Management Plan to deal
with the effective management of domestic solid waste and
consider the need for future study into the management of
special wastes.
(2) Provide approved disposal facilities for the residential
communities throughout the State, upgrading existing facil-
ities where feasible.
(3) Promote the drafting and passage of solid waste legislation
and hazardous waste legislation by the State legislature.
These objectives were addressed with varying degrees of success.
The State Plan was completed early in the budget period. It
provides historical background into the solid waste picture and
indicates the direction that future development must take to
solve an increasingly difficult problem.
The upgrading of open dumps into sanitary landfills; the closure
of old burning dumps and the development of alternative solutions
is proceeding. At present, all but the smaller towns are served
by acceptable sites. Of the State population, 84.4% of the
population are so served. 53 out of 158 sites are still sub-
standard, all of them in smaller communities.
A draft bill which combined Solid and Hazardous Waste Management
was considered by a Senate committee. For various reasons, not
connected with the substance of the bill itself, it was held
there without being introduced on the floor of the Senate. The
bill was "tabled" primarily because of a "jurisdictional dis-
pute" between counties and the State and pressure applied by
lobbyists of the agricultural chemical manufacturers.
f
-------
ARIZONA
FY-75 Grant $86,830 ($50,000 grant made 7/1/74 and amended
in February 1975 to $86,830* to include Task #7
below)
Tasks:
(1) Provide approved disposal facilities for the State, up-
grading existing facilities where possible.
(2) Promote the drafting and passage of solid waste and haz-
ardous waste legislation by the State legislature.
(3) Implement a Technical Assistance Program to disseminate
solid waste and hazardous waste information to local
government, private industry and the general public.
(4) Subdivision Plan Review Program to deny permits to sub-
division until proper solid waste collection and disposal
facilities are assured.
(5) Inspection and enforcement activity.
(6) Training program.
(7) Plan and initiate a pesticide container disposal program.
(Task added February 1975.)
The FY-75 program continues the pressure on local government
to upgrade disposal sites. Special techniques are necessary
because in many instances, small communities are separated by
many miles of unpopulated desert, thereby making local disposal
sites inordinately expensive to operate. Transfer stations and
other collection systems have to be improvised to meet community
needs at a price they can afford.
Two ad hoc committees have been formed to draw up legislation
which will serve the environmental needs. Representatives from
local government from all over the State are on the committees,
wi-;h additional representation from industry and the general
public. They are attempting to draft meaningful bills in the
solid waste and hazardous waste fields for consideration by
State Senate Committee and ultimate submission to the legislature
As part of their service, the State offers technical help in
solving the solid waste dilemma. Staff engineers respond to
recuests for Technical Assistance by supplying manuals, by
lecturing and by the setting up of Technology Transfer Seminars.
*(Note: The amount of the increase by amendment to the grant for
FY-75 of $36,830 was from $6,830 from the unobligated "solid waste
money" allocated to the Region for State program support plus
$30,000 transferred by the Regional Pesticide Program to the
Solid Waste Grant to Arizona.)
-------
The Subdivision Plan Review Program has been an effective
tool in restraining uncontrolled and poorly planned housing
development. The State requires that a subdivider provide
acceptable collection and disposal of solid waste be provided
before building permits can be issued. During FY-74, out of
370 plans reviewed, 270 were held up until satisfactory conditions
were met. In six of these cases, the subdivider was forced to
build a new sanitary landfill.
The Inspection and Enforcement Activity is gaining momentum.
Routine inspections are made. Those found in violation are
so notified, with recommendations to the operating authority.
Continued violation brings a Cease and Desist order with offers
of technical help to remedy the situation. As a final weapon,
an injunction may be secured to close up the offending site.
Eight cases were successfully concluded without resorting to
the injunction step.
A training program for landfill operators has just been finished,
with Environmental Protection Agency assistance. Another will
be started, when demand warrants.
One of the pressing needs in Arizona is the lack of a designated
and acceptable hazardous waste disposal site. Currently some
such wastes are being trucked to Beatty, Nevada, 380 miles from
Phoenix, or to sites in the Southern California Metropolitan
Area, about the same distance away. As an initial step toward
securing an acceptable site for hazardous wastes, the State is
going to conduct an inventory of the hazardous wastes generators
to get an estimate of the nature, quantity and location of
hazardous wastes produced. This inventory should be concluded
by the end of the Grant period.
A persistant problem is the large amount of pesticide containers
awaiting proper disposal. These are the subject of a Grant
Amendment now being processed.
The Environmental Protection Agency is providing the techrice.!
assistance and the financial muscle to power these projects.
The State has a budget built along strict austerity lines as
mandated by State government and would probably emasculate this
program if it were not for the Federal input. Arizona, like
Nevada, is severely handicapped by its geography. The bulk of
its area is owned by the Federal government and is thus removed
from the tax rolls.
-------
Summary for ARIZONA Marvin Schlackman
OSWMP Meeting at EPA-HQ, 2/20/75 January 29, 1975
RESOURCE RECOVERY AND ENERGY CONVERSION
The Statesof Arizona has no specific enabling legislation
requiring counties, municipalities, or jurisdictions to
study or otherwise implement resource recovery from
municipal, industrial, or agricultural wastes. The State
Bureau of Sanitation is considering drafting legislation
on beverage container control for possible introduction
in this legislative session. The Bureau of Sanitation
always 'encourages' resource recovery activities, and have
identified the following programs worthy of mention:
1) Compilation (by Bureau of Sanitation) of recycling
organizations in the state.
2) Hand sorting for materials recovery (paper, glass, cans,
etc.) at the Salt River Indian Community near Scottsdale.
3) City of Phoenix establishing working committee to study
feasibility of building a major materials and energy
recovery plant for that city. (EPA-OSWMP, Rick Hopper and
EPA-Region IX, Marv Schlackman went to Phoenix in October,
1974 to offer technical assistance in getting this program
started).
4) City of Tucson doing research on methane recovery from
mixed sludge and municipal solid waste (anaerobic digestion)
5) City of Phoenix tapping methane gas from completed
sanitary landfill.
6) Five Arizona cities either studying or implementing
separate paper collection (Casa Grande, Tucson, Mesa,
Scottsdale, and Coolidge) .
PESTICIDE CONTAINER DISPOSAL
Arizona is now applying for a grant to study pesticide
container generation, reclamation, and disposal practices
in the state. They presently have no specific legislation
governing standards or procedures for pesticide container
disposal. Upon inquiry, the Bureau of Sanitation recommends
that pesticide containers (metal drums) be returned to the
manufacturers if possible, and, in lieu of that, be rinsed
and disposed in properly managed sanitary landfills. Open
burning of containers is dependent on approval by the Arizona
Bureau of Air Pollution Control.
7
-------
ARIZONA - page 2
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
Part of Arizona's solid waste management grant requires
that they study hazardous waste generation and disposal
practices in the state. The Bureau of Sanitation is presently
compiling data on hazardous waste generators, attempting
to classify hazardous wastes, and preparing draft
hazardous waste management legislation for possible
introduction in this legislative session. They have not
yet identified those landfill sites in the state which
may be best suited for hazardous waste disposal. Upon
inquiry, the Bureau of Sanitation recommends that hazardous
wastes be transported across state lines and disposed of
in other states' hazardous waste sites (e.g. in Beatty, Nev.
or West Covina, Cal.). Considering the lack of enforcement
in this area, it is likely that hazardous wastes now
generated in Arizona are frequently managed and disposed of
improperly.
-------
HAWAII
FY-74 Grant None
FY-75 Grant None
The solid waste management program in Hawaii is included in
the consolidated grant to the State Health Department, for
FY-75. It did not, however, receive any direct solid waste
funding for several reasons. The environmental program in
Hawaii operates under a functionalized organization. The State
did not use all the solid waste funds allocated to it in FY-7J
primarily because of constraints placed on the hiring of addi-
tional personnel. An audit of that years operation for all
environmental programs revealed that, under the functionalized
program, the State received adequate funding from other environ-
mental programs to also carry the authorized solid waste portion
program without additional funds from the solid waste allocation,
The author:.zed program however did not provide for action in
some areas that the Federal program desired, i.e., inventory
of generators and amounts of hazardous wastes, planning and
implementing a program to dispose of those wastes and of pesti-
cide containers. Because of budgetary constraints and limi-
tations on hiring additional staff, these areas will not likely
be included in their FY-76 program either, unless these actions
can be accomplished by contracting the work to a consultant.
There are similar serious problems in the other "island" juris-
dictions in the Pacific in these same program areas.
Hawaii is endeavoring to issue permits for all the disposal
sites in the State. Out of about sixty sites, 29 have been
permitted and three more granted a variance. When all sites
are permitted, the emphasis will shift to surveillance to es-
tablish compliance under the permits.
A Recycling Solid Waste Authorization Bill has been drafted.
It will be presented before the legislature at the Spring i97|T
session.
-------
Summary for HAWAII Marvin Schlackman
OSWMP Meeting at EPA-HQ, 2/20/75 January 29, 1975
RESOURCE RECOVERY AND ENERGY CONVERSION
The State of Hawaii has no enabling legislation requiring
counties, municipalities, or jurisdictions to study or
otherwise implement resource recovery from municipal,
industrial, or agricultural wastes. A bill to establish a
resource recovery authority was killed in the last legislative
session, but may be reintroduced this year. Many separate
collection and recycling efforts (public and private)were
severely thwarted last year when the wastepaper export
market bottomed out. Nevertheless, there are a ฃew~ongoing
programs of interest which are listed below:
1) Joint Amfac(sugar plantation company)-Hawaiian Electric
Co.-City/County of Honolulu study to determine feasibility
of using bagasse (cane wastes) and mixed solid wastes
to fire electric utility boilers.
2) Bagasse is utilized for fuel in boilers at island
plantation sites.
3) Primo Brewery pays customers for returning empty
beverage containers (glass is shipped to mainland
for reprocessing).
4) Hawaii Western Steel Co. makes construction rebars
from abandoned vehicles and other metal wastes.
PESTICIDE CONTAINER DISPOSAL
Responsibility in this area is shared by the State Department
of Agriculture and the Environmental Health Department of
Hawaii. Each county is supposed to establish either an
adequate landfill site or a pesticide incinerator for
disposal of these wastes. No such sites or incinerators
have yet been identified. The state presently requires
that pesticide and container wastes be safely stored until
final determination is made as to what to do about them.
The state recommends that metal drums be shipped back to
the mainland for disposal or reprocessing. The problem is
furthur compounded by large accumulation of pesticide and
container wastes stored at military bases on the islands.
The federal guidelines on pesticide container disposal are
being reviewed for possible adoption by the state.
to
-------
HAWAII - page 2
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
The State Environmental Health Department is responsible in
this area. Fortunately, Hawaii, having most of its industry
being tourist oriented, does not produce large volumes of
hazardous wastes. A few landfill sites have been identified
to handle "neutralized" hazardous wastes and sewage sludges.
The state recommends that hazardous wastes be shipped to
the mainland for proper disposal. Considering the lack of
regulations and enforcement in this area, it is anticipated
that some hazardous wastes are disposed of improperly. The
large military bases on Hawaii are similarly faced with
the problem of properly disposing their hazardous wastes -
much of it is presently being stored awaiting proper
disposal procedures.
-------
REGION IX REPORT ON SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
NEVADA
FY-74 Grant Awarded $17510
Tasks:
(1) Collect data on a continuous basis: provide feedback to
planning staff; monitor solid waste practices during entire
period.
(2) Establisn program objectives: redefine problems as data
feedback indicates. Forecast future problems, review State-
of-the-art for up-to-date techniques for collection, trans-
porting, recycling and ultimate disposal. Develop solutions
to problems existing and forecast. Notify Regional author-
ities of problems in this area and solicit their participa-
tion in developing solutions.
(3) Selection of solutions and establishment of priorities:
review problems and proposed solutions. Select solutions
and establish priorities for implementation in coordination
with Regional Authority.
Plan formulation: consolidate material generated in prior
tasks. Develop and publish initial draft of State Plan.
Plan to include: program objectives; summary of existing
and forecast problems with recommended solutions; descrip-
tion of State physical, economic, and other factors; and
schedule for implementation. Circulate initial draft for
comments and recommendations. Write final draft.
Plan adoption, submit final draft to State Board of Health
for approval and adoption. Revise as necessary, publish,
distribute final document.
The tasks outlined above for FY-74 all are directed toward a
single goal - the production of the State Solid Waste Management-
Plan. This plan was completed at the end of the budget period.
It provides a detailed and descriptive analysis of current solid
waste practices. Section 6 of the plan spells out the problems
and the necess;ary courses of actions required to solve them within
the context of the rural, sparsely populated, desert wasteland
which characterizes much of Nevada.
Guidance from the region formed an effective basis for the con-
struction of this document
For FY-75, the Grant provides $35,000. This will implement the
State Plan by addressing three major issues:
1. Enforcement and strengthening of State and local regu-
lations .
2. Preparation of a hazardous waste survey in anticipation
of a regulatory role in hazardous waste management.
3. Assistance at the local level for planning and problem
solving.
-------
Performance to date has been satisfactory. State has entered
into contracts with the two urban counties (with about 90% popu-
lation of the State), Washoe and Clark counties, for hazardous
waste surveys within their boundaries. These are scheduled for
completion toward the end of the Grant budget period. The rest
of the State will be canvassed by the State Staff, probably util-
izing the corps of Public Health Sanitarians. Sanitarians have
been providing the troops for the routine quarterly inspection
of the Solid Waste Disposal sites.
The Regional contribution has been effective. We have provided
the State with manpower which would not have been available with-
out our help. We have supplied them with technical help in various
ways, for example, Nevada was sent sample Hazardous Waste inventory
forms which were used in other states.
Generally, Nevada is on schedule with the work projected for
FY-75. This, in spite of the fact that both the Public Health
Engineers now responsible for the performance under the Grant
have been at their jobs only five and three months.
-------
Summary for NEVADA Marvin Schlackman
OSWMP meeting at EPA-HQ, 2/20/75 January 29, 1975
RESOURCE RECOVERY AND ENERGY CONVERSION
The State of Nevada has no enabling legislation requiring
counties, municipalities, or jurisdictions to study or
otherwise implement resource recovery from municipal,
industrial, or agricultural wastes. State Senator Cliff
Yo ang is planning to introduce beverage container legislation
in this legislative session, and public hearings will be
held on this matter in the near future. Local recycling
efforts exist in the larger city areas; the City of Las
Vejas supports some of these activities, but most are
private ventures. The lagging wastepaper market may be
hampering these efforts. No major resource recovery element
appears to be on the horizon.
PESTICIDE CONTAINER DISPOSAL
The State of Nevada Department of Agriculture has adopted
regulations similar to the federal guidelines on pesticide
container disposal. Four sites have been identified
where rinsed pesticide containers may be disposed (Lander,
Pershing, Churchill, and Humboldt counties). However, there
is little or no effort made to enforce these regulations,
and improper disposal is likely in many areas, especially
considering the vast open spaces in the state. Open
burning of pesticide containers is dependent on approval
by the Commission of Environmental Protection.
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
Nevada's Solid Waste Management law requires that hazardous
wastes may only be disposed of at sites approved by the
State Health Officer. To date, only one site at Beatty,
Nevada has been so approved. The State Bureau of Environmental
Health is currently conducting a survey to identify generators,
amounts, and types of hazardous wastes produced in the state.
-------
NEVADA - page 2
Hopefully, new hazardous waste sites will be identified
as a result of this survey, if they are needed. Considering
the lack of enforcement in the area of hazardous waste
disposal, and considering the long travel distances to
approved sites, it is likely that indiscriminate dumping
of hazardous wastes may be a widespread practice.
-------
California Solid Waste
FY-74 Grant $108400
FY-75 Grant $104600
Tasks :
(1) Develop and adopt state policy and standards for effective
solid waste management.
(2) Assure coordinated development of comprehensive solid waste
management plans for all areas of the state.
(3) Develop appropriate enforcement capabilities to enable
implementation of plans and standards.
(4) Develop and provide broad-ranging technical and legal
assistance to local agencies regarding solid waste management.
(5) Develop and adopt state policy and programs for recovery
of resources and energy from solid waste.
(6) Determine appropriate methods of providing state financial
assistance to local agencies.
(7) Develop and implement a public information program on solid
waste management.
(8) Prepare and implement a solid waste management information
storage and retrieval program.
These tasks formed a two-year program over a grant period covering
FY-74 and FY-75. To date much progress has been shown by the
State Solid Waste Management Board and its highly competent staff
of professionals . They have addressed the individual tasks as
follows:
(1) On December 20, 1974, the State Solid Waste Management
Board formally adopted the State Policy and Miminum Standards.
These were first drafted in the summer of 1974 and were the
subject of public hearings held in the Bay Area, at Fresno
and at San Diego during October and November. The Standard?
are now incorporated into the California Administrative Cod^
(2) To date, 56 of the 58 counties are in varying stages ol
solid waste management planning. Twelve of them have reached
agreement on concept with the State.
(3) The Board lacks the enforcement power which will put th_
necessary teeth into an effective program. Under the
original legislation, neither State nor local government
was giver, enforcement mandate. The Board is sponsoring
follow-up legislation to correct this.
(4) Close liaison with the counties has been established by the
assigning of individual staff members to work with specific
counties. A series of workshops were conducted statewide
to give each county planning agency the opportunity to dis-
cuss guidelines and work out problem areas with the staff.
A number of follow-up meetings have been held to help with
the county solid waste management plans. In addition to this,
a number of Technical Bulletins have been issued. The State
also functions as a clearinghouse for new techniques of solid
waste management.
-------
(5) The Board developed a Resource Recovery Program to expand
the existing material and energy recovery from solid waste.
The Board reviewed the social, political and economic
pressures on resource recovery as well as the reduction
of waste generation at the source.
(6) In May 1974 the Board entered into a contract with VTN, Inc.
and Bartle Wells Associates. The consultants were directed
to explore the financial technique available to help the
counties fund their Solid Waste Management effort. The
consultant's report was submitted to the legislature in
January 1975. The report indicates that existing financial
authority generally provides local government with adequate
options for financing Solid Waste Management facilities.
The financial assistance alternatives may be useful especially
to counties with special problems.
(7) The Board staff issues a series of technical bulletins as
part of their Public Information effort. These cover all
phases of solid waste management, resource recovery, popu-
lation projections and trends in solid waste generation.
"Solid Waste News" is a periodical newsletter sent out to
local government, the private sector and the general public.
Board members and staff appear at numerous public meetings
to discuss legislative mandates and explain the Board's policy
The Board also told its story with pictures, literature, and
a resource recovery plant model at the State Fair. The Board
is hiring a Public Information Officer to expand its public
information activity.
(8) Major activity is commencing to update and continue the
data bank originated by the Department of Health.
In general, the Board is pursuing an aggressive policy in carry-
ing out their mandate under Senate Bill 5, the existing Solid
Waste legislation. The Environmental Protection Agency is
assisting by supplying two Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA)
engineers. In addition, we are about to install a COLMIS com-
puter program in a major city. Our grant enables the State to
get and hold a high caliber staff of dedicated, professional
engineers.
n
-------
California Hazardous Waste Program
(California State Department of Health)
New agency - no FY-74 program
FY-75 Grant $219,170
This is a new Grant first made in July 1974, so no previous
history is available.
Tasks:
(1) Develop and adopt administrative regulations and enforce-
ment standards for handling, processing and disposal of
hazardous wastes.
C2) Develop, test and produce a survey form and plan and initiate
statewide program for quantification of hazardous wastes in
conformance with the Federal HWMD format.
(3) Develop, test and implement statewide a systematic surveil-
lance and enforcement plan for hazardous waste control.
(4) Develop and test model guidelines for the land disposal
of hazardous wastes by demonstration at a selected Class 1
site.
(5) Prepare report and conduct Technology Transfer Seminar on
California's Hazardous Waste Management Program, documenting
rationale, standards and institutional requirements to maxi-
mize resource conservation.
This program is becoming a proving ground for State Hazardous
Waste Programs nationwide. In an environmental area which is
largely unexplored, the California Program is leading the way
for the other states. The experience here will provide valuable
do's and don'ts to smooth a path for others to follow.
The Environmental Protection Agency has been able to make a
vital contribution to their work. With our funding they have
assembled a staff of very competent professionals. In addition
we supply an Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA) staffer whose
organizational talents have been of invaluable help in these
initial phases . This program will be self-sufficient within
two years sine 2 it will be supported by fees levied on the
haulers of hazardous wastes. We consider their work of t*-> -
highest importance not only for its impact on the California
scene but for the rest of the nation as well, since the Ca_..fornia
Hazardous Waste Guidelines are model regulations for the use of
other states .
-------
CALIFORNIA
Resource Recovery and Energy Conversion
The State of California, in July 1972, enacted into law the
Solid Waste Management and Resource Recovery Act (Senate
Bill 5). This act created the State Solid Waste Management
Board and its Advisory Council; the Advisory Council was man-
dated to prepare a Resource Recovery Program by July 1, 1974,
and the Board, after appropriate hearings, comments, and modi-
fications, adopted the final California Resource Recovery
Program on December 20, 1974. In addition to this statewide
Resource Recovery Program element, each county, in preparing
their county solid waste management plans (mandated by Senate
Bill 5 to be submitted to the Board by January 1, 1976), must
consider the opportunities for resource recovery in their
respective jurisdictions.
The Resource Recovery Program adopted by the Board does not
have the thrist and impact to make resource recovery an "over-
night" reality, as does, for example, the Connecticut Plan.
Rather, the California Resource Recovery Plan is mostly a "study"
document; i.e., the State recognizes that certain opportunities
must be studied before a direct plan of action can be under-
taken. A few "action" items are also included in the program,
but are dependent on future legislative approval and funding.
The key elements of the California Resource Recovery Program
are listed below:
(1) Each county, in its plans, will consider the opportunities
for resource recovery.
(2) An Agricultural Waste Advisory Committee will consider
opportunities for resource recovery from agricultural wastes,
(3) The Board's staff will provide technical assistance.
(4) The Board will track and review research and development
activitias in resource recovery.
(5) The Board will seek an initial appropriation of $25 million
to fund a large scale resource recovery demonstration project
in the State.
(6) The Board will study financial assistance mechanisms that
facilitate implementation of resource recovery.
(7) The Board will work with state and local procurem
-------
(10) The Board will work with industries to modify product
configurations to increase the opportunities for using
secondary materials,
(11) The Board will help establish a marketing clearinghouse
for secondary materials.
(12) The Board will encourage source separation programs and
help counties implement them.
(13) The Board will support educational programs in this area.
(14) The Board recognizes product disposal taxes as a means to
reduce the non-recyclable waste generation.
The Solid Waste Management Board and its staff is already
working in specific areas to make some of these resource re-
covery elements a reality. About $250,000 of a recent appro-
priation by the legislature will be used to identify a site for
the proposed $25 million demonstration facility; part of this
appropriation will be used to study the market conditions and
economics that will make this demonstration feasible. Another
$150,000 has been appropriated to fund a rural resource recovery
program that will bale rice straw on the fields so that it may
be used for energy recovery or composting. In addition, as part
of the Board's Litter Management Program, a committee is being
formed to study packaging and source reduction mechanisms;
Marvin Schlackman of our staff at EPA Region IX will be on that
committee.
Besides the efforts of the Solid Waste Management Board, there
are a number of other programs being studied and implemented by
the public and private sectors in California. Though no effort
will be made here to identify all of them, some of the important
programs are listed below:
(1) Pacific Gas and Electric Company/East Bay Municipal Utility
District/R.M. Parsons project to study the feasibility of
establishing a 1750 tons per day pyrolysis facility in the
Bay Area.
(2) Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAC) project to com-
post combined solid wastes/sewage sludge/and dredger spoils
and barge it to the Sacramento Delta for disposal on the
land (State and Federals working on modifying this project
for energy conversion for possible Federal Government funding)
(3) EPA funded Garrett Research, 200 tons per day, pyrolysis
project in San Diego County.
(4) Methane gas production from landfills in Southern and
Northern California.
(5) EPA funded Combustion Power's CPU-400 project for on-site
electrical generation from solid wastes.
(6) Materials recovery at transfer stations in Southern and
Northern California.
(7) About 25 separate collection programs in the State (some
being threatened by the slack in wastepaper export).
-------
(8) Hundreds of recycling depots around the State.
(9) City of Long Beach study to establish a large scale re-
source recovery facility there.
(10) Recovery of energy from wood wastes at timber cutting
establishments.
(11) Some small scale composting and mulching operations around
the State.
(12) Some recycling of oil wastes by re-refiners and hazardous
waste site operators.
(13) Bank of America paper recycling project using out-of-date
files and records.
(14) Contra Costa County Sanitation District's plan to use energy
from solid wastes to power its water treatment plant.
(15) Studies in each county (mandated by Solid Waste Management
Board) of resource recovery opportunities.
-------
CALIFORNIA
Hazardous Waste Disposal
The State Department of Health has primary responsibility
in the area of hazardous waste disposal. Assembly Bill 598,
signed into law December 13, 1972, mandated that the Depart-
ment of Health adopt regulations for handling, processing,
and disposing hazardous wastes. It also mandated that the
Department list hazardous wastes, create a uniform record-
keeping system, create a hazardous waste technical advisory
committee, and prepare a fee schedule which hazardous waste
disposers pay to finance the Department's efforts in this area.
In June, 1974, the Department of Health issued their guidelines
for handling hazardous wastes. Lists of hazardous wastes are
contained therein, broken down into toxic, corrosive and irritant,
flammable, strong sensitizer, and pressure or heat generating
categories. Provision is also made for hazardous waste materials
not specifically mentioned on the lists. A record-keeping form
is shown, available through the Department of Health or the
Water Resources Control Board, requiring a variety of information,
including the waste generator's name, the hauler's name, the
disposal facility, and the amounts and types of wastes disposed.
A fee schedule is also indicated, whereby the Department will
collect $1.00 for the first ton and $.60 for each succeeding
ton of hazardous waste disposed.
The Department of Health is a recipient of an EPA grant to
further study the generation, amounts, types, transportation,
and whereabouts of hazardous wastes in the State. This study
will hopefully lead to ideas and motivations for recycling
these wastes for reuse. The fee schedule is another incentive
to encourage hazardous waste generators to reuse or recycle
their sludges and wastes.
Some hazardous wastes are incinerated for heat recovery and/or
volume reduction (including pesticide and container wastes).
Some of these programs are in the developmental stages and
might provide new avenues for hazardous waste management in
the future in California.
-------
CALIFORNIA
Pesticide Container Disposal
The California Department of Food and Agriculture has primary
responsibility in the area of pesticide container disposal.
Specific regulations on the subject are detailed in Article 10
of the California Administrative Code.
A pesticide container triple rinsing procedure is required
for containers less than 28 gallons. The Department of Agri-
culture recommends that, whenever possible, these containers
be shipped back to the manufacturer for reprocessing. The
same recommendation is made for containers greater than 28
gallons. Rinsed metal containers (less than 28 gallons), un-
rinsed large containers (greater than 28 gallons), and empty
sacks that have contained pesticides must then be disposed of
at landfill sites approved by the Regional Water Quality Control
Boards. In California, landfill sites classified as Class I
or Class II-l meet this approval requirement. Open burning of
pesticide containers is prohibited except by variance by the
Regional Air Pollution Control Districts.
Periodically, an Interagency task force on pesticide container
disposal meets to discuss subjects and problems pertinent in
this area. Apparently, one of the most difficult problems is
ascertaining whether or not pesticide containers have been
properly rinsed as required by law. The Department of Agri-
culture is looking into analytical techniques that can be used
to determine compliance with the triple rinsing procedure.
At present, they only require a written statement from the
user that the containers have been properly rinsed.
California, being the largest agricultural state in the nation,
probably has the biggest pesticide container disposal problem..
Fu. 1 compliance with the regulations would minimize the proh_nem,
bu- it is likely that improper disposal of pesticide containers
is a widespread phenomenon. The Department of Agriculture does
not have sufficient staff to completely enforce the regulations,
and they depend on voluntary compliance or information from
farm labor organizations to seek out the violators.
-------
AMERICAN SAMOA
FY-74 Grant $26,000
FY-75 Grant $22,500
American Samoa was handicapped early in FY-"74 by the resignation
of the sanitary engineer who was manager of its solid waste opera-
tion. The Solid Waste Project Manager's position has remained
unfilled to this date. This necessitated carry-over of most of
the FY-74 grant into FY-75. This vacancy resulted in the situa-
tion where the Solid Waste Program got no attention during the
year.
American Sairoa has serious solid waste management problems.
The generation of solid waste is up fifty percent over this
period. Satisfactory landfill sites are hard to come by because
of the potential damage to the water supply. Suitable fill
material is scarce. Most important, the mechanical skills
needed to operate such a program are almost non-existent in
American Samoa. For these reasons it is imperative that a
Project Manager be hired who has the practical knowledge neces-
sary to train local operators in the safe operation of heavy
mechanical equipment and direct implementation of the recently
completed solid waste management plan.
The Regional office has been instrumental in locating a quali-
fied candidate for Project Manager. The Government of American
Samoa accepted his qualifications but, because of a "cash-flow"
problem, balked at offering him a contract until half the grant
amount was advanced to cover his initial salary and expenses.
This is now being provided and presumably the position may now
be considered as filled.
Obviously the future of solid waste management is directly tied
to Federal financial support and technical assistance. With
the presence of a qualified Project Manager, we are expecting
that the program in American Samoa will now move off dead
center.
-------
GUAM
FY-74 Grant $26,000
In the past eight years, Guam solid waste management has gone
from primitive to a model operation. Recent indications suggest
that it is backsliding again, although this is hotly denied by
Guam Environmental Protection Agency officials. At one point,
collection was regular and dependable, the fifty gallon drum
garbage container was disappearing, and the emergence of clan-
destine dumps was coming under control. Recently, however,
visitors returning from Guam bring disquieting reports concerning
the solid waste practices, particularly at the Ordot sanitary
landfill.
The late approval of the FY-74 consolidated grant application
resulted in significant lost time during FY-74. The creation
of Guam Environmental Protection Agency and the hiring of Mr.
Jerry Wager and Mrs. Suzanne Wilkins during the year promises
to improve the solid waste situation. In the past, there was
ill will and outright antagonism between Guam Environmental
Protection Agency, the regulatory body and the Department of
Public Works, the operating authority. Reportedly this is over
now, with the advent of a new administration on Guam. It was
our feeling that solid waste held a low priority with both
groups. Guam Environmental Protection Agency was pre-occupied
with water and air problems to the exclusion of solid waste,
while Department of Public Works concentrated on road construc-
tion. The recently concluded political campaign was a factor
in these decisions.
For FY-75, Guam Environmental Protection Agency is targetting
several goals:
(1) Establishment of a transfer stations in an effort to suppress
the continued use of open dumps. Waste would be brought to the
transfer station for hauling to the island's only sanitary land-
fill at Ordot.
(2) Passage of a Solid Waste statute through the Guam xegisla-
ture. A draft bill has been drawn up for their consideration.
(3) Encourage the enactment of container legislation. This is
going to be a difficult problem since the military commissaries
are the source of most of the beverage containers.
Without the inclusion of solid waste money in the consolidated
grant, it is our feeling that the program would collapse. This
would be a disastrous blow to the water program as well, since
there are indications that the sub-standard sites are potential
leachate sources directLy affecting the aquifer which supplies
most of the drinkiig wa :er for the island. EPA can help with
the grant primarily. In addition, we can and we will use our
influence within the Federal establishment on the island's mili-
tary authorities. Since the Department of Defense accounts for
two-thirds of Guam's economy, military cooperation in all environ-
mental matters is essential.
~
-------
REPORT ON PLANNING CONFERENCES WITH STATES ON PLANNING OF
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS FOR FY-76
Region IX, in response to Agency directives to coordinate FY 1976
planning with State agencies conducted a two-day meeting with State
of California agencies on January 20-21 and with other regional states
(including Guam) on January 22-23. General format of the meetings
was for each of the four media (Air, Water, Solid Waste, and Pesticides)
to present its national strategy, regional strategy, and suggested
ranking of priorities for individual states to their state counterparts.
The states were given an opportunity to state their priorities and to
engage in dialogue. There was a closing session on intermedia problems
at which solid waste interests were significant. Our written material
is attached. Other significant items are given below.
California: They generally agreed with our priorities although
their activities differ slightly because hazardous wastes and other
solid wastes are in separate agencies. The Solid Waste Management Board
ranks resource recovery somewhat higher than does EPA.
Intermedia problems involving sewage sludge, manure, other agricul-
tural wastes, and incineration were discussed. Also, the concept of
residuals management (loosely defined as an integrated systems approach
dealing with all Wastes, hazardous or not, from water & waste treatment
processes, agriculture, industry, and municipalities). Was discussed
and recognized that air and water abatement actions often have solid
waste implications. The Regional Office is exploring the possibilities
of using Sec 208 Planning Grant (1972 Water Quality Act) to set up
integrated regional (sub-state) agencies to manage all aspects of waste
management including land use planning. California with a new
administration that is planning to combine most environmental programs
and presently existing regional water and air pollution districts (which
do not have similar boundaries) is a likely candidate to attempt such an
approach.
Arizona: They believe their major intermedia Solid Waste problem
is planning and that it should be interfaced with water planning.
Apparently, there has been some problem in getting BLM land for
sanitary land fills in some cases.
Guam: They rank their priorities as water, air, solid waste, and
pesticides. Scrap autos are already being sold to Taiwan and Guam
hopes to start selling aluminum. There is concern about potential
leachate problem from Andersen AFB sanitary landfill.
Hawaii: Priority rankings are water, solid wastes, air. They are
very concerned about resource recovery, expecially for energy generation.
We have been approached for financial assistance in such projects. Dr.
James Kumagai, Hawaii's new Deputy Director of Health for Environment,
says if he gets another man in department would probably put in solid
wastes program working on resource recovery.
-------
-2-
Nevada: Top solid waste priority is hazardous waste inventory completion.
The state does not feel they have significant intermedia problems except
perhaps S02 quantities from power plants.
Summary: This exercise with the state was very informative. It was
also time consuming, perhaps unnecessarily so. The concept of residuals
management by a combined regional pollution abatement agency is one that
has significant implications, (both positive and negative) for Solid
Waste Management agencies and they should keep involved in any
activities that are being carried out.
-------
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY
I. PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
There are two principal objectives of the National Solid Waste Management
Program:
A. Environmental Protection by achieving safe and acceptable manage-
ment of waste residuals from all sources. Particular emphasis will
be given to control of hazardous wastes.
B. Resource_ Conservation_ by source reduction and recycling of materials
where feasible.
II. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
A. Residuals management^ will be obtained by regulatory control of
storage, treatment, and disposal. Due to the lack of federal regula-
tory authority, much of this must be accomplished by developing state
and local authorities and programs by financial and technical assistance,
B. Procedu_r_oj;_ will be developed to insure that federal facility solid waste
management practices conform to guidelines promulgated under Sec-
tion 209 o: the Solid Waste Act and Section 19 of FIFRA.
C. Resource conservation^ will be attacked at the national level by support
of demons.ra1 ion projects and investigation of possible source reduction
via econonic regulation. The regional office will support state and
local organizations seeking to develop feasible projects by supplying
information, technical assistance, and perhaps financial support.
1
-------
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
Regional Office
I. Hazardous War.te Regulation and Control_
A. Develop and implement regulatory strategy by working with states
to obtain enabling legislation and adequate regulations to control
hazardous wastes. Provide financial and technical assistance to
state programs . Provide federal facility control through the Fed-
eral Regional Council Task Force for Hazardous Wastes Management.
B. Develop hazardous waste inventory to define the problem and pro-
vide a system of regulatory controls by matching waste generation
source inventories with waste disposal site inventories.
C. Provide for disposal of pesticides and containers by approved means
II. Planning for Total Residual s Man a g erne n t
This task would involve an inter-program effort in the regional office
to develop the concepts of total residual management. Participation of
state agencies will be encouraged and a candidate county or area agency
will be sought to develop a pilot plan.
III. Support State/Local/Federal Efforts in Solid Waste Management
A. Regulatory/enforcement programs will be supported financially
with particular emphasis on closing dumps, obtaining necessary
legislation, and approval of disposal sites.
B . Training and technical assistance will be provided to develop
expertise in the regulatory programs,
C. R. & D. needs will be identified and supported.
D. Federal facility compliance of guidelines will be monitored.
-------
IV. Resource Conservation
Regional assistance to state and local resource recovery programs will
be by evaluation and dissemination of information about existing systems
and by helping in decision-making on feasible local projects.
SOLID WASTE PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
BY STATE
Arizฎna
t
1. Pass hazardous waste legislation
ฃ
2. Develop hazardous waste inventory
3. Support state/local/federal efforts in SWiVi'
c
4. Csncider candidate county for total residual management study
5. Pesticide container disposal
G. Resource conservation
Cc 1 i
*>,''
J . rnplerncnt state hazardous waste management program
G (f\(-
2. Develop hazardous waste inventory system
3. Support state/lccal/federal efforts in SWM
1. Consider candidate csunty for total residual management study
i
5. Assist state resource conservation efforts
>
G. i-osticide container disposal
-------
Hawaii
f, '
1. Support state/local/federal efforts in SWM
2. Obtain improved hazardous waste management regulations I /=
3. Resource conservation ;t
<
4. Pesticide container disposal
f - C
5. Total residual management
^ <=-? ~/
6. Hazardoiis waste inventory
Nevada
c,'
1. Support state/local/federal efforts in SWM
c, > ^
I 2. Hazardous wastes inventory
" 3. Develop hazardous wastes regulations
4. Pesticide container disposal
<.,r-<
5/ Resource recovery
f. '-
6. Total residual management:.
3|f
-------
SOLID WASTES
Th :i Bdy /Delta Resource Recovery Projec
The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAC) , has
tahert the lead in organizing a region-wide system of resource
recovery. Local agencies throughout the San Francisco Bay
and Delta region have shown support for proposals that call
for centralized processing facilities to extract marketable
materials from Bay Area refuse. Separated organic matter
could be used for compost in the agricultural lands of the
Delta (perhaps combined with sewage sludge and dredge spoil) ;
construction fill for levees which protect the Delta islands
from tidal action and flooding; or energy conversion. The
project as now proposed, provides only for use of the compost
mixture as construction fill for levees. ABAC would like to
initiace Phase I which would provide more technical and economic
information on the various alternatives .
Problem: While there is interest in and commitment to the
benefits cf the region-wide approach, there are problems in
creating an institutional framework to make it work. Contracts
with existing refuse collectors, city/county jurisdictions
ar.l ordinances all must be reconciled. Federal agencies such
as EPA, Bureau of Mines, Corps of Engineers and- the Department
of Agriculture, are interested in aspects of the various alter-
natives but lack of specific authorization on grant programs
have precluded Federal funding beyond a small ($61,800) plan-
ning grant from EPA. The present State of California budget
authorization for funding was restricted to one alternative
course of action which is questioned on basis of cost effect-
iveness and possible environmental impacts. Further considera-
tion needs to be given to evaluate all aspects of all viable
alternatives for use or disposal of the organic portion of the
waste stream.
Progress: ABAC has established a Board of local and regional,
public and private members which has overseen the institutional
arrangements and preliminary engineering studies for the project.
T'" e State of California has made a specific budget authorization
of $2.3 million for the Bay Delta Resource Recovery Project which
expires June 30, l!)76. The Western Federal Regional Council has
dra-ted a Memorandum of Accord between the Federal agencies
wit-*-' an interest in the project to provide direct technical
a^s" stance and to identify potential Federal funds to match
s7-at-" and~local funds for a continuation of the ABAC approach.
iV.-jrj "~ie Council arid the State Solid Waste Management Board are
c.v-r^ratiiig with A1:AG in attempting to establish an interim
s';;3J3"~to evaluate cill aspects cf other alternative courses of
action and aet the State Legislation modified to extend time
and use funds on best alternative course of action.
32,
-------
Pate
7-23-74 New [ ]: Continuing [X]; Amended [ 1
TENTATIVE
WESTERN FEDERAL RfBierfS&l COUNCIL
FY 1975 OBJECTIVE AUD OPERATING PLAN
FRC GOAL #IV ACTIVITY # IV-B: Hazardous Waste Management
TASK FORCE GOAL; To provide fป rnnrdinatpH nvervlow *nH nnioer mechanism for technology and informational
transfer relating to the management of hazardous materials 1n an environmentally safe manner within the
Federal Establishment throughout Region IX.
BACKGROUND/APRROACH: This is a continuation of FY 1974 activity. The Council serves primarily as parent
to an interagency group including many non-WFRC member agencies which came together to coordinate ami
rationalize their individual efforts in the area of hazardous waste management.
IMPLEMENTING
LEAD AGENCY:
MECHANISM: Hazardous Waste Ha
Task Force
EPA OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITY:
Resources Standing Committee
nagement
Natural
(NRSC)
OBJECTIVES
RESOURCE
REQUIREMENTS
AGENCY STAFF INVOLVED:
EPA. USDA, DOT9 GSA,
DOD, USDIB AEC
ACTION
PROGRAM
YES [ ]
FUNDS
NO
BY TARGET
INVOLVED
[X]
DATE
1.
2.
Develop directory of agency personnel working in i Task Force
hazardous waste materials in region (2nd edition). j
Develop inventory of hazardous materials and '
wastes stored in, transported through, ;
destined for, or disposed within Federal i
Establishment of Region IX. I
a. Develop capability ! Task Force
b. Assess inventory effectiveness I Task Force
c. Implementation of inventory. Task Force
3. Design and promote adoption of action plans for
environmentally sound management of these materials.
12/31/74
12/1/74
3/1/75
6/30/75
-------
4.
5.
' 1
OBJECTIVES ; ACTION BY TnRGET DATE
a. Develop selection criteria for disposal Task Force 3/1/75
sites.
b. Design computerized recycling programs
including all Federal Agencies.
c. Develop operational criteria for hazardous
waste disposal sites.
d. Federal action to secure a disposal site(s)
or develop criteria for commercial operation.
e. Compendium of laws and regulations and criteria
on transportation of hazardous waste.
f. D.O.D. pesticide disposal
Coordinate final disposition actions with appropriate
state and local agencies.
Final Task Force Report
i
Task Force
Task Force
Task Force
Task Force
Task Force
Task Force
Task Force
;
t
1/1/75
6/30/75
6/30/75
12/1/74
Annual Reports
each 6/30
As needed
Unknown
:e adopted: 7-23-74 New f ] ; Continuing [XX]; Amended [ ] (date)
-------
TENTATIVE
LAND DISPOSAL CRITERIA SUBCOMMITTEE
FY 1975 OBJECTIVE & OPERATING PLAN
OBJECTIVE: Develop the selection criteria for hazardous waste disposal sites in the three State area
"TCaTifornia, Nevada, Arizona) encompassing hydrogeologic, engineering, socio-economic, and land use
criteria for use in FY 76 by the various Federal Agencies.
WORK ELEMENTS
1. Develop a site screening/selection
system for physical and chemical
site considerations.
2ซ Develop a screwing system for land
use considerations that vjoisld high-
light existing and potential use
conflicts.
3. Reviev; of sc-I^Mers criteria by
isjtl.jpe'Hy^ul ciy-.-fc^y (USES) arid
organization (!uc!>.rvf-.nal Hygiene
Association)
4. Prepare final report for publication.
50 Publish final report
G. Incorporate Site Selection Criteria
into a specification for 'evaluating
site Gp&v'i.lion p;'0,:'f^?:]s.
ACTION BY
Subcommittee
Subcommittee
Subcommittee
Subconwiittee
EPA/D.O.D.
Site Operation and
Management Subcommittee
TARGET DATE
March 1, 1975
March 1, 1975
1, 1975
June 15, 1975
August 1, 1975
August 1, 1975
-------
BRIEFING REPORT
REGION X STATES
SOLID WASTE
This report gives a brief rundown of each of the States in Region X
as was requested for the headquarters/regional solid waste management
meeting. Each state is covered individually in a form consistent with
that requested.
ALASKA
FY-75 Grant - A new grant was not negotiated for FY-75. The
previous grant ($35,356-Federal) was extended for an additional year
and the carryover funds used to hire a field technical operations
and enforcement man. The original objectives of the grant were met
with the development of the State Solid Waste Plan; signature by the
Governor is pending. Regulations have also been promulgated by Alaska
and primary activities are now related to technical assistance and
enforcement of the new standards. Alaska is not expected to beco,~r,.j
significantly involved in hazardous waste ar-.c resource recovery for
several years. Due to the large land area arid sparse population -v ;,,a.'
of these areas currently has significant implications in Alaska except
possibly in the Anchorage area. Imp!ementatier; arid enforcement of
the solid waste standards will.be a major challenge for the next ft,-/
years because of poverty, sparse population, weather conditions anc
the extremely independent nature of the Alaskan people.
Current solid waste staffing in Alaska including secretarial support
stands at 5 man years. As stated earlier, no new EPA solid waste crani
I L
-------
was awarded in FY-75. Alaska's primary accomplishments under EPA funding
have been the development of the State Plan and adoption of standards...
Considering the late date at which they started (FY-72), the small
amount of grant funding they have received and their small staff, Region
X feels adequate progress has been made. Anticipated EPA grant support
is expected to remain small in FY-76 [$ZO?QCO). Enforcement a,nd
technical assistance will be supported.
Alaska, is made up of vast amounts of land held by the Federa".
government. Because of severe weather conditions most agencies are
turning to the small incinerator as the means to achieve EPA sta.naards.
This trend should continue.
EPA guidance documents are relevant to Alaska and any of the other
States in Region X. The basic strategy is broad and well thought cut
and it would be difficult for anyone to disagree with its context.
It gives the States a better feel as to where EPA stands under current
thinking.
IDAHO
Idaho was awarded $35,000 for the period January la 1975 - June 30,
1976. No new funding will be required in FY-76. Idaho has come a Icr.ci
way but has relied on EPA support since FY-56. They have developed c.
State Plan, carried out an industrial survey, developed State sollc.
vaste regulations, and initiated a technical assistance program to
develop a solid waste plan for each county. Without EPA support Idaho's
program would have never proceeded as far as it has, In past year- the
percentage of their staff supported by EPA iic.s dropped from 75 pe.-xant
-------
to 50 percent. Current staffing with secretarial support is 7 man years.
Three of these man years are employed for technical assistance anc
enforcement purposes in fie.ld offices.
Under the EPA grant that expired on December 31, 1974, Idaho was
committed to technical assistance and enforcement activities. They
determined that the best approach was to go out and talk to each county,
explain the regu ations and offer to actually develop an implementation,
plan for them. Local governments reacted positively to this approach.
because instead of just being told to comply with more regulations they
were actually receiving assistance in developing the details for
compliance. During the grant period (July 1, 1973-December 31, 1974)
the number of counties with implementation plans increased from 5 to 17,
The percentage of population served by approved sanitary landfill Is
now approximately 55 percent.
Idaho does not have a formal permit system but each site must
receive their approval. Idaho is serious about their regulations and
if their voluntary technical assistance for compliance approach is
resisted, they have attempted court action. Only one county has
refused cooperation and the State is working witn the local prosecjtures
office to get satisfaction. It has not been easy,, however, and ~;l"c
formal court action approach is extremely time consuming,
The new grant jus. awarded for the period (January \, 1975 - . L, ^ 30,
1976) will continue to support the implementation and enforcement Activities,
In addition, however, the State will begin to enter the hazardous waste
and resource recovery areas more heavily. Trie best sanitary lar,c,fi ซis
in the State from a soils basis, etc. will be selected as State approved
-------
sites for pesticide container disposal. Resource recovery activities
will be limited to working with the State legislature on proposed
resource recovery legislation.
Currently the legislature is working on a bottle bill similar to
that adopted by the State of Washington i.e., (tax on manufacturing),
A Oregon type bottle bill failed last year. Tne legislature is also
close to passing a law which will require -chat solid waste handling
be given the same consideration as sewers3 etc., when permits are
being issued for subdivisions.
The same comments given for Alaska regarding EPA guidance documents
are applicable to Idaho. Overall Region X is very pleased with the
progress made by the State of Idaho and we will continue to support
them in any way possible.
OREGON
Oregon was awarded $653000 in grant monies for FY-75. This money
was combined with an existing grant of $355030ซ The project pence;
for this grant is January 1, 1974 through Decernoar 31, 1975, The
grant was for the Oregon hazardous waste management program. Oregon
was committed to develop hazardous waste disposal regulations, evc":u5;i-
hazardous waste disposal sites and -issue i. disposal site license,
implement a hazardous materials clearinghouse., ana develop a recic:^ hazardous
waste collection system for individual counties.
Under this grant Oregon has proposed hazardous waste disposa",
regulations although the regulations have not yet been adopted by the
State. Much time has been invested in hearings concerning }:cer.L\r.c a
private hazardous waste site, but no site has been put in opera'cicr,.
-------
A proposal has been brought before the legislature which would allow
the State to operate a hazardous waste disposal site. The Oregon hazardous
waste program has taken steps to implement their hazardous materials
clearinghouse and much time has been invested in evaluating specific
hazardous waste disposal methods. This is especially true in the area
of pesticide containers.
As far as status of the overall solid waste management program in
Oregon, things are moving quickly into implementation. The State
has provided money and required each county to develop a solid waste
plan. When the plan is adopted by the county and approved by the
State, the county becomes eligible for State implementation money.
Under this program the State can provide a grant for 30% of the implementation
money necessary and provide a loan for the additional 70%. The Oregon
solid waste staff is experiencing problems in handling these funds,
though, and the FY-76 EPA funding will be used to provide fllpllSlSL
f$> the staff with a capability to handle this problem. In FY-76 a
minimum of $40,000 will be required to enable the implementation program
to proceed. Tentative plans are to amend the current hazardous waste
grant to end July 1, 1975 and combine the hazardous waste money with
a solid waste grc'nt for FY-76.
Oregon solid waste staffing currently stands at 13, Four of these
positions are in regional field offices fcr technical assistance a-r.c
enforcement. Oregon has legislation in sclid waste management,
hazardous waste nanagement, and resource recovery. The solid wasta
legislation requires County plans and provides grants and loans to assist
in plan implementation. Hazardous waste legislation mandates development
-------
of regulations and a disposal site, and resource recovery legislation
is of course the Oregon Bottle Bill. The planning portion of the
County solid waste programs is almost complete and implementation steps
are underway.
Legislative activity in solid waste in Oregon is very prominent.
State legislation pending include formation of a State operated hazardous
waste disposal site, funding of an energy recovery demonstration project,
and eight bills dealing with different aspects of resource recovery,
The resource recovery legislation includes; packaging legislation, an
extension of the bottle bill, mandatory recycling of office paper In
State buildings, and a percentage requirement at disposal sites for
minimum resource recovery levels.
EPA guidance documents are relevant to Oregon solid waste programs.
Mostly, the same comments for Alaska and Idano apply to Oregon. Oregon
has expressed special interest in pending Federal legislation which
would place EPA nore prominently into the solid or hazardous waste
picture.
An interesting project which is being pushed by the Oregon solid
waste staff concerns energy recovery from solid waste. Because of
the difficulties with disposal experienced in Western Oregon because
of the climate the Sta'.e staff is working towards area wide adoptior.
of energy recovery. Legislation is proposed which would make Ste,ti
funds available to demonstrate energy recovery operations utilizing
solid waste in wood waste burners. Realization of this goal would
place about half of Oregon in an energy recovery program, This proposed
action has the support of the Governor.
-------
WASHINGTON
Washington was awarded a grant of $100,000 for FY-75 which was
part of a consolodated air, water and solid waste grant package. The
grant covered the areas of technical assistance and implementation, hazard-
our waste and resource recovery. This includes administration of the
State's grant and loan program for construction of solid waste disposal
and resource recovery facilities. A total of $8.9 million was allocated
this year. .The State was committed to the closure of 69 dumps through
the second quarter of which a total of 63 was accomplished. They were
committed to completion of their hazardous waste survey report which was
received in September 1974. They were also committed to taking the first
steps for initiation of new hazardous waste and resource recovery
legislation. Initial drafts of both have been completed and the Governor
has introduced the resource recovery bill in the legislature,
Washington has taken the leadership role for the states in Region X
and has moved well into all areas of solid waste management. Much
of this has been accomplished because they utilized EPA grant mor.ies
to expand their staff. This leaves them quire dependent upon EPA to
keep things moving as the State will not pick up all the positions EPA
supports. However, the number of EPA suppcrced man years has been
slowly reduced. In FY-76 a minimum of $1GO,GCO will be requirec for
Washington to continue its leadership role in Region X.
Washington current staffing stands at 19. Eight of these positions
are utilized in the field offices for technical assistance and enforcement.
Washington has extensive legislation requiring county plans, local standards
that meet the State minimum, a permit system and a loan and grant program
-------
totaling $30 million. Most of the county planning is complete anc!
enforcement and implementation is accomplished through the compliance
schedules required in the plans and through dangling the carrot of
grant funds.
The same comments relative to Alaska, Idaho and Oregon apply to
Washington regarding the relevancy of EPA guidance documents. However,
because of the size and broad nature of Washington's solid waste program,
we have noted particular interest from them. 'They are very interested
in EPA's latest thinking and plans.
An interesting project EPA has taken on in Washington is related
to enforcement action on Indian lands. One of the largest landfills
on the Northwest is located in a wetlands area on the Tulalip Reservation,
Over the years the State has been unable to close the operation because
of jurisdictional problems. The State asked Ei3A to step in and Region
X is working with the Department of Justice to get a satisfactory closure
settlement. The case has been most difficult from an enforcement
standpoint because of inadequate water laws and no direct solid we.ste
laws related to improper dumping practices, however the severity of this
situation has enabled us to gather sufficient evidence for a stror.g case.
------- |