Performance-Based System for Post-Closure Care at MSW Landfills

1. Performance-Based System for Post-Closure Care at MSW Landfills California Integrated Waste Management Board Post-Closure Maintenance Period and Financial Assurances for Post-Closure Maintenance Workshop December 6, 2004 GeoSyntec Consultants

2. Speaker • Michael Caldwell, PG • Sr. Director, WM Environmental Protection, Groundwater Program • More than 18 years of RCRA solid and hazardous waste experience • Member of ITRC Alternative Landfill Technologies PCC Team • Representing WM as a member of the EREF PCC Technical Advisory Panel

3. CIWMB Regulatory Standard • 27 CCR §21900: • “The operator of a solid waste landfill may be released from post-closure after a minimum period of 30 years upon demonstration to and approval by the CIWMB, the EA, and the RWQCB that the solid waste landfill no longer poses a threat to public health and safety and the environment”

4. The EREF Performance-Based Methodology is Designed to: • Provide the Solid Waste Community with a Tool to Make Technically-Defensible Decisions Regarding PCC for MSW Landfills • To achieve the objectives of 27 CCR §21900 to demonstrate that the landfill does not pose a threat to HH&E

5. USEPA Reference to a Performance-Based Approach to Ending PCC • “… In an approved state, the Director may allow an owner or operator to cease managing leachate if the owner or operator can demonstrate that the leachate no longer poses a threat to human health or the environment.” (40 CFR §258.61(a)(2) • “Concentrations at the points of exposure, rather than concentrations in the collection system, may be used when assessing threats.” EPA530-R-93-017, Section 6.6.3

6. A Performance-Based System for Post-Closure Care at MSW Landfills:A Procedure for Providing Long-Term Stewardship under RCRA Subtitle D

7. EPCC Project Team • Tech. Advisory • Panel • Industry • Regulators • Researchers EREF Project Team Experts GeoSyntec, MD (Project Management) Industry (Technical Resources and Data) Other Resources ITRC ASTSWMO Industry Leaders State Regulators Trade Associations

8. EREF Project Attributes • Scientifically-based method that addresses PCC on a modular basis • New paradigm for data collection • Conservative assumptions & approach • Rigorous post-decision monitoring • Confirmation • Surveillance • Will promote proactive landfill practices • e.g., leachate recirculation, liquid wastes, A-Cap, etc.

9. EREF EPCC Project Objectives Develop a Standardized, Performance-Based System to Define, Manage, & Ultimately Exit PCC. Intent is to: • Provide a rigorous technical approach to assess and optimize PCC activities • Allow More Effective Management of Existing PCC Funds • Assess conditions early, evaluate landfill status, and monitor for the effects of change with two levels of protective monitoring • Provide Increased Certainty for Operators and Regulators within existing regulations

10. Possible Outcome of Implementation of the EREF EPPC Methodology (Not >10 Years After Closure) • Continue PCC–Post-closure care (and additional data collection) is still required. • Optimize PCC–Post-closure care must continue for at least one element but optimization of activities does not pose a threat to HH&E • End of Regulated PCC–The landfill does not pose a threat and de minimus management of end-use obligations are maintained (referred to as “custodial care”)

11. Assessment of MSW Landfills in Peer-Reviewed Technical Literature • The quality of leachate and LFG in a landfill can be correlated to the “phase” of the life of the landfill; • The factors that affect a landfill as it progresses through each phase of its life are understood and can be identified for a particular landfill; and • The future trends of leachate and LFG can be predicted based on known, current quality and knowledge of that phase of its life. EREF EPCC Report (pending 1Q 2005)

13. Project Status • Final draft of EREF PCC reviewed by technical team and TAP • Report expected in 1Q 2005 • ITRC preparing draft report for team member review • Significant input from regulatory community including CIWMB • Final report expected to be complete by May 2005

14. Thank You! Contacts: Mike Houlihan, PE, GeoSyntec Consultantsmhoulihan@geosyntec.com Michael Caldwell, PG, WMI mcaldwell@wm.com Ed Repa, PhD, EREF erepa@erefdn.org

15. Environmental Research and Education Foundation Edward Repa, Ph.D. Project Manager Research Institutions Debra Reinhart, Ph.D., P.E Assoc. Dean, Civil & Environmental Engineering University of Central Florida EREF Board Member Public Sector N.C. Vasuki, P.E., DEE CEO, Delaware Solid Waste Authority SWANA Private Sector David Burt, P.HG. Sr. Director, Environmental Protection, Waste Management, Inc. Clarke Lundell, P.E. Director, Engineering, Republic Industries Regulatory Agency Liaisons EPA (OSWER) ASTSWMO (Paul Farrell, VADEQ) EREF EPCC Technical Advisory Panel

16. Leachate • Dr. Morton Barlaz, NC State Univ. • Dr. Jeremy Morris, GeoSyntec, MD • Groundwater Protection • Mr. John Gallinatti, GeoSyntec, CA • Landfill Gas • Mr. Pat Sullivan, SCS Engineers, CA • Containment Systems • Dr. Rudy Bonaparte, GeoSyntec, GA • Geotechnical Issues • Mr. Mike Houlihan, GeoSyntec, MD Project Team Experts • Data Analysis • Dr. Robert Gibbons, Univ. of • Illinois (Chicago) • Risk Assessment • Toxicology • Public Policy