SEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
             Office of Solid Waste and
             Emergency Response (5102G)
                                     EPA 542-F-11-024
                                     December 2011
Green  Remediation Best Management  Practices:
Landfill  Cover Systems  &  Energy Production
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation
                                                                      Quick Reference Fact Sheet
  The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Principles for
  Greener Cleanups outline the Agency's policy for evaluating
  and minimizing the environmental "footprint" of activities
  undertaken when cleaning up a contaminated site.1 Use of
  the best management practices (BMPs) recommended in
  EPA's series of green remediation fact sheets can help project
  managers and other stakeholders apply the principles on a
  routine basis while maintaining the cleanup objectives,
  ensuring protectiveness of a remedy, and improving its
  environmental outcome.
Remediation at thousands of sites across the United States
involves hazardous waste from former industrial landfills
or waste piles, aged municipal landfills, or illegal dumps.
A  cover system is commonly installed  at these areas  as
part of proper closure to serve as a surface  barrier that
contains  the  source  material,  reduces  contaminant
exposure or migration, and manages associated risk. Also
known as a cap or cover, a cover system is typically used
where:
• A  hazardous, municipal, or  co-disposal  landfill was
 created before the 1976 enactment of, and  subsequent
 amendments  to,   the   Resource  Conservation  and
 Recovery Act (RCRA)
• An existing unit such as a closed impoundment has been
 designated  as a consolidation area  or a  decision is
 made to build a  new onsite landfill,  and/or
• Direct contact or groundwater leaching presents a risk.

Cover systems can benefit from  innovative designs that
increase   long-term   performance    while    reducing
maintenance   needs.  When   properly  designed  and
maintained,  a final cover system for a  closed landfill  or
consolidation   unit   can   also    provide   significant
opportunities for site reuse (typically on a restricted basis).

The environmental footprint of activities needed to install
and maintain a cover system can be reduced by adhering
to  EPA's Principles  for Greener Cleanups. The core
elements of a greener cleanup involve:
     Materials
     & Waste
Energy
   Land&
 Ecosystems
    Air&
   Atmosphere
           Water
Reducing  total  energy
use and  increasing  the
percentage  of  renew-
able energy
Reducing air pollutants
and   greenhouse  gas
(GHG) emissions
                                         • Reducing water use  and negative impacts on  water
                                           resources
                                         • Improving  materials  management and waste reduction
                                           efforts, and
                                         • Protecting ecosystem services.

                                         Green remediation BMPs for addressing landfills focus on:
                                         > Designing and installing a cover system through
                                           approaches such as materials  life cycle assessment for
                                           conventional covers or selection of alternative caps
                                         > Landfill gas recovery for  beneficial use as a
                                           renewable source of energy
                                         > Integrating landfill cover designs with reuse of
                                           a  site for  generating  energy from  solar  or wind
                                           resources or for other beneficial use, and
                                         ^Maintaining and monitoring  a  final  cover
                                           through streamlined operation and maintenance (O&M)
                                           activities and automated equipment.

                                         Landfills built to contain hazardous wastes are governed
                                         by Subtitle C of RCRA (40 CFR 264.300), while those
                                         constructed for non-hazardous waste such  as municipal
                                         solid waste (MSW)  are covered  by RCRA Subtitle D (40
                                         CFR 258). In addition to RCRA requirements, closure and
                                         capping of a landfill or former waste area can be subject
                                         to  requirements of  the  Clean  Air Act, Clean  Water Act,
                                         and other  federal, state, or local regulations. In  cleanup
                                         programs  such  as  Superfund, these regulations can be
                                         applied to  parts of a remedy as applicable or relevant and
                                         appropriate requirements (ARARs).
                                          Designing and Installing a Cover System
A Subtitle C or D  conventional cover system, also
known as a barrier cover,  is linked to the  landfill liner
system. This type of cover consists of a layer of compacted
soil with permeability below or equal to that of the liner or
the natural soils present (or for Subtitle D, permeability no
greater than 1 x 1 0~5 cm/sec). Since the liner of a Subtitle
C  cover system  often  consists  of a  geomembrane,  its
corresponding cover needs to be constructed in a fashion
resulting  in  equivalent  permeability.  Other  layers  for
drainage or gas collection or to  serve  as a biobarrier can
be  added.  Green remediation BMPs for designing
and installing a conventional cover system include:
• Design in  ways that mimic rather  than  alter the site's
  natural  setting,  to  improve   the  cover's  long-term

-------
  performance and protect  ecosystem services2 such as
  potable water, wildlife habitat, and carbon storage
  Design  a  cover  accounting  for  potential  effects of
  climate change, which could involve changes in  onsite
  soil development or increased vulnerability to flooding
  Use   uncontaminated  soil  or  sediment from   onsite
  excavation  instead of imported  soil/sediment for the
  cover's frost  prevention   and   erosion  control  layers;
  similarly, uncontaminated  sand, gravel,  and rocks from
  onsite instead of offsite areas may be used for drainage
  Apply low  impact  development3  strategies  such  as
  installing earthen berms to manage stormwater
  Choose geotextile fabric or  drainage tubing composed
  of 100% recycled materials  rather than  virgin materials
  for lining, erosion control,  and drainage
  Select materials with biobased content for daily activities
  during cover construction, including those  designated
  for   procurement   by   federal
  agencies4
  Use   clean   fuel   and  emission
  control  technologies  for  routine
  field vehicles and  machinery such
  as  backhoes  and bulldozers  to
  reduce   fuel  consumption   and
  emission of air pollutants  such  as
  GHGs  and  particulate matter,5"
  and
  Investigate onsite  solar and wind
  resources  to  power  equipment
  such  as leachate pumps and flare
  u n its.

An alternative design for a landfill can be proposed in
lieu of a RCRA barrier design if it demonstrates equivalent
performance for criteria  such as infiltration reduction and
erosion  resistance.  Subtitle  D landfill  regulations  also
allow  installation  of  equivalent  alternative  covers  and
innovative  covers  that support research. One alternative
design   involves   covers  composed  of  asphalt  or
concrete. Systems based on this  design are  best applied
to sites where minimal  settlement is expected.  BMPs to
reduce the environmental footprint of this design include:
• Consider using  asphalt  rubber   (containing  recycled
  tires) where the cover system includes a layer of asphalt
• Substitute concrete with high albedo  pavement, which
  reflects sunlight and heat  away from  the cover surface
  and may aid growth of nearby vegetation
• Consider using  concrete containing a high percentage
  of  industrial  waste
  by-products   as   a
  substitute for cement,
  if   tests   show   no
  contaminant  leach-
  ing, and
• Use concrete  wash-
  outs to assure proper
  disposal     of    mix
  water.
Another  alterrnative design is  an evapotranspiration
(ET) cover system, which prevents  infiltration of water
into the  contained  waste.6 An  ET cover relies on  a  thick
soil layer with vegetative cover capable  of storing water
until it is transpired  or evaporated. ET  covers perform best
in  arid and semi-arid environments such as those found in
parts of the Great Plains and western states.7
      . capillary harrier ET cover at the Monticello Mill
     Tailings NPL Site in Utah was designed to mimic the
     area's ecology and follow the natural progression of
     revegetation. Native species existing atop the cover after
     seven years include gray rabbitbrush and sagebrush.
ET  cover designs present two alternatives.  A monolithic
design uses  a vegetated, relatively  homogeneous,  fine-
grained soil layer to retain water and limit deep drainage.
In contrast, a capillary barrier design  consists  of  a  fine-
grained  soil  layer  overlaying  coarser material such  as
sand  or  gravel.  The coarse
layer  forms a capillary break    A capillary barrier EJ
at    the    layer    interface,    cover system can be
allowing   the   fine-grained
layer  to  retain  more  water
than   a   monolithic  cover
system of equal thickness.
                i the
capillary break layer to
act as a biobarrier or gas
collection layer.
In addition  to BMPs that apply to conventional covers,
BMPs for designing and installing an ET cover include:
• Choose recycled  (crushed) concrete for biobarriers or
  capillary breaks instead of natural rock
• Select native  drought-resistant  plants  for  the  upper
  vegetative layer to reduce maintenance needs
• Preserve biodiversity and related ecosystem  services by
  installing a  suitable mix of native shrubs, grasses, and
  forbs, and
• Use nonsynthetic amendments such as compost instead
  of chemical fertilizers if the soil or vegetation is found to
  need supplementation over time.

Information  on  alternative landfill covers  at  more than
200  sites  is  available  in  EPA's  alternative   landfill
database.8  Additional  BMPs  that  can  apply at  many
landfills undergoing  cover installation  are described in
Green  Remediation:  Best  Management  Practices  for
Excavation and Surface Restoration.5

-------
 Landfill Gas Recovery for Beneficial Use
EPA encourages owners or operators of sites with landfills
to use landfill gas (LFG) as a source of energy. Evaluating
the  options  for a  waste  gas-to-energy  system before,
rather than  after,  waste is placed  in  a  new landfill or
consolidation unit can  maximize this  potential  throughout
the  life  of  a  landfill.  Similarly,  integration  of  the
components for an  LFG collection  system into the design
for a final cover at a closed landfill can  help  avoid later
retrofitting and additional  costs  if site or administrative
conditions change over time.

The capacity of LFG to provide useable energy  generally
depends  on its  proportion  of methane,  a potent  GHG
traditionally  destroyed through combustion (flaring). LFG
from recently closed  MSW landfills with properly  operated
gas collection  systems,  for  example,  often contains  40-
60% methane; the remainder consists primarily of carbon
dioxide  (CO2), another  GHG.
As  a landfill ages,  its  methane
generation  decreases at a  rate
depending  on the volume  and
type of  organic waste  content
and site conditions  such as average rainfall. In  contrast,
an  industrial landfill  or a  construction  and debris landfill
typically emits very little LFG throughout its life. Additional
characteristics to consider when evaluating feasibility of an
LFG-to-energy  system  include  depth  of  the  waste,
impermeability of the cap and liner, and local  electricity
prices.
The global warming
potential of methane
is 21 times higher
than that of CO,,.9
 As a small facility, the Crow Wing County SLF municipal
 landfill in Bra/nerd, MN, is not required to collect and combust
 its LFG. Accelerated  generation of LFG after startup of the
 landfill's leachate collection system, however, led to voluntary
 installation of  a  ID-well LFG  recovery  system.  With a
 throughput of only 30 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm),
 the LFG is now recovered for direct use to fuel a boiler
 that heats the facility's onsite buildings. Since 2009 installation
 of  the  LFG  recovery  system,  the facility's natural   gas
 consumption  has  decreased by nearly  70%. The  County
 estimates a $5,000 annual savings in  utility costs  due
 to lower natural gas  consumption and a return on the  LFG
 recovery system investment within eight to nine years.
With  appropriate treatment,  LFG can  be channeled  for
direct use to  power  equipment operating  on  low or
medium BTU gas (about  50% of the  heating  value of
natural gas) for onsite operations. Medium BTU gas also
could  be piped to an  adjacent facility  to  fuel equipment
such  as industrial boilers and cement kilns or to provide
heating in  commercial businesses such  as  plant nurseries.
LFG can also be routed to internal combustion engines,
turbines,  or microturbines that generate  electricity.
Internal combustion  engines  are typically the choice  for
LFG  projects  sized  at  800  kW  and  larger,  while
microturbines are used for  smaller projects (as little as 30
                         kW).   Unlike   most
                         internal   combustion
                         engines,    microtur-
                         bines  can  operate
                         with low LFG flow or
                         methane   content.10
                         Most   engines    or
                         turbines can be used
                         singularly or in paral-
                         lel configuration.
                              Points of Reference
                         LFG energy content varies but
                         averages about 500 BTU/cubic
                         foot.
                         The output of one 30-kW
                         microturbine can power a 40-hp
                         motor.
                         A 1-MW generator could meet
                         the annual electricity needs of
                         1,070 U.S. homes.
The  Lowry Landfill Superfund  Site in  Aurora,  CO,
occupies  over  500  acres  formerly  used  for  municipal,
hazardous,  and industrial waste disposal. Contamination was
partially addressed by constructing  a  conventional four foot-
thick soil cover over the landfill. The  landfill is located adjacent
to  the  Denver Arapahoe Disposal Site (DADS),  an  active
municipal landfill facility. Instead of being flared, the LFG from
both sites  is  converted  into electricity by four  internal
combustion  engines. Since 2008, the Lowry Landfill/DADS
landfill  gas-to-energy plant has converted  630 million  cubic
feet of  LFG into 3.2 MWh of electrical energy each year. The
local utility  distributes  the  generated electricity under  a
renewable energy purchase agreement.
                         Electricity   generated   through
                         technologies can be used to:
                                 these   LFG   recovery
                           Power  other  landfill  operations   such  as  leachate
                           collection and treatment systems
                           Provide  energy  for
                           long-term   cleanup
                           operations  such  as
                           groundwater pump-
                           and-treat   systems,
                           or
                           Supplement     the
                           local   utility   grid
                           through    sale    or
                           credit mechanisms.
                          Six 70-kW microturbines replaced the flaring system used to
                          treat LFG at the Operating Industries, Inc. Superfund site
                          cleanup project in Monterey Park, CA. The LFG was extracted
                          at an average rate of 4,200 scfm, with a methane content
                          of 29-39%.  Upon  turbine start-up,  sufficient electricity was
                          generated  to  meet  approximately  70%  of the  600-kWh
                          demand made  by the project's combustion  blowers, thermal
                          oxidizers,  and  auxiliary  equipment.  Over  eight  years  of
                          microturbine operations, the project  realized cumulative net
                          savings of $647,000.

-------
  Selecting  a  suitable
  landfill gas-to-energy
  system considers the
  short- and long-term
  benefits  gained by
  economy  of  scale
  and  reductions  in
  utility expenses.
Electricity Generation
Technology
Internal Combustion Enc
Turbine
Microturbine
Based on information in the
Typical LFG
Flow Range
(cubic feet per minute
(cfm) at 50% methane)
'ne 38-1,140
Power Range
(kW or MW)
1 00 kW - 3 MW
1,300-2,100 800 kW- 10.5 MW
20-200
Landfill Methane Outreach Program
30 kW - 250 kW
Typical
Capital Cost
($/kW)
$2,000
$1,400
$5,500
Typical
O&M Cost
($/kWh)
$195
$130
$380
"Project Development Handbook"1 '
These technologies may also produce waste fieaf that
can  be captured  and  used  to generate combined  heat
and  power  (CHP). In  addition  to providing  heat for
buildings,  water,   or  industrial  processes,  CHP  could
produce steam  (from  a gas  turbine) which  in  turn can
power a steam generator to produce more electricity.

LFG can  also be  processed  on site to  remove oxygen,
CO2, nitrogen, and other trace gases to  produce fuels
with  a  high  BTU  content, such as  pipeline-quality gas,
compressed  natural gas (CNG),  and  liquefied  natural
gas. An auto manufacturing  plant at a former brownfield
in   Orion,   Ml,   for  example,  relies   on   LFG  from
neighboring  landfills as a  substitute  for natural gas in  a
significant portion  of the plant operations.

LFG Flow
(scfm)
250
500
1,250
2,500
5,000
CNG Production from LFG11
Production Volume
(gallons of gasoline
equivalent (GGE)/day)
1,000
2,000
5,000
10,000
20,000

Cost
($/GGE)
$1.40
$1.13
$0.91
$0.82
$0.68
Cleanup managers may explore these opportunities by:

• Applying EPA's  Landfill Gas Energy  Screening Tool to
  initially  screen   the   potential   for  landfill   methane
  recovery,  associated  cost,  technical practicality,   and
  anticipated reduction  in GHG emissions12
• Working  closely  with  potentially responsible  parties
  (PRPs)   and  owners   or  operators  to  design   and
  implement methane  recovery projects  on  a  voluntary
  basis
• Procuring technical assistance from experts  experienced
  in  LFG energy  systems  to  evaluate feasibility at  sites
  where  initial screening indicates significant potential
• Engaging utilities or developers for sites with potential to
  generate "excess" electricity  (beyond onsite needs)  that
  contribute to state renewable energy portfolios
• Soliciting partners to  demonstrate technologies that are
  emerging for electricity generation from LFG,  such as
  Stirling  engines  (external combustion engines), organic
  Rankine cycle engines, and fuel cells,13 and
• Using  energy savings performance contracts to finance
  and  obtain  technical  assistance  for  LFG   projects
  undertaken by federal agencies.14
Information to help evaluate the options is available from
EPA's Landfill Methane  Outreach  Program  (LMOP); the
program's  tools  include the Landfill Gas Energy  Pro/ecf
Development Handbook and decision-making software.15
Continuously  updated   information  about  state,  local,
utility, and  selected federal incentives promoting LFG as a
source  of  renewable   energy  is  available  from  the
Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy.16
 A system to recover LFG at the Grand River Landfill in
 Grand Ledge, Ml, has expanded twice since 1990 start-up to
 become  a 4.0-MW electricity generator. The system relies on
 189 horizontal and vertical wells that transfer LFG to a power
 plant  adjacent to  this  active  MSW landfill, which  includes
 closed treatment cells for coal-burning ash. The plant uses five
 800-kW internal combustion engines fueled by LFG averaging
 1,350 scfm, with a  steady 51% methane content. About
 5%  of the generated electricity is used to  operate the plant
 and the  remainder is sold to the local utility. Six mechanical
 windmills drive pumps that remove the waste cell leachate,
 which is  treated onsite before discharge to the sanitary sewer.
 Integrating Landfill Cover Designs with Reuse
The  options for reuse  activities, which in some  cases
involves  long-term  cleanup in other  areas  of  a site,  can
take advantage of contact covers. These cover systems
are designed  to create  a  biobarrier against intrusion by
people, animals, and in  some cases  vegetation. This type
of cover is  generally used with metal contaminants but
can  also be  used  for  organic  contaminants  with  low
mobility. Depending on  site-specific  reuse  goals, contact
covers can be constructed of asphalt, concrete, or soil.

When  properly  designed, landfill   covers  can  provide
significant opportunities to  host economic enterprises such
as  power  production  from  solar   and  wind
resources.   EPA,   other   government  agencies,   and
developers  have  begun investigating the  potential for

-------
reusing   formerly   contaminated   lands  and   mining
properties on  a  large-scale basis. EPA's  RE-Powering
America's Land initiative  has tracked this  potential  at sites
across the United States.17

EPA recommends that designs for solar farms atop closed
and properly covered landfills consider technical aspects
such as weight of photovoltaic (PV) or concentrated
solar power equipment, landfill cover  thickness, waste
                                    settlement,  wind  or
                                    snow loading,  and
                                    cover   maintenance
                                    requirements.18  Pro-
                                    ject   planners  also
                                    need to  account  for
                                    potential  challenges
                                    such   as   ongoing
                                    cleanup  activities  or
                                    liabilities.19
 A I.48-MW  solar farm began  operating in late 2010
 above the 28-acre El cover at "Site 7" of the Box Canyon
 Landfill  at Marine  Corp Base Camp  Pendleton,  CA.  The
 farm  comprises  225  fixed-tilt  PV panels in a  28-module
 configuration covering six acres. Each panel is mounted on a
 self-ballasted,  non-penetrating foundation spaced sufficiently
 apart from others to accommodate vegetation maintenance
 and other cover requirements specified in the site's record of
 decision.  Over the first year of operation, the PV system
 produced over 2,425 MWh of electricity for transmission to the
 local utility.  This resulted in an electricity savings  of about
 $340,000, demand  savings  of  about  $95,000,  and  an
 estimated  CO2 offset  exceeding  1,540 tons.  More  solar
 energy will be captured through  solar farm expansion  and
 solar-powered ignition systems for LFG vents.
Another option  is  use  of  a  solar geomembrane
cover,  which  can  meet  Subtitle   D  alternative   cap
requirements  while  converting  solar  energy to  useable
power.  A  solar geo-
membrane  cover  also
can be  integrated with
a LFG recovery system
to  maximize  produc-
tion of  electricity from
renewable resources.
  The landfill cover system at the Hickory Ridge Landfill in
  Conley,  CA,   relies  on  a   60-mil  reinforced,  synthetic
  membrane covering 45 acres. The  exposed geomembrane
  overlays 12 inches of an intermediate cover and a compacted
  grading layer. Approximately 7,000 flexible PV panels are
  bonded to the membrane, which is positioned on about
  10 acres with 18° southern and western  slopes. Power cables
  in flexible conduit extend to the edge of the cap where they
  connect  to an  inverter. The  1-MW  facility is  expected  to
  annually generate  1.3 million kWh of electricity that will be
  sold to the local utility under a renewable energy purchase
  agreement.
Depending  on  the  cover type, project  managers  can
explore other compatible  uses of land with properly
covered landfills, such as:

• Greenspace for wildlife preservation or recreation20
• Agriculture such as hay production, and
• Seed harvesting to revegetate other sites.

Project managers  also  can  explore  approaches  for
recycling portions of the onsite waste, as an alternative to
capping  that  provides economic and land  use benefits.
Cleanup at the Fairmont Coke Works-Sharon Steel Site in
Fairmont, WV, for example,  involves excavating, sorting,
and  blending the various consitutents to  form feedstock
sold  to a local synfuel power plant.

Waste not contained in landfills or in disposal  pits but left
in  place  may provide  other reuse opportunities  while
significantly  reducing land   and ecosystem  disturbance
during cleanup.  This approach  requires  assessment of
potential  human  health  risk posed  by  the   remaining
hazardous substances or  constituents and  likely involves
long-term  institutional   controls,   restricted  use,   and
ongoing  liability to site owners.21 Low human health risk at
a high-elevation  mining site,  for example, may not affect
anticipated use of a  site for purposes such as  community
recreation or power production from renewable resources.
  In 2007, a 2-MW solar farm was installed atop a 12-acre
  monolithic ET cover for construction debris at Fort Carson,
  CO.  The design included selecting a  native  seed mix that
  would yield shade and drought-tolerant vegetation with a short
  height.  Monitoring and O&M  indicates more  successful
  vegetative growth in areas shaded by the ground-mounted PV
  panels than in non-shaded areas, with no evidence of erosion
  caused  by the panels. Vehicle traffic inside the  fenced solar
  farm  is  kept  to  a  minimum  to  avoid  land  disturbance,
  particularly under  wet conditions. No irrigation  has  been
  needed despite the site's semi-arid climate, and no chemical
  pesticides/herbicides have been applied.

  One  round of early summer mowing to a  four-inch height is
  typically  sufficient to control weeds, minimize wildfire fodder,
  allow year-round  light access across  the  site,  and prevent
  shading  of the PV panels. Periodic  hand-washing of the solar
  modules is  performed by  using  low-pressure  hosing  and
  heavily  diluted vinegar. This maintenance is  performed
  by the solar developer (Conergy)   under a  20-year
  contract with Carson Solar I, LLC, the project owner. In return,
  the owner sells the generated electricity to Fort Carson  at a
  reduced rate under a 20-year power purchasing agreement.
 Monitoring and Maintaining a Final Cover
Proper  O&M  of a  cover  system  and  landfill  closure
elements  such as a  gas  collection  system is  needed to
ensure they are performing  as intended.  Monitoring and
maintenance  BMPs  can  involve   simple   but  efficient
procedural changes as well  as advanced field equipment
to increase efficiencies, such as:

-------
• Minimize  frequency  of grass  mowing, to  reduce  fuel
  consumption and disruption to ground-nesting birds
• Explore  using controlled  grazing by  goats or sheep to
  eliminate  woody  growth  and control  vegetation height
  while adding organic matter to the soil
• Integrate onsite structures to capture rainfall as a source
  of water for work such as  rinsing field equipment
• Use remotely controlled or non-invasive techniques, to
  avoid  cover  damage  and  minimize  field visits;  for
  example,  open  path spectroscopy  techniques  can  be
  used to periodically check for escaping LFG22
• Explore  onsite  renewable  energy  to  power  auxiliary
  equipment such as weather stations, and
• Evaluate   natural settings as  indicators  of long-term
  changes in the cover.

EPA encourages  PRPs and owners  or operators  of sites
requiring landfill  cover  installation  to work closely with
states  and other agencies or organizations responsible for
oversight of the system over time  (commonly 30 years or
more)  and any site  reuse. Partners may  include non-profit
groups serving the local or regional community.
   Landfill Cover Systems & Energy Production:
               Recommended Checklist
 Designing and Installing a Cover System
     Design with the intent of maintaining natural settings
     and addressing potential  effects of climate change
     Maximize use of onsite  rather than offsite materials
     Maximize use of materials with  recycled or biobased
     content
     Reduce consumption of petroleum-based power
     through clean fuel/emission technologies and
     renewable energy resources
 Landfill Gas Recovery for Beneficial Use
     Explore opportunities for direct use of treated LFG
     Install LFG recovery technologies to generate
     electricity and use any associated waste heat
     Partner with other organizations to produce fuel
 Integrating Landfill Cover Designs with Reuse
     Consider a contact cover to serve as a biobarrier
     Explore electricity production from solar and wind
     resources, for onsite use or credit/sale
     Identify other activities that could maximize use of a
     covered area without jeopardizing the cover system
 Maintaining and Monitoring a Final Cover
     Schedule periodic inspection  of cover system
     components and  quickly complete needed  repair
     Use non-disruptive techniques and the site  setting  to
     monitor cover system performance
     Explore partnerships to integrate cover maintenance
     with site  reuse
  References [Web accessed: December 2011 ]
1  U.S.  EPA; Principles  for Greener C/eonups;  August 27, 2009;
  http://www.epa.gov/oswer/greencleanups
2  Slack, Sarah; EPA/OSWER fellowship; The Incorporation of an
  Ecosystem Services Assessment into the Remediation of Contaminated
  Sites; August 201 0; http://www.clu-
  in.org/download/studentpapers/sarah-slack-ecosystem-services.pdf
3  U.S. EPA; Low Impact Development;
  http://www.epa.gov/owow/NPS/lid/
4  U.S. Department of Agriculture; Federal Biobased Product
  Procurement Preference Program;
  http://www.dm.usda.gov/procurement/business/biopreferred.htm
5  U.S. EPA; Green Remediation Best Management Practices:
  °  Clean Fuel & Emission Technologies for Site Cleanup; EPA 542-F-
    10-008; August 2010
  b  Excavation and Surface Restoration; EPA 542-F-08-01 2; December
    2008
6  U.S. EPA; CLU-IN; Evapotranspiration Covers;
  http://www.cluin.org/products/evap/
7  U.S. EPA; Fact Sheet on Evapotranspiration Cover Systems for Waste
  Containment; EPA542-F-1 1 -001; February 201 1
8  U.S. EPA; CLU-IN; Alternative Landfill Cover Project Profiles;
  http://www.clu-in.org/products/altcovers/
9  U.S. EPA; High Global Warming Potential (GWP) Gases; Table 2.14
  (Errata); http://www.epa.gov/highgwp/scientific.html
10 U.S. EPA; Powering Microturbines with Landfill Gas; EPA 430-F-02-
  012; http://nepis.epa.gov/Adobe/PDF/P1001 12N.PDF
11 U.S. EPA LMOP; Project Deve/opmenf Handbook;
  http://www.epa.gov/lmop/publications-tools/handbook.html
12 U.S. EPA; Superfund  Landfill Mefhane-to-Energy Pilot Project;
  http://www.clu in.org/green re mediation/docs/Landfill_Methane_Final_
  Report_051011.pdf
13 Committee on Climate Change Science and Technology Integration;
  Strategies for the Commercialization and Deployment of Greenhouse
  Gas Intensity-Reducing Technologies and Practices; DOE/PI-0007
14 U.S. Department of Energy; Federal Energy Management Program;
  Landfill Gas to Energy for Federal Facilities; ORNL 2004-02580/abh,
  July 2004; http://wwwl .eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/bamf_landfill.pdf
15 U.S. EPA; LMOP; Publications and Tools;
  http://www.epa.gov/lmop/publications-tools/index.html
16 DSIRE;  http://www.dsireusa.org/
17 U.S. EPA; RE-Powering America's Land;
  http://www.epa.gov/renewableenergyland
18 Sampson, Gabriel; EPA/OSWER fellowship; Solar Power Installations
  on Closed Landfills: Technical and Regulatory Considerations;
  September 2009; http://clu-in.org/download/studentpapers/Solar-
  Power-lnstallations-on-Closed-Landfills-Sampson.pdf
19 U.S. EPA; Siting  Renewable Energy on Contaminated Properties:
  Addressing Liability Concerns; EPA-330-F-1 0-001; March 201 1
20 U.S. EPA; Reusing Cleaned Up Superfund Sites: Recreational Use of
  Land Above Hazardous Waste Containment Areas; EPA 540-K-01 -
  002; March 2001
21 U.S. EPA; Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund (RAGS);
  http://www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment/ragsa/index.htm
22 U.S. EPA; Evaluation of Fugitive Emissions Using Ground-Based
  Optical Remote Sensing Technology; EPA/600/R-07/032

  EPA/OSWER appreciates the many contributions to this fact sheet, as
     provided by EPA regions and laboratories or private industry.

  The Agency is publishing this fact sheet as a means of disseminating
information regarding the BMPs of green remediation; mention of specific
      products or vendors does not constitute EPA endorsement.
             Visit Green Remediation Focus online:
          http://www.cluin.org/greenremediation
                 For more information, contact:
      Carlos Pachon, OSWER/OSRTI (pachon.carlos@epa.gov)
              U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

-------