RECEIVED

CLERKS

OFFICE

JUL

192005

STATE

OF ILLINOIS

BEFORE THE

ILLINOIS

POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD~~tb0fl

Control Board

IN

THE

MATTER OF:

)

PROPOSED SITE SPECIFIC WASTE

)

R 06-

REGULATION

APPLICABLE TO

)

(Site-specific

SILBRICO

CORPORATION

)

rulemaking—land)

(35

III.Adm.Code Part 810)

NOTICE OF FILING

To:

(See attached Service

List.)

PLEASE

TAKE

NOTICE

that

on

this

19°’day of

July

2005,

the

following

were

filed

with

the

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Board:

Petitioner

Silbrico

Corporation’s

Petition for Site-Specific

Rulemaking and

Motion to Waive

Requirement to Submit

200 Signatures, which are attached and

herewith served

upon you.

SILBRICO CORPORATION

By:~

One of

its

attorneys

Elizabeth

S.

Harvey

Michael

J.

Maher

SWANSON,

MARTIN & BELL,

LLP

One IBM

Plaza,

Suite 3300

330 North Wabash Avenue

Chicago,

Illinois

60611

Telephone:

(312) 321-9100

---

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I,

the

undersigned

non-attorney,

state

that

I

served

a

copy

of Petitioner

Silbrico

Corporation’s

Petition

for

Site-Specific

Rulemaking

and

Motion

to Waive

Requirement to

Submit

200 Signatures

to counsel of record

in the

above-captioned

matter

via

U.S.

Mail

at

One

IBM Plaza,

Chicago,

IL 60611

on or before 5:00 p.m.

on July

19,

2005.

/~JMJJV?~RrdL-ni

(~9’nette

M.

Podlin

xl

Under penalties

as provided

by

law

pursuant to 735 ILCS

5/1-109,1 certify

that the statements set forth

herein

are true

and correct.

---

2049-00

1

SERVICE LIST

Case No. R 06-

(Site-Specific Rulemaking

--

Land)

Illinois

Environmental

Protection Agency

Division of Legal Counsel

1021

North

Grand Avenue

East

P.O.

Box

19276

Springfield,

Illinois

62794-9276

Department of Commerce

and

Economic Opportunity

Office of Legal Counsel

620 East Adams Street

Springfield,

Illinois

62701-1615

---

RECEIVED

CLEPKS OFFiCE

JUL

1

92005

STATE OF ILLINOIS

BEFORE THE

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL

BOARD Pollution Control Board

IN

THE

MAUER OF:

)

PROPOSED SITE SPECIFIC WASTE

)

R 06-

0

REGULATION

APPLICABLE TO

)

(Site-specific

SILBRICO CORPORATION

)

rulemaking—land)

(35

III.Adm.Code Part 810)

MOTION TO WAIVE REQUIREMENT TO SUBMIT 200 SIGNATURES

Petitioner

SILBRICO

CORPORATION

(“Silbrico”),

by

its

attorneys,

Swanson,

Martin

&

Bell,

LLP,

hereby

moves

the

Board

to

waive

the

requirement

that

Silbrico

submit 200 signatures with

its

petition for site-specific regulation.

1.

Section

102.202(f) of the

Board’s

rules require

a

petitioner

in

a

regulatory

proceeding to submit

200 signatures

in

support of the

petition.

2.

Notwithstanding

this

200

signature

requirement,

the

Board’s

rules

also

allow

it

to

proceed

to

hearing

without

the

submission

of

200

signatures.

(35

III.Adm.Code

102.410(c).)

3.

Requiring

Silbrico

to

provide

200

signatures

in

support

of

its

petition

is

burdensome

and

unnecessary.

SlIbrico

asks the Board to waive

that requirement.

4.

The

Board

has

waived

signature

requirements

for

site-specific

rulemakings

a

number

of

times,

including

In

re

Proposed

Site

Specific

Regulation

Applicable to

Ameren

Energy Generating

Company,

Elgin,

Amending 35

llLAdm. Code

Part

901,

R04-1

1

(November

6,

2003),

and

In

re

Site

Specific

Rule

for

City

of

Effingham

Treatment

Plant

Fluoride

Discharge,

35

llLAdm. Code

304.233,

R03-1

1

(November 7,

2002).

---

5.

Silbrico

asks

that

the

Board

exercise

its

discretion

and

waive

the

200

signature requirement, as it has done for other petitioners.

WHEREFORE,

Silbrico

Corporation

moves

the

Board

to

waive the

requirement

to

submit

200

signatures

in

support of Silbrico’s

petition for site-specific regulation,

and

for such other relief as the

Board deems

appropriate.

Respectfully submitted,

SILBRICO CORPORATION

Dated:

July

19, 2005

Michael J.

Maher

Elizabeth

S.

Harvey

Swanson,

Martin

& Bell,

LLP

One IBM

Plaza,

Suite

3300

330 North Wabash Avenue

Chicago,

Illinois

60611

Telephone:

(312) 321-9100

---

RECEIVED

CLERK’S OFFICE

BEFORE THE

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

JUL

192005

STATE OF ILLINOIS

IN

THE

MATTER OF:

)

Pollution Control Board

)

PROPOSED SITE SPECIFIC WASTE

)

R 06-

REGULATION

APPLICABLE TO

)

(Site-specific

SILBRICO

CORPORATION

)

rulemaking—land)

(35 Ill.Adm.Code Part 810)

PETITION FOR SITE-SPECIFIC

RULEMAKING

Petitioner

SILBRICO

CORPORATION

(“Silbrico”),

by

its

attorneys

Swanson,

Martin

& Bell,

LLP,

hereby petitions the

Illinois

Pollution Control Board for

a site-specific

rule

allowing

Silbrico

to

dispose

of

nonhazardous,

inert

waste

at

a

“construction

and

demolition

debris”

facility.

This

petition

is

submitted

pursuant

to

Section

27

of

the

Environmental

Protection

Act

(Act)

(415

ILCS

5/27)

and

Part

102

of

the

Board’s

procedural

rules (35 lIl.Adm.Code Part 102).

Introduction

Silbrico

was

founded

in

1946,

and

is

located

at

6300

River

Road,

Hodgkins,

Cook County,

Illinois.

Silbrico manufactures several

products using

perlite.

Perlite is

a

naturally occurring volcanic rock,

which can expand from four to twenty times

its

original

volume when

heated.

Perlite

is

the

little white kernels you see in

a

potted

plant.

During

the

manufacturing

process,

several

wastes

are

generated,

including

off-specification

perlite

and

fugitive

perlite

from

baghouse

dust

collections.

These

two

wastes

are

nonhazardous,

and

are

not

special

wastes.

The off-specification

perlite

is

an

industrial

process waste,

and

the

fugitive

perlite

is

a

pollution

control

waste.

Silbrico

currently

disposes

of these

two

wastes

at

a

permitted

nonhazardous

municipal

waste

landfill.

However,

due

to

the

inert

and

nonhazardous

characteristics

of

the

off-specification

---

perlite and

the

fugitive

perlite,

Silbrico seeks

to dispose of these wastes

at

a

“clean

fill”

facility

which

accepts

only

clean

construction

and

demolition

debris.

Allowing

the

disposal of these wastes at

a

“clean fill” facility would save valuable space

in

municipal

waste

landfills

and

result

in

significant

cost

savings,

while

posing

no

environmental

violation or threat.

Silbrico has simultaneously filed

a petition for variance.

That petition for variance

seeks authorization for Silbrico to dispose of these waste streams at a”cleanfiW’

facility

while this petition for site-specific rule

is

pending.1

Petition Content ReQuirements

The

Board’s

procedural

rules

set forth

the

content requirements for

petitions for

site-specific

rules.

(35

lll.Adm.Code

102.202

and

102.210.)

This

section

addresses

those content requirements.

The language of the

proposed

reQulation

The

Illinois

Environmental

Protection Agency (IEPA)

has taken

the

position

that

Silbrico’s

off-specification

perlite,

and

fugitive

perlite,

must

be

disposed

of

at

a

nonhazardous waste

landfill,

rather than

at

a

“clean fill”

facility.

(See

IEPA

letter dated

September

16,

2004,

attached

as

Exhibit

A.)

A search

of the

Board’s

regulations

has

located

no

regulation

specifically

stating

that

industrial

process

wastes

and

pollution

control

wastes

must

be

disposed

of

in

a

nonhazardous

waste

landfill.2

Silbrico

proposes that

the

site-specific

rule

be

added

to

Part

810,

as

a

new section

810.105.

1

Silbrico’s variance

petition

seeks,

in the

alternative to

a variance,

a declaration

by the

Board that

Silbrico’s off-specification

perlite

and fugitive

perlite

waste

streams are

analogous to

“clean

construction

and

demolition

debris,”

and

can

be

disposed

of

in

a

“clean

fill”

facility.

If

the

Board

makes

that

determination

in

the variance proceeding, this

requested site-specific

rule will be unnecessary.

2

The

Part

809

regulations

regarding

industrial

process

and

pollution

control

wastes

discuss

whether they are special wastes.

Silbrico’s wastes are not special wastes.

2

---

Silbrico

proposes

adding

the

site-specific

to

Part

810

because

that

Part

contains

general

provisions

applicable

to

solid

waste

facilities.

The

language

of

the

rule

is

proposed

as:

Section 810.105

Waste Streams from Silbrico Corporation

a)

This

regulation

applies

only

to

the

specified

waste

streams

from

Silbrico Corporation’s

Hodgkins, Cook County,

Illinois facility.

b)

This regulation

applies to two waste streams

from

Silbrico’s

facility:

off-specification

perlite,

and

fugitive

perlite

(collectively,

“the

specified waste streams”).

c)

The

specified waste

streams

may

be

disposed

of

in

a

“clean

fill”

facility that accepts only “clean construction

and demolition debris,”

defined at 415

ILCS 5/3.160W).

A statement of reasons supporting the proposal

Silbrico

is

located

at 6300

River

Road,

Hodgkins,

Illinois,

in

Cook

County.

The

Silbrico facility

was

built

in

1960.

The site was

originally

five

acres,

and

has expanded

to nine

acres on one contiguous site,

and

another 3.8

acres next to Silbrico’s

neighbor.

Silbrico employs

75

to 80

people.

Silbrico

manufactures

several products

from

perlite.

Perlite

is

a

volcanic

rock

which

naturally

occurs

in

areas

throughout

the

world.

It

expands four to twenty times

its

original volume when

heated.

Perlite is useful

in

many

applications,

including

insulation,

filtration,

aeration

and

moisture

control

in

soil.

It

is

found

in

every home that

has drywall

in

the

plaster that seals the joints.

It

is

used

in

all

ceiling tile installed

in

commercial buildings.

It can

be used

in

any

commercial product

that needs

a

lightweight,

inert mineral filler.

(See generally “Basic

Facts About Perlite,”

attached

as

Exhibit

B.)

Silbrico

uses

perlite

in

the

manufacture

of

Ryolex

insulation,

Krum

soil conditioner, Sil-Kleer filter aids,

and Sil-Cell

filler.3

Further information on the products manufactured

by

Silbrico

is available

at w~w.silbrico.com.

3

---

When

heated above

1600 degrees Fahrenheit, crushed

perlite rock expands

in

a

manner similar to

popcorn.

This expansion

is due to

the

presence of 2-4

combined

water

within

the

crude perlite

rock.

The

combined

water vaporizes

during

the

heating

process

and

creates

tiny

bubbles

in

the

heat-softened

particles.

These

diminutive

bubbles give

expanded

perlite

its

exceptionally

light weight.

(Expanded

perlite can

be

manufactured to

weigh as little

as

2.5

pounds

per cubic foot.)

This expansion

process

also

creates

expanded

perlite’s

characteristic

white

color.

The

expanded

perlite

processed

by

Silbrico

is

known

by the

trade

name

Ryolex.

Attached

as

Exhibit

C

is

a

technical

data sheet for Ryolex.

The

processing

of perlite creates two waste streams.

Off-specification

perlite

is

generated

when

the

product

produced

does

not

meet

Silbrico’s

or

the

customer’s

specifications

for

grain

size,

density,

or

other

physical

characteristics.

The

off-

specification

perlite

is

currently classified as

an industrial

process waste pursuant to

35

Ill.Adm.Code

809.103.

Fugitive

perlite

is

fugitive

product

captured

by

Silbrico’s

bag

house

filters4

and

by general

housekeeping operations such as

sweeping.

The fugitive

perlite

is

currently

classified

as

a

pollution

control

waste

pursuant to

35

lll.Adm.Code

809.103.

Silbrico

currently

disposes

of

these

two

waste

streams

in

a

permitted

nonhazardous

waste

landfill.

Silbrico

produces

approximately

100

semi

dump

truck

Silbrico

uses

all

required

air

pollution control

equipment

to capture

emissions from

its

process to

the

air,

and

has

the

necessary

permits for

this

equipment.

(Silbrico

has

a

lifetime

air

operating

permit,

number

73020157.

The

facility

identification

number

is

031126AAD.)

This

site-specific

rule

request

seeks relief only from waste disposal

provisions,

not from

air emission

regulations.

4

---

loads

of

off-specification

perlite

and

fugitive

perlite

per

year.5

This

disposal,

at

a

nonhazardous waste landfill, costs approximately $40,000 to $50,000 per year.

The continued

disposal

of the

off-specification

perlite

and the

fugitive

perlite

at

a

nonhazardous

waste

landfill

imposes

an

unreasonable

hardship

on

Silbrico.

Silbrico

currently spends

approximately $40,000 to $50,000 per year

in

disposal costs.

Silbrico

estimates

it would

save at

least 50

of those

costs

($20,000

to

$25,000)

annually if

it

could

dispose of those waste streams

at

a

“clean

fill”

facility which

accepts

only

clean

construction

and demolition

debris.

Additionally,

the

ability

to

dispose

at

a

“clean

fill”

facility would

provide

Silbrico

more

flexibility

in

arranging for disposal

sites.

Flexibility

may

result

in

even

more

cost

savings,

as

Silbrico

may

be

able

to

negotiate

prices

between

competing

facilities.

Further, Silbrico believes

it will

be able to

utilize a

“clean fill” facility which

is located very

close

to

Silbrico’s

facility.

A

grant

of

a

site-specific

rule

would

thus

result

in

reduced

trucking distances, which

equates to less traffic congestion,

lowers the

chances of traffic

accidents, and

could

result in

less

air pollution

based on fewer miles traveed~

Further, disposing

of these waste streams

in

a

nonhazardous waste landfill takes

up valuable landfill

space.

According to IEPA’s

most

recent

landfill capacity report,

the

Chicago

metropolitan

area

(the

area

in

which

Silbrico

is

located,

and

where

its

waste

streams

are

disposed

of)

has

only

five

years

of

capacity

remaining.6

That

capacity

should

be reserved

for

wastes that

truly need disposal

in

a

landfill, with

its

engineered

A

semi

dump

truck

contains

approximately twenty

cubic

yards

of waste.

At

100

truckloads

per

year,

Silbrico

is

disposing

of approximately

2000

cubic

yards of

off-specification

and

fugitive

perlite

per

year.

See “Nonhazardous

Solid

Waste

Management

and

Landfill

Capacity

in

Illinois,”

November2004.

This

publicly

available

document

is

over

350

pages

long.

In

the

interests

of

reducing

copying,

the

executive summary and the introduction

to

the

report are

attached

as

Exhibit

D.

The text

of

the full

report

is available at www.e~a.state.il.us/land/landfiIl-capacity/2003freport.pdf.

5

---

protections.

Silbrico’s

off-specification perlite and fugitive

perlite can be safely disposed

of

in

a

“clean

fill”

facility,

thus

reserving

space

in

nonhazardous

landfills.

While

this

consideration

does

not

directly

impose

a hardship on

Silbrico individually,

saving landfill

space does

impact

the

people of the

state of Illinois

generally.

This positive result of

a

grant of the site-specific rule should

be considered.

The off-specification

perlite and

the fugitive

perlite are

both nonhazardous waste

streams

that

pose

no threat to

the

environment.

Perlite

is

a

naturally

occurring

rock,

and the

expansion

process does

not

add

any

chemicals or

constituents to that

rock.

~

(The material

safety data sheet for

Ryolex

is attached

as

Exhibit

E.)

Perlite is

an inert,

stable material

and

is non-flammable.

The IEPA has already determined

that the off-specification

perlite and the fugitive

perlite

are

not

a

threat

to

human

health

or

the

environment

when

Iandfilled

in

a

nonhazardous

waste

landfill.

(See

Exhibits

F

and

G.)

While

those

determinations

were

made

in

the

context of

the

former

special

waste

delisting

program,

the

IEPA’s

findings are

relevant to this proceeding.

Those findings

(in

1985 and

1995)

show

that

IEPA

found

no

reason

to

believe

that

these

waste

streams

presented

any

problem

which would require they be handled

as special wastes.

Silbrico seeks this site-specific

rule to allow it to dispose of these

waste streams

as

“clean

Construction

and

demolition

debris.”

“Clean

construction

and

demolition

debris”

is defined

as:

Uncontaminated

broken

concrete

without

protruding

metal

bars,

bricks,

rocks,

stone,

reclaimed

asphalt

pavement,

or

soil

generated

from

construction or demolition activities.

(415

ILCS 5/3.160(b) (emphasis added).)

The

perlite may contain less than 0.1

of crystalline silica (quartz).

6

---

Perlite is

a

naturally occurring

rock.

The off-specification

perlite and the

fugitive

perlite

are simply

perlite:

a

rock.

Although

these wastes

are

classified as “industrial

process”

and “pollution control” wastes,

respectively,

in

reality they are “rock” or “stone.”

Nothing

has

been added to the

perlite (rock)

during

Silbrico’s

processes.

These waste streams

should

thus be treated as “clean

construction

and

demolition debris.”

There

is

nothing

in

the

perlite (rock) that will

leach

or react

in

a

“clean fill” facility.

It

is safe to dispose of

the waste streams

in

a “clean fill” facility,

and there will

be no impact to the environment.

The

disposal

of

Silbrico’s

two

waste

streams

does

not

include

emissions

or

discharges.

Silbrico

currently

disposes

of these

waste

streams

in

a

nonhazardous

waste

landfill;

if

the

site-specific

rule

is

granted,

Silbrico

will

be

able

to

dispose

of the

waste

streams

in

a

“clean

fill”

facility.

There

is

no

environmental

harm,

or impact

on

human

health,

by

disposal

in

a

“clean

fill”

facility

as

opposed

to

disposal

in

a

nonhazardous

waste

landfill.

The

benefits

of

disposal

in

a

“clean

fill”

facHity

(cost

savings

of

at

least

$20,000

to

$25,000

per

year;

conservation

of

valuable

space

in

nonhazardous waste landfills;

flexibility

in

arranging for

disposal

sites;

reduced trucking

distances

with

the

associated

benefits

of

less

traffic

congestion,

reduced

chances

of

traffic accidents,

and

less

air pollution based

on

fewer miles traveled),

coupled with

the

fact that disposal

in

a

“clean fill” facility

has no environmental

impact

and poses

no

risk

to the

environment or human health and safety, support the

grant of the

requested site-

specific

rule.

Compliance

with

the

general

rule

is

economically

unreasonable,

especially when

balanced against the

benefits of the

rule

and the

lack

of environmental

impact.

7

---

A synopsis of testimony to be presented at hearing

Silbrico will

present the testimony

of Tom

M.

Mendius at

hearing.

Mr.

Mendius

has

been

employed

by

Silbrico

since

1971,

and

is

currently president

of

Silbrico.

Mr.

Mendius will

testify to

the

facts

submitted

in

this

petition,

including

the

environmental,

technical, and economic justification for the proposed

rule.

Silbrico

reserves the right to

present additional witnesses,

as

may

be required.

(Silbrico will,

of

course,

comply

with

any direction

by the

hearing officer to provide

prefiled testimony.)

Material to be incorporated by reference

There is

no material to be incorporated

by reference within the

proposed

rule.

A description of any study or report used

in developing the

rule

No published study

or research

report was

used

in developing the

proposed

rule.

Proof of service

Silbrico will

serve

a

copy of this

petition on

the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Agency

and

on

the

Department

of

Commerce

and

Economic

Opportunity,

simultaneously with

the filing of this petition with

the

Board.

A petition signed

by 200 people

Silbrico asks that the

Board

waive the

requirement that Silbrico provide a petition

signed by at least 200 persons.

Silbrico has filed

a

motion to waive this requirement.

A statement regarding the

most current version of an existing

rule

This

proposed

site-specific

does

not

amend

an

existing

Board

rule,

so

Section

102.202(h)

is inapplicable.

8

---

A description of the

person or site for which

regulatory change

is requested

This site-specific

rule would

apply

only to the

two

specified waste

streams

from

Silbrico’s

facility in

Hodgkins, Cook County,

Illinois.

The reguested

relief is consistent with federal law

The requested site-specific rule may be granted consistent with

federal law.

This

request

does

not

involve the

Resource

Conservation

and

Recovery Act

(RCRA).

The

Illinois

provisions

regarding

the

disposal

of

industrial

process

waste

(off-specification

perlite) and

pollution control waste (fugitive perlite) are not federal requirements.

Conclusion

Silbrico

has

demonstrated

that requiring

the

disposal

of

its

off-specification

and

fugitive

perlite

waste

streams

in

a

nonhazardous

waste

landfill

is

economically

unreasonable when

balanced against the

benefits

of disposal

in

a

“clean fill” facility

and

the

lack

of

any

environmental

harm

from

disposal

in

a

“clean

fill”

facility.

Therefore,

Silbrico asks the

Board to grant the

requested site-specific

rule.

Respectfully submitted,

SILBRICO CORPORATION

Dated:

July

19,

2005

Michael J. Maher

Elizabeth

S.

Harvey

Swanson,

Martin

& Bell,

LLP

One IBM

Plaza,

Suite 3300

330 North Wabash Avenue

Chicago,

Illinois

60611

Telephone:

(312) 321-9100

9

---

Exhibit

A

‘S

---

SEP. 2!. 2004

8:22AM

SILBRICO 7~8/3546698

MO. 485

P.

2

ILLINOIS

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

AGENCY

1021

NoRTH GRAND AvENUE

EAST,

P.O.

Box 19276,

SPRINCFIELD, ILL;Nol~62794—9276,21 7-782~3397

JAk4ES

It THOMPSON

CENThL

100

WEST

RANDOLPH,

Suiit

11-300,

CHICACO,

IL

60601, 312-8144026

Roo R.

B1/~cOJEvIcH,

GOvERNOR

RENa CIPRI1~NO,flik~cToR

217/524-3300

September

16,

2004

Land and Lakes

Atbt

Amanda Miller

219005.

CentralAvenue

Mattesoa, Illinois

60443

Re:

0311265003—Cook

County

Silbrico Corporation

Log No. P504-140

Received: August 27, 2004

RCRA Permit File

DearMs. Miller:

This letter is in responseto yourcorrespondence (submittal) datedAugust 27, 2004.

The

submittal indicated that the above-referenced facility (Silbrico Corporation) manufactures

“Ryolex”,

a trade name applied to expanded perlita.

“Ryolex” i.~

produced by processing

(heating) perlite, a generic name for naturally occurring siliceous volcanic roclc, to make it

expand.

Duringprocessing,

setveral wastes are generated, including off-specification “Ryolex”

and fugitive perlite.

In your submittal you sought input from thn ifilnois SPA to determinethe

classificationofthe aforementioned waste and a determination whether the afore-mentioned

waste can go

to a non-permitted “clean fill,, or must be disposed ofat a permitted non-hazardous

waste landfill.

Off-specit*ion “Ryo1~x”

meets the definition ofindustrial-process waste

(Section 3.235 ofthe-

Environmental Protection Act (the Act)) while fugitive perilte meets thedefinition ofa pollution-

control waste

(Section 3.335 of theAct).

Off-specification “Ryolex” is generated whenproduct

material produced does not meet the manufacturer’s or customer’s specification forgrain siz;

density, or other physical characteristic whilewaste perlite is generated from fugitive product

capthred by bag house filters orby general housekeeping operations.

The aforementioned wastes

do not qualify forthe exclusion set forth in Section 3.235 ofthe Act.

It is the generator’s responsibility to properly characterize any

waste

that the generator produces.

Anybusiness

generating

non-liquid,

non-hazardous industrial-process or pollution control waste

has the potential to

certify that these wastes can be disposed of

us

non-special waste.

Section

goctcco~o—4302 North

Main Street, Roddord, IL 61103— (815) 987-7760

•

DES

PLAINES —9511

W.

-lanisan St.

Des PIain~,

IL 60016—

(847) 294-4000

CLaN —595

South

State, EI8in,

II. 60123 —(347)608-3131

•

PtORIA

-.

5415

N.

University St., Peoria, IL 61614—

(309)

693-5463

BUIIEAU

Q~

LANDS

PEo?4A

—7620 N.

University St.,

Peoria, IL 61614— (309) 693-5462

•

OW.4PAJGN

—2125

South FirstS~eet.Champaign,

IL 61820— (217) 278~5800

SPRII.ICF!ab

—4500$.

SixTh

Stseet Rd., Springfield.

IL 62706

—(217) 736-6892

•

CowIisV,LLE—

200~

Malt

Street,

ColiinsvIIIe,

IL 62234 —(618) 346-5120

MAPJQ.1 —2309W. Main

St.,

suite 116, Marion, IL 62959

—(618) 993-7200

Pg,~qrW

ON

R(CYCL!O

PAPOt

---

SEP. 21! 2004

8:22AM

SILBRICO 708/3546698

MO. 485

P.

3

Silbrico Corporation

Log No. PSO4—140

Page 2

22.48 ofthe Environmental Protection Act, identifies the procedures for detennining a waste is

non-special, and requires you to keep this information at your fanility and make the information

available upou request by the Tilinois EPA, the transporter or the operator ofthe facility receiviag

the waste for storage, treatment or disposal.

Certification allows quali~iug

noil-liquid, non-

hazardous industrial-process and pollution control-wastes to be shipped as non-special waste to

properly permitted facilities without manifesting or using special waste haulers.

Current

regulations

do not require the illinois EPA to review or approve the certification(s).

In addition, please be advised

based on a review ofyour submittal, it does not appear that the

afore-mentioned wastes meet the deZ.nitionof“clean conslructjoaor demolition debris” and as

such, the wastes cannot be disposed ofat a non-pentitted “clean fill”.

Should you bave any questions regarding this letter, please contact Mr. John Riekstins ofmy staff

at (217) 524-3309.

Joyce L. MunieE.

Manager, Permit Section

Bureanof Land

JLM:JR:041074.dgc

~.

15fA/

cc:

‘Tom Mendius

—

Silbrico Corporation

---

Exhibit

B

---

,

1.1

1~

I.

1

.s*.

---

HIGH

TEMPERATURE

INSULATION

METHANE, LIQUID

•1

nLINSULATION

OXYGEN, NITRa

GENAND

-

BOILER COV~RINd

It

E FILLER’/

REFRIGERATION

OTHER

PLASTERS.

QUILTED

MATIRESSI

IN

PLANTS~

GASES

IN

MORTARS,

~AND

IN

kAIRDSEThN

‘Q~sps

(~PQRTABLE

CONTAIN-

PLASTER

coMpo~ITrOr~°

•t~ft

LCE BOXES,

ERS,

BOTH

BOARDS,

-

~f_l

MTAINERS

FORTPAN

CEILING

‘PIPECO~EhINC

‘

SPORTAND

TJLES,ftND

cOAI4

m-

-

IN STATEN-

UPPER

INQOMPRESS

ARY

WALL

iflD~DPIPE

PLANTS

INSULATION

‘SECTIONS

4

H

•

*

“l’

‘_

-.

4,

INSULATION

AT

AMBIENT &LOW

FIRE

INSULA11ôN

IN.

TEMPERATURES

BRICKS & TILES,

SAF~&

ROOMS, ETCI

MEDIUM

‘5’

PO1TERY &

s,FOUNDRY CORES,

TO HIGH

E’

LIGHTWEIGHT

‘FOUNDRY MOWS TO

TEMPERATURE

_____

0

~•p~)~49’

REFRACTORIES,

REDUCE SHRINKAGE

INSULATION

t

,,x”

CALCIUM SILICATE

GRANULES

-

ooucm

HOLDING HEAT IN

~DJFFE9~T

BULK

NON-LOAD BEAR-

MOLTEN METAL

-

AND

SI.c~

‘

ING FILL IN BRIDGES,

DURINGDELAYIN

‘

‘

.

TUNNELS,

FLOORS,

POURING

.

LIGHTWEIGHT

MASONRY,

ROOFS,

-

AGGREGATE

PIPES

ETC.

liLt-

EXOTHERMIC

I..

CONSTRUC11ON

UP PANELS

TOPPING

EXPANDED

SAND BLASTING, FOUNDRY, AND STEEL

CRUDE

INDUSTRIES,

SLAG COAGULANT,

PERLITE

OIL WELL

SPECIAL

CAS11NG SAND AND

TREATMENTS

MIXTURES, SILICA SOURCE

FILTRATION

.

BEER,

-

WINE,

~.

HYDRa

—

,j,c4

0

2’

PLAS11CS,

GENATED

.

\

“c~.

-

t4y

TEXTURING

VEGETABLE

.-

\

4.

/.

AGGREGATE

OILS

~

AERA11ON

‘V

IN PAINTS,

\4

MOISTURE

CAULKiNG

CONTROL

COMP0SmONS,

A.

A4

NV

C)

EXPLOSIVES

/

\..~

______

CARRIER

/

N

,

OF

CITRIC ACID,

AGRICHEMICALS

/

IN

OILS

/

/

HORTICULTURE,

OIL

4,

PLANT

ROOTING,

ADSORPTION

/

SEED

COMPOSTS;

FOR

GROWING

MEDIUM,

POUJJT1ON

PHARMACEUTICALS,

PUMICE,

SOIL CONDmONER,

CONTROL

FRUIT JUICES,

VERMICULITE

PACKING

INC

REFINERIES

GLUCOSE,

SUBS1TIIJTE

NURSERYSTOCK,

FACTORIES

LIGHTWEIGHT

H)ROPONICS,

ANffG~AGES

SWIMMING

AGGREGATE

FLOWER

SUPPORT

POOL WATER

CONCRETE

-

-

I

SOAPS,

CLEANERS,

POUSHES,

WHEELS,

DISKS AND

RUBS

OIL WELL

CEMENT-

ING AND

LOW DEN-

SITY MUD TO

PREVENT LOST

CIRCULATION OF

DRILUNG FLUIDS

PESTICIDES

AND

HERBICIDES,

FERTILIZER

BULKING,

PELLETIZED

SEEDS

r

L

---

Origin and Characteristics...

Perlite is not a trade name but a generic term for naturally occurring

silicous rock.

The distinguishing feature

which

sets perlite apart from other volcanic glasses is that when heated to

a suitable

point in

its softening

range,

itexpands from four to twenty times its original volume.

This expansion is due to the presence oftwo to six patent combined water in thecrude perliterock When

quicldy heated to above 1600°F(871°C),

the crude rock pops in a mannersimilar to popcorn as the combined

water vaporizes and creates countless tiny bubbles which account for the amazinglight weightand otherexcep-

tional physical properties ofexpandedperlite.

Theexpansion process also creates one ofperlite’s most distinguishing characteristics: its white color. While the

crude rock mayrange from transparent light gray to glossyblack, the colorofexpanded perlite ranges from

snowy white to grayish white.

Expanded perlitecanbe manufactured to weigh aslittle as 2 pounds per cubic foot (32 kg/rn3) making itadapt-

able fornumerous applications.

Since perlite is a form of natural glass, it is classified as chemicallyinert

and has a pH of approximately 7.

lro~-

C

)

8our~~4

..~,

Al1

analyses

are shown in elemental form

even though the

actual forms

present

are

mixed

glassy silicates. Free

silica

maybepresentin smallamounts, tharacterisficof the particu-

lar

ore body. More specific information may

be obtained from

the ore supplier

involved.

)°F

(871-1093°C)

~1260-1343°C)

Specific

Heat

.•••........•.

...,.

.0.2

Btu/lb’°F

(837 J/kg•K)

Thermal

Conductivity

at7S°F(24°C).....•.•...•...•..•.......

27

.41

Btu~irVh•ft2•°Fç04-.O6

W/m•K)

Solubility....Soluble in

hot concentrated

alkali and

HF

Moderately soluble (10)

in iN

NaOH

Slightly sQ~luble(3)

in mineral acids (1 N)

Very slightly soU~le

(1)

in water or weak acids

---

Uses for Perlite,...

As the chart on page 2 indicates, there are many uses

for perlite. These uses can be broken downinto three

general catagories: construction applications, horti-

cultural applications and industrial applications.

Construction Applications

Becauseof perlite’s outstanding insulating character-

istics and light weight, it is widely used as a loose-fill

insulation in masonry construction. In this applica-

tion, free-flowingperlite loose-fill masonry insula-

tion is poured into thecavities ofconcrete block

where it completely fills all cores, crevices, mortar

areas and ear holes. hi addition to providing thermal

insulation, perliteenhances fire ratings, reduces

noise transmission and it is rot, vennin and termite

resistant Perlite is also ideal forinsulating low

temperature and cryogenic vessels.

When perlite is used as an aggregate in concrete, a

lightweight, fire resistant, insulating concrete is

produced that is ideal forroof decks and other

applications. Perlite can also be used as an aggregate

in Portlandcement and gypsum plasters forexterior

applications and for the fire protection ofbeams and

columns.

Other construction applications include under-floor

insulation, chimney linings, paint texturing, gypsum

boards, ceiling tiles and roofinsulation boards.

Horticultural Applications

In horticultural applications, perlite is used through-

out the world as a component ofsoulless growing

mixes where itprovides aeration and optimum

moisture retention forsuperior plant growth. For

rooting cuttings,

100

perlite is used. Studies have

shown that outstanding yields are achieved with

perlite hydroponic systems.

Other benefitsofhorticultural perlite are its neutral pH

and the fact that it is sterile and weed-free. In addition,

its light weight makesit ideal foruse in container

growing.

Other horticultural applications forperlite are as a

carrier for fertilizer, heibicides and pesticides and for

pelletizing seed. Horticultural perlite is as useful to the

home gardeneras it is to the commeirial grower. It is

used with equal success in greenhouse

growing,

land-

scaping applications and in the home in house plants.

IndustrialApplications

Industrial

applications

forperlite are the most diverse,

ranging from high performancefillers for plastics to

cements forpetroleum, water and geothennal wells.

Other applications include its use as a filter media for

pharmaceuticals,food products, chemicals and

water

formunicipal systems and swimming pools.

Additional

applications include its use as an abrasive in

soaps, cleaners and polishes and a variety offoundry

applications utilizing perlite’s insulating properties and

high heatresistance.

l’his same heatresistant property

is taken advantage ofwhen perlite is used in the manu-

facture ofrefractory bricks,

mortars, and pipe ihsula-

tion.

PERLITE INSTITUTE,

INC.

88

New

Dorp PI~za,Staten Island, NY 10306

718/351-5723

•

Fax

718/351-5725

•

E-mail:

lnquiries@perlite.org

---

Exhibit

C

---

‘1

~.

ii

•

4

•

b

j

N:

I

‘.7!

I-

I

-1

p

‘~1

AND

CHARACTERISTICS

tei$a petrographic term

(not a trade

i)

or a siliceous

volcanic rock which

.~raIlyoccurs in certain regions

throughout

woçld.

The disdnguishing feature,

which

ts

it

apart from other volcanic minerals

is its

L~

tO

expand fourto twenty times

its

‘ginal volume

When heated to certain

mperatures.

V~jenheated aboye 1600 degrees F, crushed

-

,

ck expands

in a

manner similar to

)p corn.

This expansion

is due to the

esence of combined water within the crude

e

rock.

The combined water vaporizes

heatir~gpPocess and creates

3

tiny bubbles

in the heat

softened

afl~cIes.

Itk ttiese diminutive glass

bbles

whioI~

account for

its

hght

dnth

iphysical

its.

Expanded

..J~to

weigh a~IIt~

~V

:-‘\

L

II

•-1

---

+8

-8 +10

-10 +20

-20 ÷30

-30 +50

-50

+100

-100

TYPICAL SCREEN ANALYSIS

(Packaged

in

4

cu.

ft-bags)

This listing

is

for standard grades.

Other grades available on request.

Packing

Volume

Weight

Density

GRADE No.

1

Bag Wt.31to34

Lbs.

-i-S

11

8

8

Lbs

per

cu.

ft.

-8+10

14

11

-10

+20

49

51

-20

+30

7

7

-30

+50

8

9

-50 +100

5

6

-100

6

8

GRADE No. 2-A

BagWt. 26

to 32

Lbs.

7.5

Lbs

per

Cu,

ft.

-

GRADE

No.- 39

•

Bagwt.27to32Lbs.

÷30

12

5

7

Lbs

per

~

-30

+50

52

44

-50 +100

24

38

-100

+200

8

9

-200

4

4

Trace

38

22

18

10

11

Trace

41

18

20

10

10

Packing

Mesh

Volume

Weight

Density

+10

-

-10+20

No. 3-S

-20

+30

-30

+50

lOb

14 Lbs.

-50

+100

-100

0

0

3

Lbs

per

cu.

ft.

5

4

20

14

44

41

19

24

12

17

+10

-10+20

No.9

-20 +30

•30

+50

to 30 Lbs.

-50

+100

-100

0

0

7Lbs

pe

Cu.

ft.

5

3

14

10

48

44

22

32

11

11

J

!

/

/

r

F

—

FF

#tP~

-

i

I

-V

-t-

r:

~E

II

~i/,,..\t•i,

•

•

-

.

.

‘

&

.

N

H~LCO~lDUGrlV1VY~

.

.

TH~R~.tALcONDuCjIVITc.V5.

COMPACTED OEN51TY

THE~RMALCON0ucTNifl

MEAN

TEMPERATURE

75’

F

Mean Ie,nperalu’e

‘15

Fl

DEN

TV

8 pci

045

14

20C

g12

~io

r140~~T~

-

~035

&‘

~I2o—1—1—~

—~—-j-

~

8

030

5

0

6

0060

I-

U

~

040

-

~025

4

020

020

5

‘

3

2

200

400

600

800

000

200

400

I6~ 1800

DENSITY

pci

0

-

-—

MEAN

TE

PERATURE

F

0 ‘6016020022024026026030032034036

-

-

STU

n/hr/sq I,

/

•

,.

REFERENCES

~‘

11.

I

J L F

Research

Inc

Reports àated

December24

1962

_________

fi

~Ø

fl flT

I

0

N.

‘.,

•

January

2,

1964, July

1.,

1965.

‘•.

-

~.,.

-

-‘

-..

•O~

~

5?

~

•

‘‘I.

.

.

~:

a30(*RJVER ROAO~•

ROD~KINS

ILLINOiS

60525

•

“Thermal Conductivity pt Expanded

Perlite Cryogenic.Fill

hisulation,”

)~,

.puoNE~fl33s4.335o4~$x’c7os~as46sga

OR.

Kinzer, Jr.ASHF1AE Journal,

February.

1963

and 1967.-

•

.

~frIAI

L:

~i

LBFiICO@ AOL

•

COM

Perlite Institute

-

1.05

2-4

1 ~83

ci~~is.ibnco

Corporation

Mesh

-i

---

Exhibit

D

---

O

Illinois

Environmental

Protection Agency

Bureau of Land

1021

North Grand Avenue East

P.O. Box 19276

Springfield,

IL

62794-9276

IEP1AJBOL/04~O21

Nonhazardous

Solid

Waste

Management

and

Landfill

Capacity

in

Illinois

November 2004

2003 Annual

U

Waste disposed

in

landfills,

I

Specification

pages for 56

U

Waste

handied

by transfer

2001 -2003

landfills,

111

transfer stations

stations, 2001-2003

Report

and 59

compost sites

•

Remaining

disposai

capacity

I

Waste generated and recycled,

U

Waste composted,

asofJan.

1,2003,

and Jan,

2003

2001-2003

Topics Covered

1,2004

Printed on recycled

paper

---

Nonhazardous

Solid

Waste

Management

And

Landfill

Capacity

In

Illinois:

2003

Reporting

period

for waste

disposal: Jan.

1

to

Dec. 31,

2003

Reporting

date for landfill

capacity: Jan.

1, 2004

This

report has been prepared for the Governor of the State of Illinois

and the General

Assembly

in accordance with Section 4 of the Illinois Solid Waste Management Act.

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

Bureau of Land

Division of Land Pollution Control

Waste Reduction and

compliance Section

1021

North

Grand Avenue East

P.O.

Box 19276

Springfield,

IL

62794-9276

Printed on

recycled

paper

---

contentsj

Additional Information

and Acknowledgements

vii

Photo Credits

viii

Preface

ix

How to

Use the

Illinois

EPA Landfill Capacity Report

x

Executive

Summary

xi

Introduction

1

Maps

17

Region One:

Northwestern Illinois

R1.1

Region Two: Chicago Metropolitan

R2.1

Region Three:

Peoria/Quad Cities

R3.1

Region

Four:

East Central

Illinois

R4.1

Region Five:

West Central

Illinois

R5.1

Region

Six: Metropolitan

East St. Louis

R6.1

Region Seven:

Southern

Illinois

R7.1

Appendix

A:

Solid Waste Landfill Owners and

Operators: Alphabetic by Facility

Al

Appendix

B:

Solid Waste Landfill Owners and

Operators: Alphabetic by County

Bi

Appendix

C:

Solid Waste Landfills Ranked by Waste Received: 2003

Cl

Appendix

D:

Solid Waste Landfills Ranked by Remaining Capacities;

as of Jan.

1,2004

Dl

Appendix

E:

Solid Waste Transfer Station Owners and Operators: Alphabetic byFacility

El

Appendix

F:

Solid Waste Transfer Station Owners and Operators: Alphabetic by County

Fl

Appendix G:

Solid Waste Transfer Stations

Ranked by Waste Received:

2003

Gl

Appendix H:

Landscape Waste Compost Facility Owners and

Operators: Alphabetic by Facility

Hl

Appendix

I:

Landscape

Waste Compost Facility Owners and Operators:

Alphabetic by County

Ii

Appendix

J:

Landscape

Waste Compost Facilities

Ranked by Waste Received: 2003

J 1

Appendix

K:

Contact

Listfor Solid Waste

Planning and

Recycling: Alphabetic by County

Kl

Appendix

L:

Adoption Dates and

Updates of Solid Waste

Management Plans:

Alphabetic

by County

Ll

Appendix

M: Municipal Waste

Generation and Recycling: Alphabetic by County

Ml

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management

and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003

iii

---

Maps

and

Tables

State Solid Waste Surcharge Fees

2

National Figures for 2000 Reported by USEPA

4

State of Origin

of Waste Received at Illinois Landfills in 2003

5

Illinois Landfills: Waste Accepted

in 2003 Versus 2002

5

Illinois Landfills:

Remaining Capacities Jan. 1,2004 Versus Jan. 1,2003

6

Waste Disposed and

Landfill Capacity Per Capita;

Landfill

Life Expectancy

6

Statewide Landfill Capacity Is Abundant Despite Same Number of Facilities

7

New Facilities

Permifted to

be

Developed or Constructed

8

Municipal Waste Management in

Illinois:

2003

8

Municipal Waste Generated

& Recycled

9

Compost Facilities:

Waste Handled in 2003

10

Transfer Stations: Waste Handled in 2003

11

Local

Agencies Delegated to Inspect Pollution Control Facilities for the Illinois

EPA (map)

17

Illinois Landfills, 2003 (map)

19

Landfills: Active, Closed & Under Development in 2003 (map)

21

Landfills

Receiving Waste from

Other States in 2003 (map)

23

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Administrative Regions (map)

25

Region

One: Landfills and

Transfer Stations

in

2003 (map depicting capacity gains or losses)

Ri .1

Region

One: Landfills: Waste Accepted 2003;

Remaining Capacities

Jan. 1,2004

R1.2

Region

One: Transfer Stations: Waste Handled

2003

RI .3

Region

One:

Compost Facilities: Waste Accepted 2003

Rl.4

Region

One: Municipal Waste Recycled

Ri .4

Region Two: Chicago

Metro Area

Landfills

and Transfer Stations 2003 (map)

R2.0

Region Two:

Landfills: Waste Accepted 2003;

Remaining Capacities Jan.

1, 2004

R2.3

Region

Two: Solid Waste Statistics

R2.3

Region Two: Transfer Stations:

Waste Handled

2003

R2.6

Region Two: Compost Facilities: Waste Accepted 2003

R2.6

Region Two:

Region

2’s

Inactive or Closed Compost

Sites

R2.6

Region Two:

Municipal Waste

Recycled

R2.7

Region Three:

Landfills

and Transfer Stations in 2003

(map depicting capacity gains or losses)

R3.i

Region Three:

Landfills: Waste Accepted 2003;

Remaining

Capacities Jan.

1,

2004

R3.2

Region Three:

Transfer Stations: Waste

Handled 2003

R3.3

Region Three:

Compost Facilities: Waste Accepted 2003

R3.4

Region Three:

Municipal Waste

Recycled

R3.4

Region

Four: Landfills

and Transfer Stations in 2003

(map depicting capacity gains or losses)

R4.’l

Region

Four Landfills:

Waste Accepted 2003;

Remaining Capacities Jan.

1, 2004

R4.2

Region Four:

Transfer Stations: Waste

Handled 2003

R4.3

Region Four Compost Facilities: Waste Accepted

2003

R4.3

Region Four:

Municipal Waste

Recycled

R4.4

iv

..

Nonhazardous Solid Waste

Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003

---

-~

Maps

and

TabIes~

Region

Five:

Landfills and Transfer Stations in

2003 (map depicting capacity gains or losses)

R5.1

Region

Five:

Landfills: Waste Accepted

2003;

Remaining Capacities Jan.

1, 2004

R5.2

Region

Five: Transfer Stations: Waste Handled

2003

R5.3

Region Five: Compost Facilities: Waste Accepted

2003

R5.3

Region

Five:

Municipal Waste Recycled

R5.4

Region Six:

Landfills

and Transfer Stations in 2003 (map depicting capacity gains or losses)

R6.1

Region Six:

Landfills: Waste Accepted

2003; Remaining Capacities Jan.

1, 2004

R6.2

Region Six:

Transfer Stations:

Waste Handled 2003

R6.3

Region

Six:

Compost Facilities: Waste Accepted 2003

R6.4

Region

Six:

Municipal Waste Recycled

R6.4

Region

Seven: Landfills

and Transfer Stations in 2003

(map depicting capacity gains or losses)

R7.i

Region

Seven: Landfills: Waste Accepted 2003;

Remaining Capacities Jan.

1, 2004

R7.2

Region Seven: Transfer Stations: Waste Handled

2003

R7.3

Region Seven:

Compost Facilities: Waste Accepted 2003

R7.3

Region Seven:

Municipal Waste

Recycled

R7.4

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacityin Illinois:

2003 t

v

---

Additional

Information

and

Acknowledgements

I

How to Obtain Additional Information

To learn

more about municipal

solid waste landfills, transfer

stations or compost facilities

in

Illinois, please call 217-785-

8604,

or write to:

Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency

Bureau of Land

Division of Land Pollution

Control

Waste Reduction and Compliance

Section

p:o.

Box

19276

Springfield,

IL

62794-9276

Our Intemet address is http:llwww.epa.state.lI.us

When using courier services (UPS, Airborne, etc.), please

use

the following street address and

zip code:

1021

North Grand Avenue

East

Springfield,

IL 62702

Acknowledgements

This document is produced

by the Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency, Reriee Cipriano,

Director, and is published

by the Agency’s Office of Public Information,

Dennis McMurray,

Manager. Primary Editor was Ellen Robinson of the Waste

Reduction and Compliance

Section, Bureau of Land.

The report is printed in the Agency’s print shop. Many thanks

to

Tom

Davis who provided publishing advice to

the Primary

Editor.

Nina Dugger provided

editing.

Excellent typing

and

design was provided

by Judy Brubaker, the Section’s clerical

support.

Photos were chosen by Terry Bent of Allied Waste,

David

Gambach, Ellen Robinson,

Gary Steele and

Robert

Wiatrolik. Poems were from

fifth and sixth graders throughout

the State who won our2003-2004 contest. Full length, fold-out

State of

Illinois and chicago Metropolitan area

maps using GIS

software, were designed by Ted Prescott.

Illinois

EPA Bureau of Land

personnel contributed their time and

expertise

to the development

of this publication. Computer data

calculation was provided by Darrel Watkins, ensuring

better

data accuracy throughout the report. Assistance with compost

site

permitting

and inspecting was provided

by Gary Cima and

Gary Steele.

Neelu

Reddy of the Remedial Project

Management

Section provided

information about our abandoned

landfill

program.

Jim

Moore

explained closure procedures for landfills.

The Agency also wishes to thank the

18 delegated

counties,

plus Ambraw Valley Solid Waste Agency and

the City of

Chicago who inspect

and have first-hand knowledge of

approximately 50 percent of the landfills, transfer stations and

compost sites covered in this

report. Our seven regional offices

and

their regional managers are responsible for inspecting

all

Agency-permitted pollution control facilities.

Nonhazardous Solid

Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003

0

vii

---

Photo

Credits

Cover Photo:

Photo of Sangamon Valley Landfill, Springfield,

by Rich Johnson, Assistant

Regional

Manager Illinois EPA,

Springfield Regional Office

Page

1

Photo of a Chicago transfer

station

by Ellen

Robinson, Project Manager,

Illinois

EPA,

Springfield

Headquarters

Region

1:

Essay: “Waste on

Earth”,

Kim

Whiffield,

Oak Grove

East School, Bartonville

Region 2:

Photo of Hooker Street Transfer Station,

Chicago

by Ellen Robinson, Project

Manager,

Illinois EPA,

Springfield Headquarters

Region 3:

Poem:

“Put Waste

in

Its

Place”,

Kora

Bestold, student, Oak Grove East School,

Bartonville

Region

4:

Aerial photo

of Livingston

Landfill,

Pontiac,

provided by Michael

Friend,

R. Russefland

Associates,

Pontiac and

edited

by Barbara

Nowack of Andrews

Environmental

Engineering, Springfield

Region

5:

Photo of Sangamon Valley Landfill, Springfield,

by Hannah Van Zutphen-Kann, published

in The State Journal-Register,February 12, 2004,

reprinted with permission

Region

6:

Photo of Roxana Landfill,

Roxana,

by David

Terry, Solid Waste Inspector,

Madison

County Planning and

Development, Edwardsville

Region

7:

Poem: “Trash Could

Ruin Us All!” Kelsey Swindle,

student,

Lisle Junior

High School, Lisle

Landfills

Appendices A-D: Photo courtesy of David

Farley, operator, Sangamon Valley Landfill, Springfield

Transfer Stations

Appendices E-G: Photo of Waste Management/Springfield Transfer Station by

Dan Erni,

Environmental

Engineer, Waste Management, Taylorville

Compost Sites

Appendices H-J: Photo of

Dirksen Parkway Compost

Facility,

Springfield,

by Rochelle Gillespie,

Associate

Sanitarian, Sangamon County Department of Public Health,

Springfield

Solid Waste Planning & Recycling

Appendices K-M:Recycling Activities at Lake Area Recycling Center,

Springfield.

Photo by Robert

Wiatrolik,

Photographer,

Illinois EPA, Springfield Headquarters

viii +

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in

Illinois:

2003

---

A

lthough

the capacity remaining in Illinois landfills declined

slightly,

the available space

is still

adequate and

should

serve our

citizens for at least another

12 years.

In this,

the

Agency’s 17th

annual report on landfill disposal and available

landfill

capacity

in

Illinois, we report to

you not only the remaining

capacity,

but manyother useful facts about landfills and pollution

control facilities throughout the state.

Since

its

inception

in

1970,

the Illinois

EPA

has overseen the

development and operation of a productive system of modern

sanitary landfills. The Agency continues to ensure that these

facilities meet

the

strictest disposal

standards

in history,

and that

they are engineered

to

be fully protective of human health and

the

environment,

especially where it concerns any possibility of

groundwater

contamination.

In 2003, the number of active

landfills in

Illinois accepting

waste

was 50. Regional

capacity, however,

varied tremendously.

Region

4,

which

includes counties in East

Central Illinois,

has about four

remaining years.

The Chicago Metropolitan

Region had five

years

of landfill capacity remaining

at

the end of 2003.

In

July 2003,

Sangamon Valley Landfill, Springfield re-opened

after approval was received for a

50.31 acre lateral expansion that

added

5.1

million cubic yards of airspace for waste disposal.

In October 2003,

Milam Recycling

and

Disposal Facility,

East St.

Louis provided

a 4.75 million cubic yards expansion to the state,

adding

19.5 cubic yards of airspace forwaste

disposal.

Other landfills that expanded or were constructed at the beginning

of 2004,

include Winnebago Reclamation

Services,

Rockford;

PrairieView Recycling and Disposal

Facility, Wilmington; Envirofil

of

Illinois mc, Macomb;

Indian Creek Landfill #2, Hopedale;

and

Perry

Ridge, DuQuoin. More

about these facilities will be in the

18th annual

report.

In 2003, there were additionally

91

active transfer stations and

38

active compost facilities that

help manage

the waste generated in

Illinois.

Additionally,

the Illinois EPA’s seven regional offices and

18

counties,

the Ambraw Valley Solid Waste Agency and

the Cityof

Chicago have been delegated

the authority to

inspect landfills,

transfer stations and compost sites

in

their jurisdictions,

providing

a

needed service to

the citizens of Illinois.

The Illinois EPA

hopes you will

find this

information useful and

instructive and welcomes your comments and suggestions

as to

how it may be improved.

Renee Cipriano

Director

Illinois EPA

Preface~

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003 +

---

How to

Use

the

Illinois

EPA

Landfill Capacity

Report

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill

Capacity in

Illinois is

Illinois

EPA’s annual

report describing

the

management of nonhazardous municipal solid waste by

the

State’s solid waste landfills, transfer stations and compost

facilities. The report is divided

into sections representing

Illinois EPA’s administrative regions.

Region

1

includes

Northwestern

Illinois counties;

Region

2

includes Chicago

Metropolitan

counties;

Region

3 includes Peoria/Quad

Cities

area counties;

Region

4

includes East Central Illinois

counties; Region

5

includes West Central Illinois counties;

Region

6 includes

Metropolitan

East St. Louis area counties;

and Region

7

includes Southern

Illinois counties.

Each regional

section

includes newly designed

specification

pages describing the chief physical characteristics of each landfill.

Provided

are:

its

location and

hours of operation, tipping fee, quantities of wastes received

for the last

three years,

the landfill’s

certified remaining

capacity (in gate

cubic yards) for the last

two

reporting dates, solid waste

management fees paid

in

2003, the Agency regional field office or delegated

local authority that

inspects the facility, and the name,

address

and phone number of the landfill’s owner and

operator.

Similar, but scaled down specification

pages,

are included for each transfer

station.

In

all, this report includes details of 56 landfills,

111 transfer stations and 59 compost facilities.

Those sites included

accepted some waste in

2001, 2002 and/or 2003.

Landfill details are found in

Appendices A through

D;

transfer station

details are found

in

Appendices E through

G; landscape waste compost facility

information

is found

in Appendices H

through

J; the contact list for local (county) solid waste planning and recycling coordinators is

found

in Appendix

K;

in Appendix L, information is found

about updated local (county) solid waste

plans; and found

in Appendix

M

is

information

about local municipal waste generation and

recycling.

Additionally,

this

17th

edition of the

report contains

a state map

designed with

GIS software

showing locations

of Illinois landfills. A Chicago Metropolitan area map

also shows the

locations

of transfer stations in

addition to the location of landfills.

x + Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacityin Illinois:

2003

---

Executive Summary~

T

HIS

IS THE

ILLINOIS

EPA’S 17TH ANNUAL REPORT

describing

the management of nonhazardous municipal

solid waste by the state’s solid waste landfills, transfer

stations and

compost facilities.

The report is divided into sections representing Illinois EPA

administrative regions.

Each

regional

section includes

specification pages describing the chief physical characteristics

of each landfill.

Provided in this

report are

eachfacility’s location and

hours of

operation, tipping fee, quantities of wastes received forthe last

three

years (2001. 2002 and 2003),

in both gate cubic yards

and gate tons; the landfill’s certified remaining

capacity for the

last

two

reporting dates Jan. 1,2004,

and Jan.

1,2003, in gate

cubic yards; solid waste management fees paid to

the State in

2003; the Agency Regional office or delegated

local authority

that inspects

the facility; and

the name, address

and phone

number of the landfill’s owner and operator.

Similar, but scaled down specification pages are included for

each transfer station and compost facility. In all,

this report

includes details of 56 landfills, 111

transfer stations and 59

compost facilities. Any landfill, transfer station or compost site

that accepted waste

in 2001, 2002 and/or 2003 is included in

the report. The list of active pollution control

facilities during

2003 includes

50

landfills,

91

transfer stations and 38 compost

sites.

Illinois municipal solid waste landfills are required to report to

the Illinois EPA

the quantities of solid waste they receive each

year, and

to calculate and report the amount of remaining

capacity on the first day of the following year.

During 2003, 50 landfills reported receiving

a

total of 57 million

gate cubic yards (17.3 million

gate tons) of waste.

This volume

was almost 2.4 million gate cubic yards more

than the total

received during 2002,

a 4.4 percent increase.

As of January 1,2004, 49

landfills reported having

a combined

remaining capacity of 674.6 million gate cubic yards (almost

204,4 million tons), or 26 million gate cubic yards less than on

January

1, 2003, a

decline of 3.7 percent. One landfill

did not

report its

capacity.

Dividing wastes

disposed

during 2003 by capacity remaining

on

January

1, 2004, indicates

an overall

landfill

life expectancy in

Illinois of

12 years.

at 2003 disposal rates and barring

capacity

adjustments.

Areas to watch and monitor are the

East Central Illinois

area

and Chicago Metropolitan Area with four and five

years of

capacity remaining

respectively.

Nonhazardous

Solid Waste

Management and Landfill Capacityin Illinois:

2003

+

xi

---

Introduction

Nonhazardous

Solid

Waste

And

Landfill

Capacity

2003

---

M

UNICIPAL

SOLID WASTE

IS THE

TERM

USED TO DESCRIBE

the

garbage discarded by America’s households,

stores,

offices, factories, restaurants, schools and other

institutions. “Discarded”

most often, in Illinois, means disposed of

in Agency-permitted landfills. Waste is also handled through other

alternative means of solid waste management: recycling and

composting, after

it is collected.

The

U.S.

EPA’s

Municipal Solid Waste in the

United States:

2000

Facts

& Figures

says that nationwide

55.3

percent of solid waste

was

landfllled, 30.1 percent was recycled or composted,

and

14.5

percent was incinerated. National figures

for 2003

were

not

yet

published when this

report was printed.

In

2003,

Illinois landfills accepted more

than

57

million gate cubic

yards

of solid waste. Most Illinois

waste was

discarded in landfills

within our borders.

Wastes entering or leaving Illinois are not

believed

to

noticeably affect this equation.

Of

all

solid waste

landfilled in Illinois

in

2003, II

percent, or about

6.2

million cubic

yards or

1.9

milliontons, came from

11

other

states.

We know

this

because Illinois landfills have reported these quantities to the

Illinois EPA since

1992.

However, waste haulers are not required to

report how much

Illinois waste they transport to landfills in other

states

or from which counties in Illinois waste is transported. Some

local solid waste coordinators may have this information. Their

contact information

is found inAppendix K of this report.

Almost

37 percent

of municipal

waste is recycled

Much of Illinois is rural and far from recycling markets. However,

most local governments have attempted to continue recycling

education efforts, and to collect recycling data from haulers as an

additional public

service.

Local recycling coordinators in Illinois claim that almost

6

million

tons of municipal

waste were recycled in 2003. Total

municipal

waste generated is

16.2 million tons. Dividing the

amount

recycled

(6 million tons) by the amount generated (16.2 million tons) equals

a

37 percent recycling rate.

Most of the counties in the Chicago Metropolitan area voluntarily

reportrecycling

and waste generation

figures annually. In this area,

there are adequate recycling markets and public

interest and

recycling is high.

In general, the most populated areas of the

State

voluntarily report waste generation

and recycling data annually to

the illinois EPA.

What’s happening in the

solid waste industry in

Illinois?

i~)

Fifty active landfills in 2003, most

with

larger capacity

+

In Southern

Illinois, new

landfills

are open or proposed and

two

plan

to expand

•:.

A few compost facilities are closing.

The agricultural community is

managing landscape

waste at

“agronomic rates”

on

their farmland

+

Continued private

ownership and

operation of landfills

in Illinois

•.

Waste transfer out of metropolitan

Chicago area

into adjacent states,

and to north and central

Illinois

counties continues into 2003

1•

More transfer stations

in

Chicagoland suburbs

and

elsewhere in Illinois obtain local

siting and permits to operate.

2003 Annual

U

Waste disposed

in

landfills,

•

specification pages for 56

U

Waste handled by transfer

Report

2001-2003

(in

gate cubic

landfills,

111

transfer stations

stations. 2001-2003

yards and

in

gate tons)

and 59

compost

sites

(in tons)

U

Remaining disposal capacity

U

Waste generated

and recycled,

•

Waste composted.

Topics

Covered

as of Jan.

1,2003, and Jan.

2003 (in tons)

2001-2003

(in tons)

1, 2004

(in

gate cubic yards)

Nonhazardous

Solid Waste

Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003 +

---

Burn Barrels Outreach

New and Expanded

Environmental Program Fees

in

Campaign

Illinois EPA began

a Burn Barrel

Public

Education Campaign in September

2004, with funding from

U.S. EPA. The

goal of this

10-week initiative is to

educate the public about the

environmental hazards

of burning

household waste and

help them find

alternative disposal options.

The

campaign

will consist of newspaper

advertisements

and radio spots

targeted in various parts of Illinois.

Local governments,

including Solid

Waste

& Recycling Coordinators and

delegated agencies, could become

a

great asset for us in promoting this

public education

campaign. Our limited

resources with combined partnerships

(federal funding) could

still influence

some citizens to make better choices

for waste disposal.

Two newspaper ads may include local

contact information,

and may be

placed

in local

newspapers.

Our web site,

www.lllinoisburnbarrels.org could

link

to

yours. Illinois

EPA brochures

and fliers or U.S.

EPA brochures are

also available for distribution.

For

more information, contact

Robert

Fanning, Associate Director’s Office, at

217-558-6716.•

Illinois

The Illinois General Assembly

approved Governor Rod R,

Blagojevich’s proposal for new and increased fees for several

types

of environmental programs operated by Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency to implement federal and state regulations.

Those

fees

are authorized under Senate Bill

1903 (Public Act

93-32,

signed into law on June 20, 2003), and the

fees became

effective on

July 1,2003,

the beginning of the

state fiscal year.

The fees will impact a wide range of facilities, including landfills.

Municipal waste landfill operators currently pay two fees based

upon the volume of waste received each

year. Both ofthese fees

(Solid Waste Tipping Fee and Subtitle D Fee) have been increased

beginning with the waste received on or after July 1,2003.

The fee depends on

the total volume of waste received in a calendar

year. Operators that received more than 150,000 cubic yards of

waste in a year have the option of measuring waste by volume

(cubic yards) or weight (tons) and deciding which unit to use to

calculate the fee payment. Operators that receive

less than 150,000

cubic yards in a year might

fall

into one of four other fee payment

categories (see table below). These categories have remained the

same.

Notices were sent

by Illinois EPA to current permit-holders

specifying their obligations under the new

fee schedule. Permit-

holders should be aware that

failure to pay fees when they arc due

could

result in a referral to the Attorney General’s Office and

potential

penalties, pursuant to

statute.

However, solid waste surcharges paid to local governments remain

the same

as

those mentioned in the Illinois Environmental

Protection Act, Section 22.15(j).

Additional information

or assistance is available by contacting the

Bureau of Land Financial Management Unit at 217-524-4337.

State Solid Waste Surcharge Fees

would pay a new

and a new

Landfills Receiving:

solid waste fee

of:

Subtitle 0 Fee

greater than

150,000 cu. yds./yr.

$2.00/ton or

$0.95/cy

$0.22/ton or

$0.101/cy

between

100,000 and

150,000 cu. yds./yr.

$52,630

$7,020

between 50,000 and

100,000 Cu.

yds./yr.

$23,790

$3,120

between

10,000 and

50,000 cu,

yds./yr.

$7,260

$975

less than

10,000 cu. yds./yr.

$1,050

$210

2

+

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacityin Illinois:

20Q3

---

About $1

million per acre

Developing a landfill requires enormous investments in land and

equipment totaling millions of dollars, plus engineering expenses,

fees

to state and

local governments, taxes, normal operating costs

and additional

millions set aside for post-closure care. One industry

rule of thumb says

it takes about $1

million per acre to design,

build,

permit, operate, and conduct post-closure care at a landfill

today. Patrick Engineering Inc., Springfield, designed plans for

several counties in Illinois

in 1994, which included landfill

economic studies, describing costs necessary to build 100

tons per

day (TPD), 500 TPD and

1,000 TPD landfills.

As with everything,

costs

have gone up, no doubt.

These costs

included pre-developmcnt stage,

site development, site

operation, closure costs, post-closure costs, and financing issues.

Landfills are developed

cell by cell

Landfills

are divided

into sections called cells, which are developed

as needed, filled systematically so that specific

loads ofwaste can

be

located weeks or months later, and covered with soil or other

materials to prevent the spread of odors

and vermin.

Trucks arriving at

a landfill are inspected for prohibited

nonhazardous wastes

(illinois bans

landfillingof liquids, motor oil,

whole tires, and landscape wastes) and for hazardous wastes. Loads

are weighed and details about them are recorded. They are then

taken to the exposedportion of the active cell, which is known as

the working

face.

Trucks empty their loads

at

the working face, where specially

modified bulldozers spread and compact the

waste, crushing it to

eliminate air pockets and squeezing it into the smallest space

possible.

During 2003,50

Illinois landfills reported receiving a total of 57

million gate cubic

yards (almost

17.3 million gate tons) of solid

waste. A ranking of these facilities (Appendix C)

finds

the top five

landfills received

50.5

percent of waste received in

Illinois. This

unequal distribution of waste creates a large difference between an

average

landfill, which would

have accepted almost

1.1 million gate

cubic yards (about 346 thousand gate tons) of waste, and a

median

landfill, which would

have received about

518

thousand

gate cubic

yards (almost

157

thousand

gate tons).

Closings

cut capacity

Three

landfills closed their gates between

2001

and

2003. They

were:

Region

I: Freeport Municipal Landfill

#4

(ceased

accepting

waste in April 2003); Region

2: Wheatland

Prairie RDF (June

18,

2001) and CID RDF (Area

3

only) Dec.

31, 2003. Area 4 is a

hazardous waste site that remains open.

Landfills projecting closure dates prior to the

end of 2003

are

as

follows: Region 3: Streator Area Landfill #3

(expansion under

review); Region 6: South Chain of Rocks

RDF (still open as of

September 2003); and in Region 7: Saline

County Landfill

(temporarily closed,

appealing permit

denial).

Delegated Inspection

Program

The Illinois EPA

has

delegated

inspection authority to

17 county

agencies,

the Ambraw Valley Solid

Waste Agency,

and Chicago. This

program takes advantage of additional

staff resources

at the local level.

Delegation

agreements authorize these

agencies to conduct many of the duties

that would otherwise

be performed

by

an

Illinois

EPA field office: investigating

suspected violations of land pollution

laws and

reports ofopen dumping,

and

inspecting landfills, transfer stations

and

compost facilities permitted

through the Agency’s Bureau of Land.

Inspections can also include industrial

landfills

and monofills (private facilities

that do not accept municipal

solid

waste).

Thousands of inspections of

pollution

control facilities and

other sites were

completed by delegated agencies

during 2003.

These efforts at the local

level

stimulate the regulated

community to

take all

necessary steps

to comply with environmental

regulations. Also, prompt

response by

local

authorities does much to curtail

open dumping,

unfortunately still a

common

practice throughout

Illinois.

In

2003, a team of county and Agency

staff developed a solid waste

inspection training manual for

its field

operations personnel at the Agency’s

regional offices

and for our delegated

partners.~

Average Illinois

Landfill,

2003

Waste Disposed

1.1

million gate cu. yds.

(about 346

thousand

gate tons)

Capacity Available

13.8 million gate cii. yds.

(4.2 million

gate tons)

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003 +

3

---

Gate Cubic Yards and Tons

Acronyms

Used

in

this

Report

Illinois landfills are

required to

report to

the

Illinois

EPA the quantities of waste

received during each calendar year.

They must also calculate

how much

capacity remains available for future

waste disposal as

of Jan.

1.

These figures are submitted

to the

Agency

in

agate cubic yards,” or the

volume of waste entering the landfill’s

gate. Remaining capacities are

expressed

as

certified

gate cubic

yards,

meaning that the calculations

have been certified as true and

accurate by a licensed professional

engineer.

These numbers are found

on

the landfill specification

pages in each

regional section of this report.

The term ‘in-place cubic yards”

is

used

to indicate wastes that have been

compressed to a half or a third or a

quarter of their original volume,

depending

on the degree of

compaction

achieved by the

landfill.

Gate cubic yards can be difficult to

visualize.

To aid the reader, we have

divided gate cubic yards by an

industry

standard of 3.3 to achieve approximate

tons.

In other words 3.3 gate cubic

yards

=

one ton.

Number of municipal solid waste

landfills in the USA

Average number of

landfills per state

Waste generated

Waste recycled

and composted

Waste recycled

Waste composted

waste landfilled

and

combusted

Waste landfilled

Waste combusted

Landfills seek to expand

Milam

Recycling Disposal

Facility, East St.

Louis, increased its

permitted disposal area in

2002.

Streator Area Landfill #3,

Streator,

and Saline

County Landfill, Harrisburg plan to expand their

disposal areas in the near future.

Additional capacity at Sangamon Valley Landfill

in Region Five

was unavailable

until July

2003,

then the new owner/operator

remedied the site’s environmental issues to appease the county

court.

Illinois

EPA also approved

its

application to re-open.

Southern Illinois

Regional Landfill, DeSoto,

also has

a permit

application under review to expand.

USEPA’s MSW Report, 2000

National solid waste data are available in the report Municipal Solid

Waste

in the

United

States: 2000

Facts

& Figures, published June

2002.

To get a copy, contact USEPA

at www.epa.gov/osw and

search by report number EPA53O-S-02-001. This report contains

information about

waste generation

and

categorizes the municipal

solid waste stream by waste type. The executive summary is

abstracted below. No newer figures were available at the federal

level.

AKA

Also known as

CS

Compost site

LF

Landfill

LSW

Landscape waste

MRRF

Material Recycling and Recovery Facility

PPDIPCD

Pounds per person

per day/Pounds per capita

perday

RDF

Recycling and Disposal Facility

TPD

Tons

perday

TPY

Tons

peryear

TS

Transfer station

National

Figures for 2000 Reported by USEPA1

1,967

39

Million Tons

Percent

PPD2

231.9

4.5

69.9

53.4

30.1

16.5

162.0

70

128.3

55.3

33.7

14.5

1

Source: Municipal

Solid Waste in

the

United

States:

2000 Facts & Figures,

USEPA

Office

of

Solid Waste and-Emergenq,;Re.sponse. J~ne.20O2~

2

PPD

Pounds Per Person Per

Day

4 +

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003

---

Waste imported and exported

in 2003

State of Origin of Wastes

Perhaps even more revealing, state data show, in the table on bottom

ofpage 6, views of waste disposal and landfill capacities

on

a per

capita basis. Chicago Metropolitan Region has the lowest remaining

capacity per capita. There is a moratorium against landfills within

Chicago’s city limits and land prices havehigh values.

Waste

generated by 8.6

million people ofthe Chicago Metropolitanregion

then becomes a state-wide

problem, and also affects available

capacity in adjacent states of Indiana and Wisconsin.

Siting ofnew landfills or expansion of existing landfills

in Northwest

and Central Illinois might help alleviate this situation. Land prices

are found to be lower in these areas.

Indiana Department ofEnvironmental Management (IDEM),

Indianapolis, has not yet released its

2003

edition, but reported in its

“2002

Summary

ofIndiana Solid Waste Facility Data” that 88

percent of waste imports come from 29

Illinois counties. Almost 1.4

milliontons of

Illinois

waste were imported into Indiana in 2002.

Illinois waste in 2002

was sent to

14

landfills in

12 Indiana counties

for disposal:

Fulton, Greene,

Hendricks, Lake, LaPorte, Newton,

Pike, Putnam,

Vanderburgh, Vermilion, Vigo and White.

CookCounty, Illinois, (CountySeat, Chicago) sent to Indiana’s

landfillsand transfer stations almost

1.2 million

tons of waste in

2002.

Any limits to out-of-state

waste disposal in other states, or capacity

shortages,

would put pressure on the Chicago Metropolitan areas

waste management systems and could cause

a local shortage in

landfill disposal capacity.

The tonnage of waste from Indiana counties that

was sent to Illinois

landfills in 2003

as reported by them totaled 42,210 tons. Indiana’s

waste was managed

by

10

Illinois

landfills, located mainly in East

Central Illinois.

For a copy of Indiana’s 2003 report,

contact Michelle Weddle

(IDEM)

at 317-233.4624.

Received at Illinois Landfills

in

20031

Eleven

percent of all

solid waste

landfilled

in

Illinois

in 2003

is 6.2 million

gate cubic yards (1.9

million tons). This

is the amount which came from

out-of-

state.

However, waste haulers are not

required to report how much Illinois

waste they transport to landfills

in other

states or from which counties (in

Illinois) waste is

transported.

The

2003

amount

is up just one

percent from the

previous year.

Most

states

exporting waste to Illinois

are

neighbors of Illinois

and share its

borders.

State of Origin

Cu. Yds.

Percent

Missouri

4,993,966

80

Iowa

878,321

14

Indiana

139,293

2

Kentucky

5,339

1

Wisconsin

165,068

3

Other States

2

24,868

1

Total

6,206,855

100

Twenty-five Illinois landfills accepted

waste from

11

other states in 2003.

2

Arkansas, Georgia, Kansas,

Minnesota, Nebraska,

and Tennessee

Illinois Landfills:

Waste

Accepted

in

2003

Versus 2002

Landfills

Accepting

2003 waste

Waste

waste Accepted,

Gate

Cu. Yds.

Yearly

Change

Share of

Region

2003

20032

2OO2~

Cu. Yds.

Percent

State Tetal

One: Northwestern

Illinois

8

12,631,640

11,221,557

÷

1,410,083

+

12.6

22.1

Two: chicago Metropolitan

9

12,402,321

13,970,429

-

1,568,108

-

11.2

21.7

Three:

Peoria/Quad

cities

8

4,357,705

4,036,121

+

321,584

+

8.0

7.6

Four East central

Illinois

9

14,653,759

13,811,429

+842,330

+6.1

25.7

Five: West central

Illinois

5

1,849,110

1,747,874

+

101,236

+

5.8

32

Six:

Metropolitan

East St. Louis

6

9,165,066

8,168,149

+

996,917

+

12.2

16.1

Seven:

Southern

Illinois

5

1,990,192

1,694,507

+

295,685

+

17.4

3.5

Totals

50

57,049,793

54,650,066

+

2,399,727

+

4.4

100

1

Includes facilities

that accepted

municipal

waste

for

less than one

complete calendar year.

Includes 6,206,855

cubic yards

of out-of-state waste (11

of state total) accepted

by

25 Illinois

landfills during

200&

‘Includes

5,800,977 cubic yards

of out-of-state waste (10

of state total) accepted

by 26

Illinois

landfills during

2002.

Nonhazardous

Solid

Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003 +

5

---

Amounts reported

in gate

Cu.

yds.

2003

2

Remaining capacity divided

by

waste

disposed. Tells how

long a

region

may be

served

by local landfills at current disposal

rates,

barring capacity adjustments, until capacity is depleted..

Illinois

Landfills:

Remaining Capacities Jan.

1,

2004 Versus

Jan.

1, 2003

Landfills

Reporting

Capacity

Capacity

Reported Capacity. Gate

Cu.

Yds.

Yearly

Change

Share of

Region

1-1-04

1-1-04

1-1-03

Gate Cu. Yds.

Percent

State Total

One: Northwestern

Illinois

7

150,019,000

158,998,000

-8,979,000

-5.6

22.2

Two:

Chicago

Metropolitan2

9

59,755,000

73,994,000

-14,239,000

-19.2

8.9

Three: Peoria/Quad

cities

8

179,875,000

177,195,000

+

2,680,000

+

1.5

26.7

Four

East central

Illinois

9

63,128,000

80,712,000

-17,584,000

-21.8

9.4

Five: west central Illinois

5

53,924,000

51,499,000

+

2,425,000

+

4.7

8.0

Six: Metropolitan

East St.

Louis

6

124,149,000

112,470,000

+

11,679,000

+

10.4

18.4

Seven:

Southern Illinois3

5

43,791,000

45,794,000

-2,003,000

-4.4

6.5

Totals

49

674,641,000

700,662,000

-26,021,000

-3.7

100

1

Includes capacity at one reactivated facility:

Sangamon Valley

Landfill which

re-opened in July 2003.

2

Does not include any capacity for community Landfill or Prairie View Landfill (new in 2004).

Does

not include capacity for Perry Ridge

Landfill (new in

2004).

Slight

capacity

loss

documented on Jan.

1, 2004

In a year that brought a 3.7 percent decline in landfill capacity, Southern

-

-

Illinois declinedonly 4.4 percent and Northwestern Illinois only 5.6

Landfill

Opening Planned

percent. The largest

drop was in East Central Illinois, a 21.8 percent

in

Southern

Illinois

decline.

Southern

Illinois anticipates

the

The table below

compares landfill remaining capacities in

“snapshots”

opening of

Perry Ridge Landfill

in

taken Jan.

1,2003, and Jan. 1,2004.

Capacity drops of 21.8 percent and

DuQuoin (Perry County) which

19.2

percent in East Central

Illinois

and Chicago

Metropolitan areas

planned to open

in

March 2004.

respectively, are somewhat counter-balanced by expansions

in

Southern

Illinois

Regional

Landfiil

Metropolitan East St. Louis, which had a capacity spurt of 10.4 percent.

also

received

Illinois

EPA approval to

expand on

July 2,

2004.

Next year,

capacity will

be boosted by

two new landfills (Prairie View

Landfill, Wilmington, and Peny

Ridge Landfill, DuQuoin),

four

expansions

and one upgraded landfill (Indian Creek Landfill

#2,

Hopedale).

Waste Disposed and Landfill Capacity Per Capita; Landfill

Life Expectancy

Region

Estimated

Population

Waste

Disposed,

Cu. Yds.

Remaining Capacity,

Cu. Yds

Landfill

Life

Per Capita

Jan.

1,

2004

Per Capita

Years2

One: Northwestern Illinois

807,640

12,631,640

15.6

150,019,000

185.7

12

Two: chicago Metropolitan

8,576,656

12,402,321

1.4

59,755,000

7.0

5

Three: Peoria/Quad

Cities

760,144

4,357,705

5.7

179,875,000

236.6

41

Four:

East

Central Illinois

858.790

14,653,759

17.1

63,128,000

73.5

4

Five: West Central

Iflinois

561,922

1,849,110

3.3

53,924,000

96.0

29

Six: Metropolitan

East St.

Louis

708,732

9,165,066

12.9

124,149,000

175.2

14

Seven:

Southern Illinois

434,527

1,990,192

4.6

43,791,000

100.8

22

Totals

12,708,411

57,049,793

4.5

674,641,000

53.1

12

6

+

Nonhazanious

Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003

---

Statewide Landfill Capacity

Is Abundant Despite Same Number of Facilities

At the end of each year,

Illinois

landfill operators calculate how much waste they

Will

beable

toacceptin

the future. This volume is known as remaining or available

capacity, and

is expressediagate cubic yards,

meaning waste

received at the landfill’s gate before

it

is compacted. One industry rule of thumb says

10

gate Cubic yards of waste can be

compressed into

five

compacted cubic yards.

Obviously, the greater the

compaction, the more waste can be buried.

In 2003, 50 landfills reported accepting

57

million gate cu. yds.

of waste from

Illinois counties and

11

other

states besides Illinois. The 675 million cubic yards of available capacity allows

for

12 years

of landfill life.

Tight Regulations Force Cutbacks

Pushing Survivors

To Build Capacity

Active landfills accepting waste each year

Available

landfill

space, millions of gate cubic yards

180

800

725

150

650

120

575

90

500

425

60

350

30

275

0

200

‘94

‘95

‘96

‘97

98

‘99

‘00

‘01

‘02

‘03

Average Landfill Capacity Steady

Millions of gate cubic yards

60

50

6

40

30

‘93

‘94

‘95

‘96

‘97

‘98

‘99

‘00

‘01

‘02

‘03

‘04

‘94

‘95

‘96

‘97

‘98

‘99

‘00

‘01

‘02

‘03

‘04

While Disposal Rates Remained Constant

Wastes

landfilled, millions of gate

cubic yards

I

~

~

‘91

‘92 ‘93

‘94 ‘95

‘96

‘97 ‘98

‘99 ~00‘01

‘02

‘03

~,~increase

I

15

12

9

3

0

Nonhazardous

Solid

Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003

7

---

Municipal waste management in Illinois: 2003

Landfilling continues

to play the largest role in the handling of

municipal

waste in

Illinois. It is estimated

that almost 75

percent

was landfilled in

2003. Waste

data collected

from landfills (17.3

million

tons),

compost sites (366,571

tons),

and the amount

reported

as recycled

by

local recycling

coordinators

(about 6.0

million tons)

were

added together and

percentages

of each were

calculated.

Waste generation

as

calculated

by

recycling coordinators

does not

include

the

composted amounts

managed by

homeowners, or

incineration

for volume

reduction

usingbum

barrels. Neither

does

the

composted

amount include

that

managed on-farm at agronomic

rates.

No

amount was burned in commercial

incinerators in 2003 in

Illinois.

Municipal

waste management

computes to the following rates:

landtilling: 73.1 percent; recycling: 25.3 percent and composting:

1.6percent.

These figures

as outlined below in the pie chart might

be the more accurate figures for Illinois.

New Facilities Permitted to be Constructed or to Expand

Opening

Design

Airspace

Region

Landfill

Municipality

Date

Details

(cu. yds.)’

One:

Northwestern Illinois

Winnebago Rec.

Svs.

Rockford

4-27-04

N

&

s

unit

1,798,840

vertical & Horizontal

expansion

Two:

Chicago

Prairieview

RDF

Wilmington

1-16-04

223 ac.

30,196,438

Metropolitan

Three:

PeorialQuad Cities

Envirofii

of Illinois

Inc.

Macomb

4-20-04

57

ac. horizontalll9 ac.

9,250,000

vertical

Three:

Peoria/Quad Cities

Indian

Creek LF #2

Hopedale

6-30-04

36.27

ac.

2,661,136

Five:

West Central Illinois

Sangamon Valley LF

Springfield

7-7-03

50.31

ac.

lateral

exp.

5,135,625

Six:

Metro East St. Louis

Milam ROE

E. St.

Louis

10-16-03

4.75 million

exp.

19,450,000

Seven:

Southern Illinois

Perry Ridge

DuQuoin

5-2004

141

ac.

14,872,900

Total

83,364,939

1

Includes space for waste, intermediate

or daily cover and capacity (in-place

cubic yards)

Municipal

Waste

Management

Plans

and Plan Updates

The Solid Waste Planning

and

Recycling Act requires all

Illinois

counties and the city of Chicago to

develop, adopt and

implement 20-year

municipal waste management plans.

Every

five,

10 and

15 years, each

plan

must identify changes in planning

areas, evaluate

progress in the plan

implementation

and,

if

necessary,

revise

plan

recommendations

and

goals. A

county also has the option of

updating its

solid waste generation

rate. The plan

is

then submitted to the

Illinois EPA for review

and comment.

Questions concerning these plans

should be directed

to the appropriate

local administrators

listed in Appendix

K

of

this

report.

Due dates for plan

updates are found

in

Appendix L.

Contact Ellen Robinson for more

information about this requirement of

state law at 217-785-8604.

Municipal Waste Management in

Illinois: 2003

Compostlng

1.6

RecyclIng

25.3’!,

—

Landfllling

73.1

8

+ Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacityin Illinois:

2003

---

Amount recycled

Solid waste coordinators have many priorities to balance. More

pressingpriorities of public health concern such as WestNile Virus

andbioterrorism, plus limited funding for solid waste planning

studies,

have diverted the attention ofmany away from solid waste

management

issues during the past few years. Therefore, the 37

percent recycling rate reported should be considered an

estimate.

Actual figures may be lower orhigher.

a

Municipal Waste Generated

& Recycled

Estimated

waste Generated

waste Recwled

Region

Population

Tons

PCD

Tons

Percent

One: Northwestern Illinois

807,640

820,148

5.6

190.895

23.3

Two: Chicago Metropolitan

8,576,656

11,903.588

7.6

5,017,329

42.1

Three: Peoria/Quad

Cities

760,144

926,220

6.7

243,008

26.2

Four:

East Central

Illinois

858,790

952,240

6.1

210,538

22.1

Five: West Central

Illinois

561,922

538,045

5.2

81,732

15.2

Six: Metropolitan

East

St.

Louis

708,732

632,188

4.9

182,873

28.9

Seven:

Southern Illinois

434,527

389.469

4.9

56,637

14.5

Total

12,708,411

16,161,898

7.0

5,983,012

37.0

1

PCD

=

Pounds per capita per day.

State Solid Waste and Recycling

Grants

The Department of Commerce and

Economic Opportunity

(DCEO),

Bureau of Energy and Recycling

issues a number of

grants to governments,

not-for-profit organizations and

businesses.

For information about grant programs

promoting recycling

efforts, contact these DCEO staff members.

Division and Contact Person

Phone

Recycling

& Waste Reduction Division

217-782-7887

•

Resource Recovety Section

217-524-0933

•

Resource Development Section

217-785-2006

•

Education,

Research and Development

Ron Swager, Manager

217-785-3498

For information about recycling, visit their web site at www.

illinoisbiz.biz and

click on the energy and recycling tab.

Who to Call for Help With

Specific

Problem Waste

The Illinois EPA supports a number of

waste

disposal and recycling efforts aimed

at helping households

and selected

institutions safely dispose of household

hazardous waste, scrap tires,

leftover

paint, used motor oil,

educational

hazardous waste

and more.

To obtain the

latest information about these

programs, or to learn the dates, times and

locations of drop-off collections, please call

one of the following:

•

Dan Rion, at 217-782-9294,

conceming scheduling of Household

Hazardous Waste collections;

concerning what to do with waste paint

and

used motor oil;

•

Tap Hefley or Todd

Marvel, at

217-785-8604, concerning scrap/used

tire disposal;

•

David Saladino, at 217/558-4115

concerning high school laboratory

hazardous waste

and used fluorescent

and high intensity light bulb disposal.

Nonhazardous

So/id Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003+

9

---

of

Composting is increasing

by 3.5 percent

Landscape wastes were banned from Illinois landfills beginning July

1,

1990.

The number ofcompost sites now stands at 38, two less

than in 2002.

Compost facilities report to the Agency each year the quantities of

waste accepted. In 2003, the state’s compost facilities processed

366,571 tons of landscape waste, a 3.5 percent increase from 2002’s

total of 354,333

tons.

Chicago Metropolitan area compost sites take five ofthe top

10

spots in

terms of waste accepted in

2003. Number one, two and

three ranked sites, located

in McHenry,

Kankakee and Kendall

counties respectively, took in one-third of the wastes

composted in

Illinois in 2003.

However,

increasing amounts of landscape wastes in all parts of the

State

are being handled by permit-exempt farms, which are

described next.

On-farm composting facilities

If the farmer meets the requirements shown in the adjacent sidebar,

then a composting permit is not needed. However, the sites are still

subject to the minimum performance standards of Section 830.202

of the Act.

These requirements include controlling odors, processing

waste within five days, mn-off and run-on control

and windrow

construction. They must have written plans for the intended

use

and

for odor control. The only minimum standards they are notrequired

to meet are posting

an entrance sign and record keeping of

complaints. They are not subject to any ofthe standards for

permitted compost

sites.

Due

to the limitations of the exemption, the finished compost may

not be sold,

given to others, or used

as alternate daily cover at

landfills.

On-Farm Composting

Facilities

In

rural areas, farming provides an

outlet for

landscape waste

management through the Illinois

Environmental Protection

Act’s

provisions for on-farm exemption and

agronomic rate application,

Section

830.106 a) and

b). While the

agronomic rate application

has only

one limit

(20 tons per acre per year);

other requirements must

be met to be

permit

exempt:

•

The

site and

where the finished

compost is to

be used,

must be on

property operated

by the farmer

doing the composting. The property

used for the

composting

process

cannot

be

more than two percent

that farmer’s total

acreage.

•

The compost site,

and the land

where the compost is to be

used,

shall

be ‘principally and diligently

devoted

to the production of

agricultural crops.”

•

The land

used

and the farmer shall

not

be

connected to a waste

hauling

company, or a

generator of

non-agricultural compost

materials

(tree trimming businesses,

nurseries,

cemeteries and utility

companies).

If the farmer is

paid to

haul the landscape waste to the

site,

he would

not be qualified for

the exemption.

•

The compost needs to be

used

within

18 months from the day

waste was first brought to the site.

The compost

site and

use

area

meet

required setbacks

from

wells

(200

feet),

nearest

residence

(one-

fourth mile) and

groundwater

(five

feet).

It

cannot

be within the

10-

year

flood

plain, or have more than

10

occupied

non-farm

homes within

one-half mile.

•

The farmer registers the site with

the Illinois

EPA,

and

submits an

annual report.

Compost Facilities:

Waste Handled 2003

Active

Region

Facilities

Tons

One: Northwestern

Illinois

5

47,125

Two: Chicago Metropolitan

17

226,863

Three: Peoria/Quad

cities

s

23,407

Four:

East Central

Illinois

3

21,830

Five: West Central

Illinois

1

15

Six: Metropolitan

East St.

Louis

6

45,774

Seven:

Southern Illinois

1

1,557

Total

38

366,571

10

C.

Nonhazardous So/id Waste Management and Landfl/l Capacity in Illinois:

2003

---

Transfer station and recycling center regulations proposed

The Agency has

met with interested parties

and organizations about

regulations for recycling and transfer stations. The Illinois Pollution

Control Board

web site www.ipcb.stateil.us

has more details about

the rule-making process.

In 2003,44 of the 91

active transfer stations (48.4 percent)

voluntarily reported handlingnearly 5.3 million tons oftrash, or

nearly 30.4 percent of waste landfilled statewide. If the number of

active landfills falls from

50 in 2003,

to the mid-40s, or even the

upper-30s, over the next decade, the number oftransfer stations can

be

expected to grow,

as will the amount of waste

they will handle.

The Agency requested

data from transferstations, but not all of the

facilities chose to voluntarily return the survey;

so it is

assumed that

transferred amounts ofwaste

are under-represented in this report.

We

do know which transfer stations were accepting waste, because

they are inspected on a regular basis by our Field Operations staff

and the delegated agencies.

Project TREAD launched

Project TREAD (Tire Reduction, Education and Disposal) is the

Illinois EPA’s

outreach effort to

increase the public’s awareness

and

assistance for

the Illinois EPA’s Used Tire Program in response

to

the serious West Nile Virus situation in Illinois.

In addition, the Illinois EPA issued

a fact

sheet in early 2003 called

“Used Tires

and

the West Nile Virus.” This fact sheet identifies the

link

between improperly managed used

and

waste tires and

the

proliferation of disease-carrying

mosquitoes

that results in an

increased risk and occurrence of West Nile Virus. The fact sheet is

available on our web site at http://www.epa.state.il.us/land/tires/

images/project-tread.pdf.

For

further

information

on the

Illinois

EPA’s Used Tire

Program,

go

to

http://wwwcepa.state.il.us/land/tires/index.html.

Illinois EPA Enlists More

Citizen “Tire Spotters”:

Project TREAD

Launched

Illinois

Environmental Protection

Agency

Director Renee Cipriano announced

on

March 20, 2003, the launch

of “Project

TREAD” that

will

seek additional help from

the

public

and

local officials to

identify and

remove illegal tire dumps.

“Illinois EPA’s Used Tire Management

Program

cleaned

up more than

1.1

million

waste tires last year that were

potential

breeding grounds for mosquitoes

that may

spread West Nile

virus

and other

diseases,” said

Director

Cipriano.

“Project TREAD (Tire

Reduction,

Education

and Disposal) will

urge citizens and local

officials

to

report improperly discarded tires

to

the Illinois

EPA and/or to local police,”

Director Cipriano added.

Fact sheets addressing the hazards posed

by abandoned

used tires will also

be sent

to

local

officials across

the state.

Public Service Announcements will

also be

mailed

to

radio stations statewide and

Illinois EPA will give special recognition to

those officials

and

citizens who

make

outstanding contributions to Project

TREAD.

“In addition

to the more than

1,000

inspections done by our staff each year, we

rely on

tips from

the public

and local

officials to track

down renegade tires,”

noted

Director Cipriano.

If mosquito

larvae

are found, the inspector

applies

a

larvacide

and takes immediate

action

to have the tires removed and

disposed of properly.

Illinois EPA

is

part of the state’s West Nile

Virus Task Force and last year cleaned up

more than 50,000 waste

tires

at the

request of the Illinois Department of Public

Health and

local health departments.

Approximately

12 million

used tires are

generated

each year in

Illinois. While most

are now managed

properly

as

a resultof

oversightby our Used Tire Management

Unit, there are

still

hundreds of thousands

of tires that need

to be

removed from

illegal

sites each year.

•

Transfer Stations: Waste

Handled

in 2003

Region

Facilities

Tons

One: Northwestem Illinois

6

146,216

Two:

Chicago Metropolitan

62

4,801,549

Three: Peoria/Quad

Cities

4

15,625

Four:

East Central Illinois

7

9,400

Five: West central

Illinois

3

165,000

Six: Metropolitan

East St.

Louis

6

60,209

Seven: Southern

Illinois

3

60,256

Total

91

5,258,255

Each region contains

active sites

that did not report amounts of waste

accepled.

Nonhazardous Solid

Waste Management and Landfill Capacityin Illinois:

2003

C.

11

---

Alternative re-use of

Permitting

requirements ofIllinois EPA

Construction and Demolition

Debris

The

Illinois

Environmental Protection Act

was amended

in

July

2003 to increase

the opportunities for beneficial reuse

of

clean construction and demolition debris.

Clean construction or demolition

debris

includes uncontaminated

concrete with

no protruding

metal bars,

bricks, rock,

stone; reclaimed

asphalt pavement;

and

soil

from construction or demolition

activities.

Prior to July 2003,

use of this material

without being classified as

disposal

of

solid waste was mainly

limited projects

where it was used “below grade.”

This

meant the

material was used to fill a

quarry,

borrow

pit or other constructed

excavation. It could

also be

used

in

engineered construction projects.

The changes to Section 3,160 of the Act

removed the “below grade” requirement.

It was replaced by the limitation that the

fill is placed

no

higher than the existing

elevation of the area immediately

adjacent to the site prior to filling. With

this change,

leveling parking

lots and

filling in

ravines can now

be

done without

being part of an engineered project.

Please refer to the whole text of Section

3,160 prior to

beginning a project, as

there are other limitations and

conditions

that must

be taken into account before

using the material.

The

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Act

and the Rules and

Regulations of the

Illinois Pollution Control Board

are

available on the

Internet. Go

to the

Agency’s web site, www.epastate.il.us

and choose “Rules and Regulations”.

This will provide

links to the Illinois

Pollution Control Board and Secretary of

State web sites where this information

is

kept.4

New landfills

or landfill expansions cannot be built unless the

Bureau of Land issues

a permit. Issuance of a Bureau of Air permit

to

a landfill identi~’ing

it

as a potential new source of air pollution

must also be obtained.

An

initial completeness review of a permit application normally

takes

30

days. If omissions

are found, the application is rejected as

incomplete.

The applicant

then has

35

days to provide additional

information to make an application

complete. Once

an application is

found to be complete,

technical reviews

are conducted.

Approval or denial ofpermit applications

During the review period, comments

are solicited from

Bureau of

Land’s Regional Office, Groundwater Assistance Unit and the Solid

Waste Unit.

After review of the application, the addenda, and

comments

from public officials,

the general public

and the regional

office, final action is ready to

be taken.

If the

reviewers have found

the application to completely adhere

to

applicable

environmental regulations, the permit is approved

outright or with special conditions. If the application is deficient, the

Permit

Section denies the permit.

Rather than sending out a formal denial letter, the reviewer prepares

a draft

denial letter which explains the areas in the application that

are deficient,

The applicant has

a choice of either providing some

additional information in the form of an

addenda to

the

original

application or askingthe reviewerfor a formal denial that could be

appealed to the Illinois Pollution Control Board, Additional

information is usually provided. Approval or denial of a permit

application takes

180 days, unless an

extension is

granted,

If

the application is denied, an owner/operator could submit a new

application, appeal

the Agency’s denial of the permit through the

Illinois Pollution Control Board or they could abandon the project.

Most choose to submit

a new application, starting the

180-day

process over again.

Permits for landfills contain detailed requirements for the design,

construction,

capacity and operation of the landfills.

They also

contain stringent requirements for monitoring the groundwater

beneath and around the landfill

to detect releases from the landfill

thatwould

adversely impact the qualityof the groundwater. Finally,

the permit contains detailed requirements

to properly “close” the

landfill

once it has been filled to permitted capacity and to provide

for proper care of the landfill after it has

been closed.

From time to time, the owner/operator of a landfill must

modify

the

facility’s permit. These modifications

can address many things,

including changes in construction and/or operational practices;

construction of cells within the permitted landfill boundaries;

and

groundwater monitoring issues.

12

C•

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003

---

This report

attempts to document significant permit actions.

However, only those permit actions which change the items

mentioned in “Facility Facts” section ofthe landfill specification

pages

are acknowledged. Pay close attention to the footnotes on

each facility specification page for permit actions made during

2001, 2002 and 2003, and on page eight ofthe Introduction there

is

a chart entitled “New Facilities Permitted to

be Constructed orto

Expand.”

For more information about items discussed in this report, contact

the Agency’s Freedom of Information Officer at FOIA@epa.state.il.

us. You may also fax

requests

on letterhead

to 217/782-9290. Be

very specific inyour request for information and include the site’s

identification number, if possible,

Closure and post-closure care

period

Once a landfill has received its permitted volume of waste, it must

be “closed” in accordance with an approved plan and with Illinois

landfill regulations.

Proper closure

of a

landfill

includes establishing

a propergrading plan to allow for precipitation to run off of the

landfill, constructing a final

cover over the waste to minimize the

amount ofprecipitation that can infiltrate

the landfill, establishing a

vegetative cover system over the final cover system to minimize

erosion and finalizingthe gas and leachate management systems to

ensure that gas and leachate generated in the landfill after the

landfill is closed are properly

managed.

After a landfill has been properly closed,

it must then receive

at

least

30 years of post-closure care.

Proper post-closure

care includes

maintaining the vegetative cover to

ensure it

does not erode,

monitoring the groundwater to

ensure there have been no releases

due to the landfill, and removing the gas

and leachate generated in

the landfill to

ensure that they do

not have adverse impacts on the

area surrounding the

landfill.

Closure activities, depending on the site, may include: capping the

landfill; installing

monitoring devices if they are not already in

place;

providing topsoil, seeding, and mulching as necessary; and

possibly converting the land for follow-up use. Routine post-closure

care continues for 30

years after a landfill ceases to accept waste

and includes maintaining the surface cover, monitoring gas

produced, flaring or collecting any gas, monitoring, pumping

and

transporting any leachate, and monitoring groundwater.

Estimates

for both closure and post-closure care costs must be based

on an

engineering estimate ofthe cost for a third party to perform the

necessary work and maintenance.

Financial

assurance

is

also

required for corrective action measures, such

as remediation of

groundwater contamination,

Financial Assurance

Requirements

Funding for landfill closure,

post-

closure maintenance and corrective

action must

be provided

by the

landfill

owners and operators, ensuring costs

are not borne by taxpayers.

Many

different

mechanisms are available to

help landfill

owners prove

now that

they will

be able to

pay later.

Financial

assurance mechanisms for

landfill closure and long-term care fall

into three

broad categories: cash-in-

hand,

in the form

of trust funds or

escrow accounts; third-party insurance,

including

letters

of credit and

surety

bonds;

and various

types of self-

insurance. Self-insurance can include

a

financial test, a guarantee by a parent

corporation or government entity, or

deferred funding

in the form of pledge

of revenues.

The state can further

determine which mechanisms are

allowable for publicly and

privately

owned landfills and

how

landfill owners

and

operators must provide

accounting.

Closure

and

long-term costestimates

are revisited

annuallyfor active

landfills.

For

those

which closed

under

Part

807 regulations, review takes

place every

two

years.

Costs are

updated based upon the remaining

capacity in the landfill, the

remaining

post-closure

care period, and adjusted

for

inflation.

The funds

available must

be

adequate to cover the projected

costs.

For more information about Illinois

regulations

regarding financial

assurance,

contact Greg Bouillon,

Bureau of Land, at

217-785-8604.

•

Nonhazardous

Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003t

13

---

Solid Waste Landfill Terms

Defined

Closure:

procedure that a solid

or

hazardous waste management facility

undergoes

to cease operations and

ensure protection of human health

and

the environment for the future.

Final Cover System: the materials

or

layers (i.e., erosion/vegetative layer,

infiltration/barrier

layer, drainage layer)

installed over the top of a closed landfill

to minimize

infiltration and

erosion.

Leachate: any liquid,

including

any

suspended components

in the liquid,

which percolates through or is drained

from

waste.

Operation & Maintenance:

activities

conducted at a site to ensure

that the

treatment and

containment system is

functioning

properly. This

may include:

grading, seeding and mowing the

vegetative layer,

monitoring and

repairing gas

and leachate collection

systems; treating collected leachate;

groundwater monitoring and

maintaining; and repairing the

physical

integrity of drainage control structures.

Response Action:

an

action

taken to

reduce or control risks to human health

and

the environment.

Site Investigation:

a study designed to

gather data

needed to determine the

nature

and extent of