United States Solid Waste and
Environmental Protection Emergency Response
Agency	(5305W)	
EPA530-R-97-070
PB98-108 251
November 1997
a rn/i RCRA, Superfund & EPCRA
Hotline Training Module
Introduction to:
Solid Waste Programs
Updated July 1997

-------
DISCLAIMER
This document was developed by Booz-Allen & Hamilton Inc. under contract 68-W0-0039 to EPA. It is
intended to be used as a training tool for Hotline 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 Hotline training and is not used as a reference
tool on Hotline calls. The Hotline 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 Hotline Phone Numbers:
National toll-free (outside of DC area)
Local number (within DC area)
National toll-free for the hearing impaired (TDD)
(800) 424-9346
(703) 412-9810
(800) 553-7672
The Hotline is open from 9 am to 6 pm Eastern Time,
Monday through Friday, except for federal holidays.

-------
RCRA SOLID WASTE PROGRAMS
CONTENTS
1.	Introduction	 1
2.	Municipal Solid Waste 	 3
2.1	EPA's Integrated Waste Management Hierarchy	 4
2.2	Source Reduction 	 5
2.3	Recycling							 6
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 malodorous 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 40 CFR 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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
f
* !
2 - Solid Waste Programs	'
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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
»
*
2. MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
Solid Waste Programs - 3
EPA defines municipal solid waste as durable goods (e.g., appliances, tires, batteries),
nondurable goods (e.g., newspapers, books, magazines), containers and packaging,
food wastes, yard trimmings, and miscellaneous organic wastes from residential,
commercial, and industrial sources. Examples of waste from these categories
include appliances, newspapers, clothing, boxes, disposable tableware, office and
classroom paper, wood pallets, and cafeteria wastes. 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 208 million tons, or 4.3 pounds
per person per day in 1995. EPA previously projected the 4.3 pounds per capita rate
to slightly decrease by the year 20001; however, expected increases in the generation
of consumer products and packaging offset projected decreases in the amount of
yard trimmings entering the waste management system. As a result, the Agency
now expects the per capita generation rate to remain constant at about 4.3 pounds
per day until the year 2000.
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. In 1995, this
figure had increased to 27 percent, and projected scenarios for future recovery are
estimated at between 30 and 35 percent by the year 2000. 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 UNITED STATES, 19942
RECOVERY
(including recycling and composting)
49.3 MILLION TONS (23.6%)
COMBUSTION
32.5 MILLION TONS (15.5%)
LANDFILL, OTHER
127.3 MILLION TONS (60.9%)
TOTAL WEIGHT - 209.1 MILLION TONS
1	Based on statistics in Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1994 Update
2	Based on statistics in Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1995 Update
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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
4 - Solid Waste Programs
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
RECYCLE
LANDFILL
COMBUSTION
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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
Solid Waste Programs - 5
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.
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
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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
6 - Solid Waste Programs
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 Pav-
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 recovered materials. These are only the first steps —
recovered 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 15 percent (29.8 million tons) of the MSW
generated in the United States. 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 1985, the amount of yard waste
recovered was negligible (less than 5,000 tons, or 0.05 percent). According to
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1996 Update, by
1995, the amount of yard waste recovered had grown to 9 million tons, or 30.3
percent.
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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
Solid Waste Programs - 7
FEDERAL PROCUREMENT
As mentioned above, the recycling loop is not complete until the recovered
materials are used in a new product and that product is purchased. One of the
biggest problems facing attempts to increase recycling rates is the wide fluctuation in
market demand for recovered materials. Acknowledging the interdependence
between buying recycled content products and the success of recycling, and
recognizing the impact that the purchasing power of the federal government could
have in stimulating markets for recovered materials, Congress added RCRA §6002,
establishing the government's "buy-recycled" program. (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.) Under this program, EPA designates items
that are or can be made with recovered materials and provides guidance to
government agencies on purchasing the designated items containing recovered
materials.
RCRA §6002 requires all federal agencies to revise their product specifications to
eliminate any exclusion of recovered materials and any requirement that products
be manufactured from virgin materials. In addition, §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. Figure 3 lists those items that EPA has designated to date.
Figure 3
DESIGNATED ITEMS
Paper and Paper Products
Transportation Products
Vehicular Products
Traffic Control Cones
Engine Coolants
Traffic Barricades
Re-Refined Lubricating Oils
Park and Recreation Products
Retread Tires
Playground Surfaces
Construction Products
Running Tracks
Structural Fiberboard
Landscaping Products
Laminated Paperboard
Hydraulic Mulch
Carpet
Yard Trimmings Compost
Floor Tiles
Non-Paper Office Products
Patio Blocks
Office Recycling Containers
Building Insulation Products
Office Waste Receptacles
Cement and Concrete Containing
Plastic Desktop Accessories
Coal Fly Ash or Ground
Toner Cartridges
Granulated Blast Furnace Slag
Binders
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. "Procuring agencies" include federal agencies, as well
ile&rtftSsp	actors.

-------
8 - Solid Waste Programs
(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 recovered 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.
It is EPA's responsibility to designate items that are or can be made with recovered
materials pursuant to §6002. EPA designates these items in the Comprehensive
Procurement Guideline (CPG), which is codified in 40 CFR Part 247. In addition,
EPA issues recommendations to assist procuring agencies in establishing their
affirmative procurement programs. These recommendations typically contain the
range of recovered content levels within which the designated items are available.
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).
JOBS THROUGH RECYCLING INITIATIVE
In another effort to foster the markets for recycled materials, EPA launched the "Jobs
Through Recycling Initiative" 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. 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. (The deadline for submitting proposals
was February 18,1994.)
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 (REDAs). The REDA 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
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.
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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
Solid Waste Programs - 9
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.
WASTEWI$E PROGRAM
In 1994, EPA developed the WasteWi$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 Second Year Progress Report, voluntary
programs implemented by WasteWi$e partners conserved more than 344,000 tons
of material through waste prevention, and conserved an additional 4.2 million tons
via recycling. The WasteWi$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-S00-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
Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1996 Update.
combustion of solid waste increased from 9.0 percent in 1985 to 16.1 percent in 1995.
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 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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
10 - Solid Waste Programs
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
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
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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
Solid Waste Programs - 11
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 §3001(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 Characterization of
Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1996 Update, landfilling, at the end of
the hierarchy of solid waste management, still remains the most widely used waste
management method (approximately 56.9 percent). Many communities are having
difficulties 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
Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Facility Criteria.)
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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
12 - Solid Waste Programs
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
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.
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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
Solid Waste Programs - 13
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
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.
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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
\
3. INDUSTRIAL SOLID WASTE
Solid Waste Programs - 15
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.
FUTURE GUIDANCE ON MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
EPA and the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials
(ASTSWMO) have started an initiative to develop voluntary guidance for the
management of industrial nonhazardous waste in land-based disposal units. The
goals 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 State/EPA Steering Committee developing the guidance also convenes the
Stakeholders Focus Group of environmental, industry, state, and EPA
representatives to advise the Steering Committee during development of the
guidance. The current schedule is to complete the draft guidance by late 1997.
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 Hotline training purposes.

-------
16 - Solid Waste Programs
t
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 Hotline training purposes,

-------
50272-101
REPORT DOCUMENTATION ° 1. REPORT NO.
0 2.
©


PAGE • EPA530-R-97-070
O
e
0
o
o

4.
Title and Subtitle

0
5. Report Date

RCRA, SUPERFUND, AND EPCRA HOTLINE TRAINING NODULE:
INTRODUCTION TO
a
NOVEMBER 1997

SOLID WASTE PROGRAMS

0
0
6.
7.
AuthorCs)

e
e
o
8. Performing Organization Rept. No
9.
Performing Organization Name and Address

0
o
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.

U.S. EPA

o
11. Contract(C) or Grant(G) No.

OFFICE OF SOLID WASTE

o
(C) 68-W0-0039

401 M STREET, SU

o
(G5

WASHINGTON. DC 20460

e

12.
Sponsoring Organization Name and Address

o
13. Type of Report & Period Covered

BO02-ALLEN & HAMILTON

o
TRAINING - UPDATED 7/97

4330 EAST WEST HIGHWAY

©


BETHESDA, MARYLAND 20814

o
Q
14.
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstract (Limit: 200 words)
OWE OF A SERIES OF MGOUIES DEVELOPED AS A TRAINING TOOL FOR HOTLINE SPECIALISTS. SOLID UASTE IS PRIMARILY REGULATED BY
THE STATES AND MUNICIPALITIES AND MANAGED ON THE LOCAL LEVEL. THE ONLY EXCEPTION IS THE 40 CFR PART 258 FEDERAL SOLID
WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY CRITERIA WHICH PROVIDE EPA'S REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DESIGN AND OPERATION OF LANDFILLS. EPA'S ROLE
IN IMPLEMENTING SOLID UASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS INCLUDES SETTING NATIONAL GOALS, PROVIDING LEADERSHIP AND TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE, AND DEVELOPING EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS. THIS MODULE FOCUSES ON EPA'S EFFORTS IN MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL
SOLID WASTE. THE INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT A COMPLETE REPRESENTATION OF EPA'S REGULATIONS OR POLICIES, BUT IS
AN INTRODUCTION USED FOR HOTLINE TRAINING PURPOSES.
17. Document Analysis a. Descriptors
b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
c. COSATI Field/Group
18. Availability Statement
RELEASE UNLIMITED
19.	Security Class (This Report)0 21. No. of Pages
UNCLASSIFIED		16	
20.	Security Class (This Page) 0	22. Price
UNCLASSIFIED	°	0.00		
(See ANSI-239.18)
OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77)
(Formerly NTIS-35)

-------