United States Solid Waste and EPA530-K-02-019I
Environmental Protection Emergency Response October 2001
Agency (5305W)
RCRA, Superfund & EPCRA
Call Center Training Module
Introduction to:
RCRA Solid Waste Programs
Updated October 2001
-------
DISCLAIMER
This document was developed by Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. under contract 68-W-01-020 to EPA.
It is intended to be used as a training tool for Call Center specialists and does not represent a
statement of EPA policy.
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA s
regulations or policies. This document is used only in the capacity of the Call Center training and
is not used as a reference tool on Call Center calls. The Call Center revises and updates this
document as regulatory program areas change.
The information in this document may not necessarily reflect the current position of the Agency.
This document is not intended and cannot be relied upon to create any rights, substantive or
procedural, enforceable by any party in litigation with the United States.
RCRA, Superfund & EPCRA Call Center Phone Numbers:
National toll-free (outside of DC area) (800) 424-9346
Local number (within DC area) (703) 412-9810
National toll-free for the hearing impaired (TDD) (800) 553-7672
The Call Center is open from 9 am to 5 pm Eastern Time,
Monday through Friday, except for federal holidays.
-------
RCRA SOLID WASTE PROGRAMS
CONTENTS
1. Introduction 1
2. Municipal Solid Waste 2
2.1 EPA's Integrated Waste Management Hierarchy 3
2.2 Source Reduction 4
2.3 Recycling 5
2.4 Combustion 9
2.5 Landfilling 11
2.6 Municipal Solid Waste Management Issues 12
3. Industrial Solid Waste 15
-------
-------
Solid Waste Programs - 1
1. INTRODUCTION
During the 1980s, solid waste management issues began to pose potential crises in
many areas of the country because of increasing solid waste generation, shrinking
landfill capacity, rising disposal costs, and strong opposition to new solid waste
facility siting. This problem was illustrated by the much-publicized Mobro garbage
barge, which traveled on a 6-month odyssey of over 6,000 miles, including 6 states
and 4 countries, before the cargo was finally disposed in New York, where it was
originally generated. Many solid waste management officials are faced with
problems posed by shrinking landfill capacity and increased costs. The growing
volume of waste generated has made it increasingly important to develop an
overall strategy to manage wastes safely and effectively and to reduce the amount
and toxicity of material entering the solid waste stream.
RCRA §4001 encourages environmentally sound solid waste management practices
that maximize the reuse of recoverable material and foster resource recovery.
Unlike regulations addressing hazardous waste management, EPA has not
promulgated regulations dictating how solid wastes should be managed. Instead,
solid waste is primarily regulated by states and municipalities and managed on the
local level. The only exceptions are the 40 CFR Part 257 federal solid waste disposal
facility criteria for nonhazardous, nonmunicipal landfills, and the Part 258
municipal solid waste disposal facility criteria. EPA set forth these regulations to
specify how landfills are to be designed and operated. Primarily, EPA's role in
implementing solid waste management programs includes setting national goals,
providing leadership and technical assistance, and developing educational
materials.
This module focuses on EPA's efforts in two areas: municipal and industrial solid
waste. The garbage that is managed by our local governments is known as
municipal solid waste (MSW). Garbage excluded from hazardous waste regulation
but not typically collected by local governments is commonly known as industrial
solid waste. This category includes domestic sewage and other wastewater treatment
sludge, demolition and construction wastes, agricultural and mining residues,
combustion ash, and industrial process wastes. EPA has developed programs and
policies regarding MSW, while federal programs covering industrial solid waste are
still in their infancy.
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
2 - Solid Waste Programs
2. MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
EPA defines municipal solid waste as durable goods and nondurable goods.
Examples of waste from these categories include appliances, tires, batteries (durable
goods) and newspapers, clothing, boxes, disposable tableware, office and classroom
paper, wood pallets, and cafeteria wastes (non-durable goods). In other words, MSW
is waste generated by commercial and household sources that is typically collected
and disposed in MSW landfills.
Generation of MSW has grown steadily over the past 30 years, from 88 million tons
per year, or 2.7 pounds per person per day in 1960, to 229.9 million tons, or 4.62
pounds per person per day in 1999. While generation of waste has grown steadily,
recycling and recovery of waste have also greatly increased. In 1960, about 7 percent
of MSW was recycled and in 1999, this figure had increased to 27.8 percent. The
breakdown of how MSW is managed is shown in Figure 1. While the majority of
solid waste is still landfilled, statistics show there is a clear trend away from reliance
on this method.
Figure 1
Management of MSW in the U.S., 119
(Total Weight = 229.9 million ton
Combustion
14.8%
34 million ton
Recovery for
recycling
(including
composting)
27.8%
63.9 million ton
Landfill, other
57.4%
131.9 million ton
Based on statistics in Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1999 Facts and Figures
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
Solid Waste Programs - 3
2.1 EPA'S INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT HIERARCHY
In 1989, EPA published Solid Waste Dilemma: An Agenda for Action, which
presents goals and recommendations for action by EPA, state and local
governments, industry, and consumers to address the solid waste problems facing
the country. EPA recommends an integrated, hierarchical approach to waste
management using four components: source reduction, recycling, combustion, and
landfilling. This comprehensive approach addresses critical junctures in the
manufacture, use, and disposal of products and materials to minimize wastefulness
and maximize value. It favors source reduction to reduce the volume and toxicity
of waste and to increase the useful life of products. Recycling, including
composting, is the preferred waste management approach to divert waste from
landfills and combustors. Combustion is used to reduce the volume of waste being
disposed and to recover energy from this process, and landfilling is used for final
disposal of nonrecyclable and noncombustible material. The goal of this approach is
to use a combination of all of these methods (shown in Figure 2) to safely and
effectively handle the municipal solid wastestream with the least adverse impact on
human health and the environment. Each community should choose a mix of
alternatives that most effectively meets its needs. The four elements of the
hierarchy are discussed below.
Figure 2
Hierarchy of Integrated Waste Management
Source
Reduction
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
4 - Solid Waste Programs
2.2 SOURCE REDUCTION
Source reduction is a front-end approach to addressing MSW problems by changing
the way products are made and used. Focusing on source reduction is an attempt to
move away from the traditional "end-of-the-pipe" waste management approach
used in the past. Source reduction is defined as the design, manufacture, and use of
products in a way that reduces the quantity and toxicity of waste produced when the
products reach the end of their useful lives. Source reduction activities fall into
some basic categories:
• Product reuse (e.g., reusable shopping bags and coffee mugs)
• Reduced material volume (e.g., less unnecessary packaging for products)
• Reduced toxicity of products (e.g., use substitutes for lead, cadmium,
mercury, and other toxics)
• Increased product lifetime (e.g., design products with longer useful life)
• Decreased consumption (e.g., changing consumer buying practices, bulk
purchasing).
Businesses, households, and state and local governments can all play an active role
in implementing successful source reduction programs. Businesses can implement
source reduction through the design and manufacture of products that use less
packaging or that use substitutes for toxic constituents. Many businesses have also
used source reduction to significantly reduce the amount of material that enters the
wastestream (e.g., reusing packaging for shipping products, double-sided copies,
maintaining equipment to extend its useful life, reusable envelopes). These changes
have often resulted in significant savings in waste management costs and raw
material purchasing. EPA developed the WasteWi$e program (discussed later in
this module) to help businesses achieve these goals.
If source reduction is going to play a key role in overall waste reduction, consumers
also must incorporate this concept into their buying practices. Consumers
purchasing products that reduce unnecessary packaging or that eliminate toxic
constituents will increase demand for products with these attributes. Finally, source
reduction must be part of state and local governments' strategic long-term planning
to address solid waste problems. Some states have passed legislation to reduce lead,
cadmium, chromium, and mercury in packaging. Some local governments have
established model communities that use source reduction and recycling concepts as
the focus of their strategic waste management plans.
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
Solid Waste Programs - 5
UNIT PRICING
Many waste management officials have had success with programs of economic
incentives to encourage citizens to reduce generation of solid waste. One of the
most successful economic incentive programs used to achieve source reduction is
variable rate refuse collection. Variable rate collection systems, also known as unit
pricing, or pay-as-you-throw systems, include an array of programs with a common
objective: customers who dispose of more waste pay more for the collection and
disposal service. There are several different types of variable rate systems. Most
require residents to pay a per-bag fee for refuse collection, and require the purchase
of special bags or tags to place on bags; or require residents to choose among refuse
containers and pay substantially more for collection of wastes in the larger
containers. Some communities are beginning to experiment with weight-based
collection programs, in which the hauler weighs the waste residents set out at the
curb and bills the resident accordingly. Unit pricing programs aim to ensure that
waste service prices reflect the actual costs of solid waste management. It is expected
that higher waste disposal rates will encourage source reduction, and the per capita
demand for disposal will decrease. EPA has developed a helpful guidance
document to assist communities in establishing unit pricing programs, titled Pay-
As-You-Throw: Lessons Learned About Unit Pricing.
2.3 RECYCLING
Municipal solid waste recycling refers to the separation and collection of wastes and
their subsequent transformation or remanufacture into usable or marketable
materials. Recycling, including composting, diverts potentially large volumes of
material from landfills and combustors, and stops unnecessary waste of natural
resources and raw materials. Recycling collection and separation programs vary in
degree of implementation: some may be simple drop-off programs, while others
may involve comprehensive curbside collection and complex source separation at a
material recovery facility. Successful recycling, however, is more than the
separation and collection of postconsumer materials. These are only the first steps
postconsumer materials must also be reprocessed or remanufactured, and only
when the materials are reused is the recycling loop complete.
Centralized composting of yard and food wastes is also classified as recycling. Yard
waste composting is a key element in addressing the municipal solid wastestream
because yard waste accounts for nearly one-eighth (27.7 million tons) of the MSW
generated in the United States in 1999. Some communities have begun to conduct
large-scale centralized composting of yard waste in an effort to save landfill capacity.
Individuals are also helping to reduce waste by composting yard waste in their
backyards, and by not bagging grass clippings or other yard wastes (these activities are
actually classified as source reduction). Composting yard waste has seen
tremendous growth in the past eight years. In 1980, the amount of yard waste
recovered was negligible (less than 5,000 tons, or 0.05 percent). According to
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
6 - Solid Waste Programs
Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1999 Facts and Figures, by 1999 the
amount of yard waste recovered had grown to 12.6 million tons, or 45.3 percent.
FEDERAL PROCUREMENT
The recycling loop is not complete until a recycled product is reused. One of the
biggest problems in the attempt to increase recycling rates is the wide fluctuation in
market demand for secondary materials. It is important to acknowledge the
interdependence between buying recycled content products and the success of
recycling, and to recognize the impact that the purchasing power of the federal
government can have in stimulating markets for recycled materials. For this
reason, Congress added RCRA §6002, establishing the government's "buy-recycled"
or procurement program. The procurement program is designed to increase
recycling, waste prevention and the acquisition of recycled content materials. The
program uses the government's purchasing power to build markets for recycled
content products and to reduce solid waste. (In 1992, federal, state, and local
governments purchased $1.32 trillion out of a total economy of $5.95 trillion, or 22
percent of U.S. goods and services.)
RCRA §6002 requires procuring agencies who purchase $10,000 or more worth of an
EPA-designated item in the current fiscal year, or $10,000 or more worth of a
designated item in the preceding fiscal year, to procure the item composed of the
highest percentage of recovered materials practicable, considering the item's
availability, price, and performance standard. Procuring agencies are federal, state,
and local agencies, and their contractors, that use appropriated federal funds. In
addition, RCRA §6002 requires all federal agencies to revise their product
specifications to eliminate any exclusion of recycled materials and any requirement
that products be manufactured from virgin materials.
It is EPA's responsibility to designate items that are or can be made with recycled
content pursuant to §6002. EPA designates these items in the Comprehensive
Procurement Guidelines (CPG), which are codified in 40 CFR Part 247. In addition,
EPA must issue recommendations to assist procuring agencies in establishing their
affirmative procurement programs. These recommendations typically contain a
minimum content standard. For example, EPA recommends that procuring
agencies purchase rubber patio blocks with a minimum of 90 to 100 percent
postconsumer content. Depending on the unique characteristics of a particular item,
however, EPA may recommend some alternate standard. For example, EPA
recommends that procuring agencies purchase either retread tires or a retreading
service to retread the agency's used tires. EPA publishes these recommendations in
the Federal Register as Recovered Materials Advisory Notices (RMANs). EPA is
required to update the CPG every two years and the RMANs periodically to reflect
changes in market conditions.
In 1995, EPA issued the first CPG which covered EPA's original five procurement
guidelines (paper and paper products, re-refined lubricating oils, retread tires,
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
Solid Waste Programs - 7
building insulation products, and coal fly ash) and added 19 products. The first CPG
update (CPGII), published in November of 1997, designated an additional 12 items.
A second CPG update (CPG III), published in January 2000, designated an additional
18 items.
Figure 3 lists those items that EPA has specifically designated to date.
Figure 3
DESIGNATED ITEMS
Paper and Paper Products
Vehicular Products
Engine Coolants
Re-Refined Lubricating Oils
Retread Tires
Construction Products
Building Insulation Products
Carpet
Carpet Cushion
Cement and Concrete Containing Fly
Ash or Ground Granulated Blast
Furnace Slag
Consolidated and Reprocessed Latex
Paint
Floor Tiles
Flowable Fill
Laminated Paperboard
Patio Blocks
Railroad Grade Crossing Surfaces
Structural Fiberboard
Transportation Products
Channelizers
Delineators
Parking Stops
Traffic Barricades
Traffic Cones
Park and Recreation Products
Park Benches and Picnic Tables
Plastic Fencing
Playground Equipment
Playground Surfaces
Running Tracks
Landscaping Products
Food Waste Compost
Garden and Soaker Hoses
Hydraulic Mulch
Lawn and Garden Edging
Plastic Lumber Landscaping Timbers
and Posts
Yard Trimmings Compost
Non-Paper Office Products
Binders
Office Recycling Containers
Office Waste Receptacles
Plastic Clipboards
Plastic Folders
Plastic Clip Portfolios
Plastic Desktop Accessories
Printer Ribbons
Toner Cartidges
Miscellaneous Products
Awards and Plaques
Industrial Drums
Manual-Grade Strapping
Mats
Pallets
Signage
Sorbents
On August 28, 2001, EPA published a proposed update to the CPG (66 FR_45297). The
update, referred to as CPG IV, proposes to designate 11 new items that are or can be
made with recovered materials. Additionally, EPA is proposing to revise its
previous designations for polyester carpet and railroad grade crossing surfaces. EPA
also announced the availability of a draft Recovered Materials Advisory Notice
(RMAN IV), which contains the recommended recovered materials content levels
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
8 - Solid Waste Programs
for the items proposed for designation in CPG IV. EPA is proposing to designate the
following items: rebuilt vehicular parts, tires, cement and concrete containing
cenospheres, cement and concrete containing silica fume, nylon carpet and nylon
carpet backing, modular threshold ramps, non-pressure pipe, roofing materials,
office furniture, bike racks, and blasting grit.
Within one year after EPA designates an item, procuring agencies must revise any
agency specifications for that item, and establish an affirmative procurement
program to assure that these items will be purchased with recycled content to the
maximum extent practicable. An affirmative procurement program should, at a
minimum, contain (1) a preference program to show the agency's preference for
recycled products; (2) a promotion program to promote the agency's preference
program; (3) a program for obtaining estimates and certifications of recycled
materials content and for verifying the estimates and certifications; and (4) an
annual review and monitoring of the effectiveness of an agency's affirmative
procurement program.
JOBS THROUGH RECYCLING INITIATIVE
In another effort to foster the markets for recycled materials, EPA launched the "Jobs
Through Recycling Initiative" (JTR) in 1994. The goal of the pilot initiative is to
foster markets for recycled goods by promoting and assisting the development of
businesses using recovered materials, creating new recycling jobs, and spurring
innovative technologies demonstrating the connection between environmental
benefits and economic viability. From 1994 to 1999, the JTR program offered a
variety of grants to
strengthen recycling market development and economic development programs.
Under the initiative, EPA allotted $2.6 million in grants to distribute to states, tribes,
and organizations representing states and tribes who responded to one of two
solicitations. Although JTR grant funding is no longer available, several entities
(e.g., states, territories, and tribes) with a primary focus on recycling and/or
economic development received funding. JTR funding has helped create more than
8,500 jobs, generate $640.5 million in capital investment, create 15.3 tons of capacity,
and utilize 13.9 million tons of recovered materials.
One of the solicitations invited proposals to develop Recycling and Reuse Business
Assistance Centers (RBACs). The purpose of the RBAC is to create a highly visible
and recognizable source of expertise offering technical, business, financial, and
marketing assistance to new and existing recycling businesses. Each center will
provide an infrastructure to concentrate the combined resources and efforts of
multiple agencies on the development of markets for secondary materials.
The other solicitation invited proposals to develop Recycling Economic
Development Advocates (RED As). The RED A is a professional dedicated
exclusively to the purpose of attracting, expanding, and retaining manufacturers and
other businesses that use recovered materials. The primary purpose of the REDA is
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
Solid Waste Programs - 9
to build a bridge between traditional economic development activities and growth
of businesses using secondary
materials. REDAs will be integrated into state or tribal agencies responsible for
economic development where they will serve as advocates for recycling businesses.
Generally, EPA does not provide grants to fund new recycling technologies or
programs for private parties. On the other hand, the Small Business
Administration has various loan programs for small businesses as well as Small
Business Development Centers which provide equipment and other resources for
marketing activities.
WASTEWISE PROGRAM
In 1994, EPA developed the WasteWi$e program to assist businesses in taking cost-
effective actions to both reduce and recycle solid waste at the source. The program
offers several advantages to companies that voluntarily commit to achieving results
in waste prevention, recycling collection, and buying or manufacturing recycled
products. According to the WasteWiSe Sixth-Year Progress Report. WasteWi$e
partners' waste prevention activities removed 583,000 tons of material from the
solid waste stream, and conserved another 8.4 million tons via recycling in 1999.
The WasteWi$e program offers several forms of technical assistance to help
participating companies find waste reduction opportunities and set waste reductions
goals. EPA has established a special hotline to provide information on the program,
1-800-EPA-WISE.
2.4 COMBUSTION
For centuries, burning has been a popular method of reducing the volume and the
odor of garbage. Until the early 1970s, Americans routinely managed much of their
trash by burning it. People often burned large-volume combustible trash such as
leaves in their backyards, while dump operators purposely set fires in waste pits to
reduce volume. As concern about air pollution increased, local governments began
to impose restrictions on uncontrolled burning of trash. The Clean Air Act of 1970
essentially banned uncontrolled burning of solid waste.
The energy crisis of the 1970s also influenced changes in the handling of MSW. A
more sophisticated system of incineration was developed that could use waste as a
fuel to produce energy. Modern combustion facilities no longer just destroy garbage,
but instead are designed to recover energy that is used to produce steam and
electricity. These waste-to-energy facilities can be used in conjunction with source
reduction and recycling programs, because many items that are traditionally
recycled, such as aluminum cans and glass, have low heating values. According to
Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1999 Facts and Figures., combustion of
solid waste increased from 9.0 percent in 1980 to 16.9 percent in 1997, and then
decreased to 14.8% in 1999.
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
10 - Solid Waste Programs
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE COMBUSTION ASH
Waste-to-energy units and incinerators are not really waste disposal facilities, but
waste reduction units. After incineration, the noncombustible component of MSW
remains as ash. Two types of ash are generated during incineration: fly ash, which
collects in the air pollution control devices which "clean" the gases produced during
the combustion of the waste; and bottom ash, which collects on the bottom of the
combustion unit and comprises approximately 75 to 80 percent of the total ash. EPA
studies indicate that fly ash generally contains the highest concentration of
inorganic chemical constituents.
Municipal waste combustion ash is periodically removed from the incinerator and
usually land disposed, either in a MSW landfill or a "monofill" specifically intended
for the ash. This procedure presents potential threats to human health and the
environment due to the risks of inhalation near combustion and disposal sites. In
March 1990, EPA completed a study which characterized ash, ash leachate, and
extracts from five municipal waste combustors and their ash monofills. The study
concluded that ash samples often fail the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure
(TCLP) due to the presence of lead or cadmium. The TCLP subjects samples to a
very aggressive leaching medium to mimic the conditions that waste would
encounter in a poorly operated MSW landfill. Ash samples subjected to a less
aggressive leaching medium (similar to acid rain) did not leach metals above levels
of concern. EPA concluded (from a technical standpoint) that the disposal of ash in
an appropriately designed monofill greatly minimizes the potential for release of
any leachable constituents of concern.
The way that EPA has approached municipal waste combustion ash (from a
regulatory standpoint) over the past 15 years is complex. In the first federal
hazardous waste regulations, promulgated in 1980, the ash enjoyed an exemption
from the federal hazardous waste regulations on the basis that it is derived from
exempt household waste. In 1984, Congress amended RCRA by adding §3001 (i),
which stated that a resource recovery facility recovering energy from the mass
burning of MSW and nonhazardous commercial or industrial waste shall not be
deemed to be treating, storing, disposing, or otherwise managing hazardous waste
under certain circumstances. In 1985, EPA announced that although RCRA
exempted municipal waste combustors from hazardous waste permitting
requirements, the ash that was generated was not exempt. Between 1985 and 1992,
various EPA officials and court decisions took differing positions on the issue. In
1992, EPA Administrator Reilly issued a memo announcing that the Agency had
concluded that ash could be safely disposed in MSW landfills that are in compliance
with the 40 CFR Part 258 criteria.
On May 2, 1994, in the case of City of Chicago v. Environmental Defense Fund, the
U.S. Supreme Court ruled that ash from municipal waste-to-energy combustors that
exhibits a hazardous waste characteristic is not exempt from regulation as a
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
Solid Waste Programs - 11
hazardous waste under RCRA. Owners and operators of waste-to-energy facilities
are now required to determine whether their ash is hazardous. Facilities generating
ash that is a hazardous waste must manage the ash in accordance with RCRA
hazardous waste regulations. If the ash is not a hazardous waste, it may be disposed
of in a MSW landfill that meets applicable RCRA standards. Because of the
substantial confusion caused by the evolution of the federal regulatory
interpretation, EPA has developed a strategy to gradually phase in the hazardous
waste regulations and enforcement provisions that now apply to the waste-to-
energy facilities.
In the City of Chicago case, the Supreme Court issued a narrowly focused opinion
that §3001 (i) does not exempt ash generated by waste-to-energy facilities. The Court
did not address the issue of the precise point at which regulation of waste must
begin, and §300 l(i) does not expressly address the issue. In an effort to provide some
guidance to the regulated community, EPA published a Notice of Statutory
Interpretation entitled "Determination of Point at Which Subtitle C Jurisdiction
Begins for Municipal Combustion Ash at Waste-to-Energy Facilities" on February 3,
1995. EPA interprets RCRA §3001 (i) to first impose hazardous waste regulation at
the point that the ash leaves the "resource recovery facility," defined as the
combustion building, including connected air pollution control equipment.
Consequently, the point at which the hazardous waste determination for the ash
should be made and when Land Disposal Restrictions standards, once promulgated,
will begin to apply is the point at which the ash exits the combustion building
following the combustion and air pollution control processes. This interpretation is
critical, because it means that many facilities will be able to test their ash after the fly
ash and the bottom ash have been combined. Often when fly ash that exhibits the
toxicity characteristic is combined with bottom ash, the resulting mixture no longer
exhibits a characteristic of hazardous waste, and would not be regulated as such.
In the February notice, EPA asserted that if it comes to EPA's attention that waste-to-
energy ash is being managed or disposed of in a manner that is not protective of
human health and the environment, the Agency may consider issuing ash
management guidelines or promulgating additional regulations to address those
situations. In addition, at individual sites, if the disposal of ash presents an
imminent and substantial endangerment to human health and the environment,
EPA may invoke RCRA §7003 authorities to require responsible parties to undertake
appropriate action.
2.5 LANDFILLING
Even with the use of source reduction, recycling, and combustion, there will always
be waste that ultimately must be disposed. According to Municipal Solid Waste in
the United States: 1999 Facts and Figures. , landfilling, at the end of the hierarchy of
solid waste management, still remains the most widely used waste management
method (approximately 57.4 percent). Many communities are having difficulties
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
12 - Solid Waste Programs
siting new landfills largely because of increased citizen and local government
concerns about the potential health risks and aesthetics of having a landfill in their
neighborhoods. EPA promulgated new technical standards for MSW landfills in
1991. These new standards address location restrictions, design and operating
criteria, groundwater monitoring, financial assurance, closure and post-closure
requirements, and corrective action. (See the training module entitled Subtitle D:
Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Facility Criteria.)
2.6 MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ISSUES
Unlike industrial wastestreams, which tend to be generated separately and managed
in separate systems, MSW is mixed as soon as it is generated. Thus, municipal
waste management officials are faced with taking care of a collection of waste that
includes materials that are rotting along with materials that may never degrade and
materials that may be dangerous or hazardous along with inert materials. This
complicates already difficult technical, environmental, political, and economic
decisions. The following is a sample of some of the complex solid waste
management issues that EPA has addressed.
FLOW CONTROL
Flow controls are legal authorities used by state and local governments to designate
where MSW must be taken for processing, treatment, or disposal. This waste
management approach requires waste to be delivered to specific facilities such as
waste-to-energy facilities, materials recovery facilities, composting facilities, transfer
stations, and/or landfills. One of the direct effects of flow control is that designated
facilities are assured of receiving a guaranteed amount of MSW. If the designated
facility charges a fee for receipt of the waste or recyclables, flow control assures a
source of revenue to meet their capital and operating costs.
Waste flow control laws often play an important role in the development of
integrated solid waste management systems. Without the power to direct the flow
of waste within its jurisdiction, a municipality may have difficulty determining the
appropriate capacity of its solid waste disposal facilities. In addition, if a
municipality has an expensive waste-to-energy facility, and waste haulers choose to
avoid the facility in favor of a cheaper landfill elsewhere, the municipality will lose
revenue. On the other hand, the waste management industry often contends that
by eliminating the right of waste haulers to seek the facility with the lowest tipping
fee, waste flow control creates monopolies and drives up waste disposal costs.
In September 1992, Congress directed EPA to develop and submit a Report to
Congress on flow controls as a means of MSW management. EPA's report,
published in March 1995, found that 35 states, the District of Columbia, and the
Virgin Islands explicitly authorize flow control directly, 4 additional states authorize
flow control indirectly, and 11 states have no flow control authority. EPA also
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
Solid Waste Programs - 13
found that flow controls play a limited role in the solid waste market as a whole.
EPA concluded that although flow controls have provided an administratively
efficient mechanism for local governments to plan for and fund their solid waste
management systems, there are alternatives. EPA also determined that there are no
data showing that flow controls are essential for the development of new solid
waste capacity or for the long-term achievement of state and local goals for source
reduction, reuse, and recycling.
DEGRADABLE RING RULE
In response to concerns about the effects of nondegradable plastic ring carriers (for
beverages), Congress passed the Degradable Plastic Ring Carriers Act (P.L. 100-556).
Congress found that nondegradable plastic ring carriers have been found in large
quantities in the marine environment, and may entangle fish and other wildlife.
Congress did not consider the issues of landfilling, littering, or ingestion of plastic
pieces of ring carriers in this Act. Congress did not include any enforcement
authority in this Act; therefore, it is not clear if EPA can enforce 40 CFR Part 238.
Pursuant to the Degradable Plastic Ring Carriers Act, EPA issued a final rule
establishing regulations that required plastic ring carriers to be made of naturally
degradable materials which, when discarded, would decompose within a specified
period of time (59 FR 9866; March 1, 1994). The regulations, codified in 40 CFR Part
238, describe one test for ring carriers made of biodegradable material (referred to as
the in situ test) and another test for photodegradable material (referred to as the lab
test). Ring carrier processors and importers of ring carriers must determine that
their ring carriers degrade according to one of these two tests.
HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE
Some communities choose to include a household hazardous waste (HHW)
management program as a component of their MSW management system. EPA has
not estimated, nationwide, the amount of HHW found in the municipal solid
wastestream; however, most studies to date have found HHW to be less than one
percent of the municipal solid wastestream. Household waste is exempt from the
definition of hazardous waste under RCRA Subtitle C (§261.4(b)(l)). EPA
promulgated the exemption for household waste based on its belief that Congress
did not intend for household wastes to be regulated under Subtitle C. The effect of
the exemption is to exclude waste that would otherwise meet hazardous waste
listings or exhibit characteristics of hazardous waste and thus have to be managed in
accordance with Subtitle C regulations. Generally, the exemption allows waste
streams from residences to be managed as nonhazardous regardless of the nature of
the wastestream.
In the absence of HHW-specific federal regulation and with few state regulations,
programs and requirements for managing HHW have been enacted at the local
level. Some states have provided support to communities choosing to run HHW
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
14 - Solid Waste Programs
collection programs. Communities conduct HHW collection and management
programs in order to reduce specific toxicity loadings (e.g., states that depend heavily
on combustion of MSW may be interested in reducing heavy metals entering
combustors). EPA encourages communities conducting such programs to use the
following hierarchy for managing HHW after it is collected:
• Reuse and recycle as much HHW as possible
• Treat HHW in a hazardous waste treatment facility
• Dispose of remaining HHW in a hazardous waste landfill.
HHW, except used oil generated by "do-it-yourselfer" oil changers, retains the
exemption at all phases of its management, including when it is collected in large
quantities, provided it is not mixed with regulated quantities of hazardous waste.
Therefore, HHW can be aggregated and stored in any amount for any time period
under federal regulations (states and localities may have their own requirements).
Transportation does not require manifesting. Many communities that have HHW
collection programs are also interested in separating and collecting conditionally
exempt small quantity generator (CESQG) wastes from the municipal solid
wastestream to minimize the amount of hazardous constituents in landfills and
combustion facilities. EPA has clarified that state-approved/registered collection
programs that accept and mix CESQG wastes with HHW have not violated the
mixture rule and the mixture is subject to regulation as CESQG waste (OSWER
Directive 9574.00-02).
EPA issued several outreach documents on HHW collection programs to assist the
public and local officials in setting up and managing HHW collection programs.
The publications include Household Hazardous Waste: Steps to Safe Management.
Household Hazardous Waste Management: A Manual for Community Collection
Programs, and Used Dry Cell Batteries: Is a Collection Program Right for Your
Community?
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
-------
Solid Waste Programs - 15
3. INDUSTRIAL SOLID WASTE
Under RCRA, "industrial nonhazardous waste" or "industrial solid waste" means
waste that is neither MSW nor considered a hazardous waste under RCRA Subtitle
C. Industrial nonhazardous waste consists primarily of manufacturing process
wastes, including wastewaters and non-wastewater sludges and solids. EPA
estimates there are 7.6 billion tons of industrial nonhazardous waste generated
annually in the United States by 12,000 facilities, and disposed of on-site in surface
impoundments, landfills, land application units, or waste piles.
The states are responsible for regulating the management of industrial
nonhazardous waste. State requirements for management of industrial
nonhazardous waste vary widely, and may include standards for design and
operation of waste management facilities, location monitoring, and recordkeeping.
EPA's role in the management of industrial nonhazardous waste is very limited.
Under RCRA Subtitle D, EPA issued minimal criteria prohibiting "open dumps" (40
CFR 257) in 1979, but has no authority to regulate beyond issuing these criteria. The
states, not EPA, are responsible for implementing the open dumping criteria, and
EPA has no back-up enforcement role.
REVISED CRITERIA FOR SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL AND FACILITY PRACTICES
On July 1, 1996, EPA promulgated a final rule revising the existing criteria for solid
waste disposal and facility practices (61 FR 34252). Specifically, the final rule allows
only those nonmunicipal nonhazardous waste disposal units that meet specified
standards to receive CESQG hazardous waste. Standards that need to be complied
with include location restrictions, groundwater monitoring, and corrective action.
GUIDANCE ON MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
EPA and the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials
(ASTSWMO) have developed a draft voluntary guidance for the management of
industrial nonhazardous waste in land-based disposal units. The highlights of this
joint guidance are to:
• Encourage pollution prevention and waste minimization
• Affirm state leadership
• Recommend good industrial nonhazardous waste management practices that
are environmentally sound and protective of public health.
The draft guidance was released in June 1999 for comments.
The information in this document is not by any means a complete representation of EPA's regulations or policies,
but is an introduction to the topic used for Call Center training purposes.
------- |