Dear Bill:
I mentioned I have been spending quite a bit of time developing a
Petition to the State of California Water Resources Control Board on
the deficiencies in the current approach followed at the Regional Board
level throughout the state in implementing Chapter 15, i.e. the state's
landfilling regulations. California has some of the best landfilling
regulations in the country, adopted in 1984, requiring that the
development of landfills either naturally or through engineered
structures protect groundwaters from all use impairments (not just
hazardous chemicals) for as long as the wastes in the landfill will be a
threat. This is a much cleaner statement of the performance standard
of landfills than embodied in RCRA. As we have discussed, RCRA
needs to be changed to adopt that approach.
The basic problem in California, however, is that the Regional Boards
have been allowing the development of landfills with Chapter 15
minimum design requirements for the liners, covers, monitoring, etc.
These now are the same as Subtitle D. It is obvious that minimum
Subtitle D requirements will not protect groundwaters from impaired
use for as long as the wastes in the landfill will be a threat. My
Petition, being sent under separate cover via US mail, is an attempt to
try to get the State Board to take action which would require that the
Regional Boards stop allowing minimum Subtitle D landfill design,
closure, and post-closure care and, instead, require full Chapter 15
protection, i.e. no impaired use of groundwaters by waste-derived
constituents for as long as the wastes in the landfill will be a threat.
At this point, I do not know if the State Board will hear this issue.
Since I am doing this as an individual without outside financial
support, I do not have a contingency behind me that could put
pressure on the Board. Obviously, I would welcome any support that I
could get, including pro-bono legal support from an environmental
group such as the Sierra Club, who could carry my Petition to the
courts if necessary. I am reasonably confident that if we could get the
Petition to be reviewed by the court, we could gain a favorable ruling
on it.
Recyclers may be highly interested in this effort since basically I am
pursuing the development of landfills that require paying the true cost
of landfilling, including the cost of the long-term pollution that will
occur from Subtitle D landfills. If these true costs were more
appropriately incorporated into landfill tipping fees today, including
developing the necessary contingency funds for landfilling to address
long-term liability and groundwater pollution clean-up issues, the cost
of landfilling would be several times what is being charged today for
Subtitle D landfilling. This would make the recycling of waste
components far more attractive and economically feasible.
Please feel free to contact those in California or elsewhere on your
network, indicating that if they want a copy of the Petition, which is
about 20 pages, they should contact me, providing their names and
mailing addresses. While this issue at this time a California issue, how
it evolves could have national repercussions since, basically, I am
focusing the inadequacies of Subtitle D. There may be others in your
group who would have an interest in carrying on similar activities in
their state since this problem is a national one.
Please find enclosed (via US mail) copies of several of my papers
providing information on this topic. These include the following:
1. Cost of Groundwater Quality Protection in MSW Landfilling
2. Landfill Post-Closure Care: Can Owners Guarantee the Money Will
Be There?
3. Municipal Landfill Post-Closure Care Funding: The "30-Year Post-
Closure Myth
4. Landfilling of Solid & Hazardous Waste: Facing Long-Term
Liability
5. Recommended Design, Operation, Closure and Post-Closure
Approaches for Municipal
Solid Waste and Hazardous Waste Landfills
Several of these papers are down-loadable from our Web page,
http://members.aol.com/gfredlee/gfl.htm. We are adding the other
to the Web page as we get them converted to a suitable format.
Number 5 above evolved from the work I did about a year ago with
Greenpeace in Mexico. It provides references to the Hickman SWANA
discussions for the need for dedicated trust funds for assured long-
term funding. This paper also mentions the GAO article focusing on
the lack of adequate funding for post-closure activities for hazardous
waste landfills. This same issue applies to municipal solid waste
landfills. If you have trouble obtaining copies of any of these, please
contact me.
Let me know if I can be of further assistance, and thank you for any
help you can provide.
Sincerely yours,
G. Fred Lee, PhD, PE, DEE
************************************************************************
GREENYES is an open (unmoderated) discussion forum focusing on policies
and strategies needed to advance sustainable resource policies. We seek
to advance serious discussion from a broad range of viewpoints.
TO SUBSCRIBE Send to: listserve@ucsd.edu Message: add greenyes
TO UNSUBSCRIBE Send to: listserve@ucsd.edu Message: delete greenyes
TO POST MESSAGES Send to: greenyes@ucsd.edu
GREENYES is hosted by the GRASSROOTS RECYCLING NETWORK.
************************************************************************