BEFORE THE

ILLINOIS POLLUTION

SILBRICO CORPORATION,

Petitioner,

V

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

RECERVED

CONTROL

BOAREFERKS OFFICE

iL~JL192005

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Controj Board

PCBO6-

jj

(VarianceLLland)

To:

(See attached Service

List.)

NOTICE OF

FILING

PLEASE TAKE

NOTICE that on this

19th

day of July

2005,

there

was filed

with

the

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Board,

Petitioner

Slibrico

Corporation’s

Petition

for

Variance, which

is attached and herewith

served

upon you.

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

SILBRICO CORPORATION

By:

---

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I,

the

undersigned

non-attorney,

state

that

I

served

a

copy

of

Petitioner

Sllbrico

Corporation’s

Petition

for Variance

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.

(~phette

M.

Podlin

Ix

Under penalties

as provided

by

law

pursuant

to

735 ILcS

5/1-109,

Icertify

that the statements

set forth

herein

are true

and correct.

---

2049-00

1

SERVICE LIST

Case

No. PCB 06-

(Variance

--

Land)

Illinois

Environmental

Protection Agency

Division of Legal

Counsel

1021

North

Grand Avenue

East

P.O.

Box

19276

Springfield,

IL 62794-9276

---

RECEIVED

CLERK’S OFFICE

BEFORE THE

ILLINOIS POLLUTION

CONTROL

BOARD

JUL

192005

STATE OF ILLINOIS

Pollution Control Board

SILBRICO CORPORATION,

)

Petitioner,

)

v.

)

PCB 06-

(Variance—land)

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

Respondent.

PETITION FOR VARIANCE

Petitioner

SILBRICO

CORPORATION

(“Silbrico”),

by

its

attorneys

Swanson,

Martin

&

Bell,

LLP,

hereby

petitions the

Illinois

Pollution

Control

Board

for

a

variance

allowing

Silbrico

to

dispose

of

nonhazardous,

inert

waste

at

a

“construction

and

demolition debris’

facility.

Silbrico

seeks this variance while it pursues

its

request

for

a

site-specific rule.

This petition for variance

is submitted pursuant to Section

35(a)

of the

Environmental

Protection

Act

(Act)

(415

ILCS

5/35(a))

and

Part

104 of

the

Board’s

procedural

rules (35 lll.Adm.Code Part

104).

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.

Sflbrico

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

is

pursuing

a

site-specific regulation to allow it to

permanently dispose of

the

off-specification

perlite and

the fugitive

perlite at

a

“clean fill” facility.

Silbrico

seeks

a variance

to allow

it to dispose

of these

waste streams at

a

“clean

fill” facility while

its

petition for site-specific rule

is pending.

Petition Content Requirements

The

Board’s

procedural

rules

set forth

the

content

requirements for

petitions for

variance.

(35

lll.Adm.Code

104.204.)

This

section

addresses

those

content

requirements.

The regulation from which variance

is sought (Section 104.204(a))

The

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Agency

(IEPA)

has taken

the

position that

Silbrico’s

off-specification

perlite,

and

the

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 (off-specification

perlite)

and

pollution

control

wastes

(fugitive

perlite)

must

be

disposed

of

in

a

2

---

nonhazardous

waste

landfill.1

Silbrico

asks

the

Board

to

either:

1)

grant

a

variance

from

the

provisions of Parts

810 through

817,

to the

extent those Parts

require disposal

of the

wastes

in

a

nonhazardous

waste

landfill,

or

2)

in

the

alternative,

declare

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.

A description of petitioner’s

activity (Section

104.204(b))

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

that

is

used

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.

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

1

The

Part

809

regulations

regarding

industrial

process

and

pollution

control

wastes

discuss

whether they are special wastes.

Silbrico’s wastes are not special

wastes.

3

---

bubbles give

expanded

perlite

its

exceptionally

light weight.

(Expanded

pertite

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

lll.Adm.Code

809.103.

Fugitive

perlite

is

fugitive

product

captured

by

Silbrico’s

bag

house filters2

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

loads

of

off-specification

perlite

and

fugitive

perlite

per

year.3

This

disposal,

at

a

nonhazardous waste

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

Silbrico has not

previously obtained

any variance.

2

Silbrico

uses

all

required

air pollution

control

equipment

to capture

emissions from

its

pro.cess

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 variance

request seeks

relief

only from waste

disposal provisions,

not from

air emission regulations.

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.

4

---

Data describing the nature and extent of the failure to comply

(Section 104.204(c))

This content

requirement

is

not directly

applicable to

Silbrico’s

variance request.

Silbrico

is

technically

able

to

comply

with

the

current

requirement

that

its

off-

specification perlite and fugitive

perlite waste streams

be disposed

of in

a

nonhazardous

waste

landfill,

and

is

currently

in

compliance with

that

requirement.

However,

as

set

forth

more

fully

below,

compliance

with

the

requirement

imposes

an

arbitrary

or

unreasonable hardship while Silbrico pursues

its

site-specific rulemaking. request.

Description

of efforts

needed

for immediate compliance (Section 104.204(d))

This

content

requirement

is

also

inapplicable

to

Silbrico’s

variance

request

because

Silbrico

is currently

in compliance by

its

disposal of the two waste streams

in

a

nonhazardous waste landfill.

Facts

supporting

Silbrico’s

claim

of

arbitrary

or

unreasonable

hardship

(Section

104.204(e))

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

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 the

variance would thus

result

in

reduced trucking

5

---

distances,

which

equates

to

less

traffic

congestion,

lowers

the

chances

of

traffic

accidents, and could

result in

less air pollution based

on fewer miles traveled.

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.4

That

capacity

should

be

reserved

for wastes that truly need

disposal

in

a

landfill, with

its

engineered

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.5

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

variance

(and the

pending site-specific rule) should

be considered.

The

Board

has

previously

held

that

economic

costs

are

sufficient

to

warrant

a

finding

of

arbitrary

or

unreasonable

hardship,

when

balanced

by

a

finding

of

no

or

minimal impact.

Village of Lake Zurich

v.

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency,

PCB

97-77 (February

20,

1997).

See also City of Streator

v.

Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency,

PCB

02-04

(January

10,

2002),

where

the

Board

granted

a

variance

based

upon

a future

economic benefit to the petitioner.

Here, there

is

no adverse

environmental

impact

from

the

grant

of the

requested

variance.

The grant of the

variance

would

result

in

significant cost

savings to

Silbrico,

See “Nonhazardous

Solid Waste

Management

and

Landfill capacity

in

Illinois,’

November 2004.

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.epa.state.il.us/land/landfill-capacitv/2003/report.pdf.

See

below,

in

the

section

regarding

environmental

impact,

for further discussion

of

the safety

of

disposal

in a “clean fill” facility.

6

---

as well

as increased flexibility

in

arranging

for

disposal.

The cost savings

and flexibility

in

arranging

for

disposal

warrant

a

finding

of

unreasonable

hardship,

when

balanced

against the

lack

of any

adverse

environmental

impact.

Silbrico

has

demonstrated

an

unreasonable hardship.

A detailed description of the compliance plan

(Section 104.204(f))

Silbrico’s

compliance

plan

for

this

variance

request

is

obtaining

a

site-specific

rule

allowing

Silbrico

to

dispose

of

its

off-specification

perlite

and

fugitive

perlite

in

a

“clean

fill”

landfill.

Silbrico

has filed,

contemporaneously

with

this variance

petition,

a

petition

for

site-specific

rulemaking.

Silbrico

will

pursue

that

site-specific

rulemaking

petition

vigorously.

In

the event that

the

site-specific

petition

is

denied

by the

Board,

Silbrico

will

revert

to

disposing

of

the

two

waste

streams

in

a

nonhazardous

waste

landfill.

A description

ofthe

environmental impact of the activity (Section

104.204(g)

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.

6

(The material safety data

sheet for

Ryolex

is attached

as

Exhibit

E.)

Perlite

is

an

inert,

stable material

and

is nonflammable.

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

landfilled

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

6

The perlite

may contain less

than 0.1

of crystalline silica

(quartz).

7

---

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

variance

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).)

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.7

Citation to supporting documents (Section 104.204(h))

Silbrico

has

attached

supporting

documents

(see

Exhibits

A through

H)

to

this

petition.

The

items

listed

in

Section

104.204(g)(1)—(3)

are

not

directly

applicable

to

this

petition.

The

disposal activity

at

issue does

not

include

emissions or discharges.

Silbrico

currently disposes

of these

waste

streams

in

a

nonhazardous

waste

landfill;

if

the

variance

is

granted,

it

will

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.

Silbrico

will,

of course,

continue

to

use

all

efforts

to

minimize

the

amount

of off-

specification perlite and fugitive

perlite that need

to

be disposed

of.

8

---

A copy of any relevant

permit or permit

application (Section 104.204(i))

This variance

does

not

involve an existing

permit

or a

pending

permit

application.

Any conditions suggested for the

variance (Section

104.204(i))

Silbrico will

comply with

any reasonable conditions

placed

on the variance.

Proposed dates for the variance (Section 104.204(k))

Silbrico proposes that the

variance

begin

on the

date

on

which the

Board grants

the

variance.

Silbrico proposes that the

variance

end five years from

the date

on

which

the

variance

is granted,

or the date

nine months from

the

date

on which the Board

takes

final

action

on Silbrico’s

request for site-specific rule,

whichever occurs

first.

(The

nine-

month

period

would allow Silbrico time to arrange for disposal

of the

two waste streams

in

a nonhazardous waste

landfill,

in the

event the site-specific rule

is denied.)

Consistency with federal

law (Section

104.204(l) and Section

104.208)

This

request

for

variance

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.

An affidavit verifying any facts (Section

104.204(m))

The affidavit of Tom

M. Mendius,

President of Silbrico,

is attached as Exhibit

H.

A statement

regarding the

need for

a

hearing (Section

104.204(m)

Silbrico requests a

hearing

on this petition.

However,

Silbrico reserves its

right to

waive hearing

at

a future date.

9

---

CONCLUSION

Silbrico

has

demonstrated

that

disposing

of

its

off-specification

perlite

and

its

fugitive

perlite

waste

streams

in

a

nonhazardous waste

landfill,

while

its

request

for

a

site-specific rule

is pending,

presents an arbitrary

or unreasonable hardship.

These two

waste streams present no environmental threat

when

disposed

of in

a

“clean fill” facility,

as

requested.

Continuing

to

require Silbrico to

use

a

nonhazardous

landfill for the

two

waste

streams

is

a waste

of valuable

landfill space,

and

is

an unnecessary expenditure

of money.

Landfilling the waste streams

in

a

nonhazardous

landfill

is

an

unreasonable

hardship.

Alternatively,

Silbrico

has

demonstrated

that

its

off-specification

perlite

and

fugitive

perlite

waste

streams

are

analogous

to

“clean

construction

and

demolition

debris.”

The definition of “clean

construction and

demolition debris” includes

“rock”

and

“stone.”

Perlite

is

a

“rock”

and

shares

the

same

inert

qualities

of

a

rock.

Silbrico’s

perlite waste streams

should

be treated as “clean construction

and demolition debris.”

Therefore,

Silbrico Corporation

asks

the

Board to

grant the

requested

variance.

In the

alternative,

Silbrico

asks the

Board

to declare that Silbrico’s

off-specification

and

fugitive

perlite

waste

streams

should

be

handled

as

“clean

construction

and

demolition

debris,” and can be disposed

of at a

“clean fill” facility.

Respectfully submitted,

SILBRICO CORPORATION

~

10

---

Dated:

July

19,

2005

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

11

---

Exhibit

A

---

SEP. 21. 2004

8:22AM

SILBRICO 7UB/3545698

NO.

485

P.

2

ILLINOIS

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

AGENCY

1021

No~m

GRAND

Av~wtJE

EAsT,

P.O.

Box

19276,

SPRINGFIELD,

ILLtNO’~ 62794—9276, 217-782-3397

JMAES

R.

THOMPSON

CENTER,

100

WEST

RANDOLPH,

SUiTE

11-300, CH1CACO, IL

60601, 3)2-814-6026

ROD R.

BL,cGojEvIcI-l, COVERN0~

ItNEE

CIPRIANO,

September

16,

2004

Land and

Lakes

Attu:

Ainanda Miller

21900 S. Central

Avenue

Matteson,

illinois

60443

Re:

0311265003—Cook

County

Silbrico Corporation

Log

No. PSO4-140

Received:

August

27,

2004

RCRA

Permit File

Dear Ms.

Miller:

This letter

is in response to your correspondence (submittal) dated

Augwt

27, 2004.

The

submittal

indicated that the

above-rei~renced

facility (Silbrico

Corporation)

manufactures

“Ryolex”,

a

trade name applied to expanded

perlite,

“Ryolex” is produced by processing

(heating)

perlite,

a generic

name

for naturally occurring

siliceous

volcanic rock, to

make

it

expand.

During

processing,

several wastes are generated,

including off-specification “Ryolex”

and

fugitive

perlite.

In your

submittal

you sought input from the

Illinois

EPA

to determine the

classification ofthe aforementioned waste and a

detennination

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-specific?tion

“Ryolçx” meets the definition of

industrial-process

waste

(Section 3.235 ofthe-

Environmental

Protection Act (the Act)) while

fugitive perlite

meets the definition ofa

pollution

-

control

waste

(Section 3.335 of theAct).

Off-specification “Ryolex”

is

generated when product

material

produced does not meetthe

manufacturer’s

or customer’s specification for grain Se,

density,

or other physical

characteristic while waste perlite

is

generated from fugitive

product

captured by bag house

filters

or by

general

housekeeping

operations.

The aforementioned

wastes

do not

qualif~’

for the exclusion set forth in Section 3.235 ofthe Act

It is the generator’s

responsibility

to properly

characterizeany waste

that the generatorproduces.

Anybusiness generating

non-liquid, non-hazardous

industrial-process

or pollution

control

waste

has

the potential

to

certify that these wastes can

be

disposed

ofas non-special waste.

Section

R0CKIORD—

4302 North Main

Stre6t.

Roddord, 1161103— (815) 907-7760

•

O~Ptjns —9511

W. lia,rhan St.,

Des PIain~,

II. 60016— (847)

294-4000

ELCIN

—595

South

State, ElBin,

IL 60123—

(847) 608-3131

•

PEORiA

—

5415

N. Univ~sit~

St.,

Peoria,

IL

61614

—(309) 693-5463

RugLfru

O~

L,Qlc-

PEO,iA—

7620 N.

Linrversity St.

Peoria, IL

61614— (309) 693-5462

•

Ot~MPMGI~

—2125 South F~ittStreet,Champai$n,

IL.

61620

—(217)

278-5800

SpaiNcRan

—45003. Sixth Street

Rd.,

Springfield, 1162706— (217) 786-6892

•

Cou.waVjLLE—

2009

wIall

Street,

ColIinsvIIIe,

IL 62234 —(616) 346-5120

MA~iQN

—

2309W.

Main St., Suite

116, Marion,

IL 62959

—(618) 903-7200

PRINt~

ON RrCVCLW

Pnft

---

•

SEP.

21. 2004

8:22AM

SILBRICO 708/3546698

NO. 485

P.

3

Silbrico Corporation

Log No. PSO4-140

Page 2

22.43 ofthe

Envixonniental

Protection Act, identifies the procedures fordetermining a waste is

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

available upon request by the flhinois EPA, the transporteror the operator ofthefacility receiving

the waste for storage, trealnient or disposal.

Certification allows qualifying nod-liquid, non-

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

properly permitted facilities without manifesting orusing special waste haulers.

Current

regulations do not require the illinois EPA to reviewor approve the certification(s).

In

addition, please be advised that based on a review ofyour submittal,

it

does not appear that the

afore-meritioned wastes meet

the

definitionof“clean conshuction or demolition debris”

and as

such,the wastes cannot

be

di~osedofat a non-permitted “clean fill”.

Should

you have any questions regarding this letter, please contactMr. John Riekstins

of

my staff

at (217) 524-3309.

Joy~

L. M~ieXE.

Mainger, Permit Section

Burean ofLand

)LM:JR:041074.dpc

IR.

~$1W

cc;

Tom Mendius

—

Silbrico Corporation

---

Exhibit

B

---

III

---

/

METHANE. LIQUID

/

OXYGEN, NITRO-

/

GEN.AND

/

OTHER

/

PLASTERS.

GASES

IN

/

MORTARS,

CONTAIN-

/

PLASTER

EElS,

BOTH

/

BOARDS,

FOR

THAN-

/

CEIUNG

SPORT

AND

/

TILES, AND

IN STATION-

/

UPPER

AIRY

/

WALL

PLANTS

INSULATION

INSULATION

AT

AMBIENT

&LOW

TEMPERA11JRES

D

BRICKS &

TILES,

POYFERY

&

LIGHTWEIGHT

REFRACTORIES.

CALCIUM SIUCATE

PRODUCTS,

NON-LOAD

BEAR-

ING

FILL IN BRIDGES,

TUNNELS,

FLOORS,

MASONRY, ROOFS.

PIPES,

ETC.,

liLT-

UP PANELS

OIL WELL

CEMENT-

ING

AND

LOW DEN-

SITY

MUD TO

PREVENT LOST

CIRCULATION OF

DRILUNG

FLUIDS

CITRiC

ACID,

SUGAR,

9LS

/

/

/

/

/

/

/

I

~

HORTICULTURE,

/

/

PLANT ROOTING,

/

/

SEED

COMPOSTS,

/

SILICA,

/

GROWING

MEDIUM,

PHARMACEUTICALS,

/

PUMICE,

/

SOIL

CONDmONER,

FRUIT

JUICES,

/

VERMICULITE

/

PACKING

FOR

GLUCOSE,

/

SUB$’IlTUTE

/

SHIPPING

CHEMCALS,

/

IN

/

NURSERYSTOCK

WORT,

/

LIGH1WEIGHT

/

H~POPflCS,

SWIMMING

/

AGGREGATE

/

FLOWER

SUPPORT

POOL WATER/

CONCRETE

/

OIL

~ADSORPTION

FOR

POLLUTION

CONTROL

IN

REFINERIES,

FACTORIES

AND

GARAGES

(MOLDS

SHRINKAC

WING

HEAT IN

MOLTEN

METAL

DURING DELAY

II

POURING

EXOTHERMIC

TOPPING

SAND BLASTING, FOUNDRY, AND STEEL

INDUSTRIES,

SLAG COAGULANT,

SPECIAL

CASTING

SAND AND

MIXTURES, SIUCA SOURCE

CRUDE

I,’

---

Origin and Characteristics...

P~rlite

is not a trade name but a generic tenn for naturally occurringsilicous rock. The distinguishing feature

which sets perlite apart from othervolcanic glasses is that whenheated to a suitable pointin its softening range,

it expands from four to twenty times its original volume.

This expansion is due to

the

presence

of

two to six patent combined water in the

cuide

perlite rock. When

quickly

heated to above 1600°F(871°C),

the cruderock pops in a manner similar

to

popcorn as the combined

water vaporizes

and creates countless tiny bubbles

which

account

for

the

amazing light weight

and other excep-

tional physical properties of

expanded

perlite.

The

expansion process also creates one

of

perlite’s

most

distinguishing characteristics: its white

color.

While

the

crude rock may range fiumtransparent light gray to glossy black, the colorofexpandedperlite ranges from

sno~y

white to grayish white.

Expanded

perlitecan be manufacturedto weigh as little 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 chemically inert

and has a

pH of

approximately

7.

sq~

Mu

Sodium

Ifol

M

Tr’

NetTotal

97.0

BoUnd

Water

3.0

Total

100.0

‘API

analyses

are shown in

elemental

form

even though

the

adual forms

present

are

mixed glassy silicates.

Free

silica

maybe presentin small amounts, charaderisticoftheparticu-

1w ore

bady. More specd~c

üifonuation

may be obtained

from

the ore supplier involved.

0.5

6.5-8.0

je(32-400 kg/rn3)

redL4-Brneshandtiner

.1600-2000°F(871-1093°C)

Fusion Point

2300-2450°F

(1260-1343°C)

Specific

Heat

0.2

BtuIlb-

F

(837 JA’cg’K)

Thermal

Conductivity

at75 F(24°C)

-

27-.41

Btu’irilh-ft2~FC04-.06 W/m’K)

Solubility....Solubte in

hot

concentrated alkali and HF

Moderately soluble (10)

in iN

NaOH

Slightly sqluble (3)

in mineral acids (iN)

Very

slightly

solOble (1flr9f~eakaC~S

---

Uses for Perlite,..

As the chart on page 2 indicates,

there are many

uses

for perlite. These usescan be broken down into three

general catagories: construction applications, horti-

cultural applications and industrial applications.

Construction

Applications

Because ofperlite’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-flowing perlite loose-fill masonry

insula-

tion is poured into

the cavitiesofconcrete block

where

itcompletely fills all cores, crevices, mortar

areas and ear holes. In addition to providing thermal

insulation, perlite enhances fire ratings, reduces

noise transmission and it is rot, verminand termite

resistant. Perlite is also ideal for

insulating 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 forroofdecks and other

applications. Perlite

can also be used as an aggregate

in Portland cement and gypsum plasters for

exterior

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 boart

In horticultural applications, perlite

is

used through-

out the worldas a component ofsoulless growing

mixes where it provides aeration and optimum

moisture retention for superior

plant growth. For

rooting cuttings, 100

perlite is used. Studies have

shown

that outstanding yields are achieved with

perlite hydroponic systems.

Other benefits ofhorticultural perlite are its neutral pH

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

its light weightmakes it ideal foruse in container

growing.

Other horticultural applications forperlite are as a

carrier for fertilizer, herbicides and pesticides and for

pelletizing seed. Horticultural perliteis as useful to the

home gardener as it isto the commercial grower. It is

used with equal success in greenhouse grossing, land-

scaping applications

and in

the home in houseplants.

Industrial Applications

Industrial applications for perlite are the most diverse,

ranging from high performancefillers forplastics to

cements forpetroleum, water and geothermal wells.

Other applications include its use as a filter media for

pharmaceuticals, food products, chemicals and

water

for municipal systems and swimmingpools.

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.

This same heat resistantproperty

is taken advantage ofwhen perliteis used in the manu-

facture ofrefractory bricks,

mortars, and pipe insula-

tion.

PERLITE INSTITUTE,

INC.

88

New Oorp PI~za,

Staten

Island,

NY 10306

718/351-5723

•

Fax

718/351-5725

•E-mail:

lnquiries@perlite.org

---

Exhibit

C

---

e

I

-

~J1IGIN

AND

CHARACTERISTICS

&n~~

petrographic term

(not a trade

a siliceous volcanic rock which

—

y

occurs

in certain

regions throughout

ortd.

the

distinguishing feature,

which

~oadfrom

other volcanic minerals is

its

lityto expand four to twenty times

its

JInat volume When heated to certain

ratures.

When heated above 1600

degrees F, crushed

ertite

cock expands

in a manner

similar to

op corn.

This expansion

is due to

the

we~~nce

of combined water within the crude

-

thck.

The combined

water vaporizes

~ heating process and creates

Ur!tles~

tiny

bubbles

in the

heat softened

~

lt)s these diminutive glass

)bles’whiblr account for its

bght

Jother exeptional physical

of

e?panded

perhte.

Expanded

-

-

~ctured

to weigh as little

pplte4to expandeq

‘~

1*Silb

I

~

-t

4

1

-

~*.

~i

I’

I

I

/;

p

-4

4

/4

C

.1

---

Mesh

+8

-8

+10

-10

+20

-20

+30

+50

TYPICAL SCREEN

ANALYSIS

(Packaged

in

4

Cu. ft. bags)

This listing

is for standard grades.

Oiher

grades available on

request.

Voiume

Weiaht

Packing

Density

1

Bag

wi.

31

to

34

Lbs.

+8

11

8

8

Lbs

per

Cu. ~

-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

Bag

Wt. 281032

Lbs.

-50 +100

-100

7.5

Lbs

per

cu.

ft.

Trace

38

22

18

10

-ii

Trace

41

18

20

10

10

+30

No. 39

-30

+50

-50

+100

to 32 Lbs.

-100 +200

-200

12

5

7

Lbs

per

Cu-

52

44

24

38

8

9

4

4

GRADE No.9

Bag

Wi. 26

to 30 Lbs.

7/

7-

Packing

Mesh

Volume

Weight

Density

K

GRADE No. 3S

Bag

WE.

lOb

14 Lbs.

+10

0

0

3

Lbs

per

Cu.

it.

-10+20

5

4

-20

+30

20

14

-30

+50

44

41

-50

+100

19

24

-100

12

17

2

~HT

-t

L

HLLt

~f--f+

+10

-10

+20

-20

+30

-30

+50

-50

+100

-100

0

5

14

48

22

11

~L

a-

t

±

0

3

10

44

32

11

e~

7 Lbs

per

Cu.

ft.

n-

-I-

-I--

ii

i

GRADE

No.

5

I

I

~

Bag Wi.

241030 Lbs.

+6

23

21

6.5 Lbs

per

Cu- it.

-6 +8

29

30

-8 +16

33

31

-16

15

18

-4

7

-4

Li

—

-‘

-

.

--

-~

-

-

-

-

1

—

a~a*’~’

-

mcpMALcoNoucTivrn’

---

--

.

mEnMALcoNbuqtivivrvs. COMPACTED

DENsITY

I

-

-ThEkMALcONOuWiTY-~

-

MEAN TEMpERAruRE

75

F

Mean Temperature

115

I

-

DENSITY

8

pcI

-

14

2173

_______

—

180

——~—

—

—

—

-

&

12

160

a

10

40

a

120

----

--

-

-

—

-

~

8

?I~3

-

~08c

6

t060

i

01

2

34

5

6

7

891011

~

DENSITY

pci

o

MEAN

TEMPERATURE

F

-

016018020022014026028030032

034035

-

-

-

A—

-

-

eTu

an/hr/sq Il/

a.

-

-

-

a

~I

~1I

1~

1

L..B1,R

Ia~Q

-

JTLwRe~earchjnc~

Reporis d~ted0~cemberZ4

-

--

-

-CD?

lao

flfl’T’~ON

-

t__

-:

January21964,J1J1y1H965.

‘-

:-

-

-

-

—

~

~‘-

-

~.

-~

‘9

630&RIVEB

ROAD’ HODGICU4S

Lu4NoIa6ot25

Thermal Condudivnyuf

ExpandedPerbie-Ci-yogenicFill Itistñation

a

-

-

PHONE:708-354-3350

•

~AX:708’-354-6698

GB. Kinz~r,

Jr.,

ASHRAE Journal,

February, t~S

and

i967.~

-

-

-

-

-

-

E MAILr

SI LBRJCO’@ AOL

coM

a

Perlite Institute

-

TDS 2-4

1983

-

-

a

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

01997

Slibr,00

Corporataon

0 45

0-40

0.35

0.30

0

-7

---

Exhibit

D

---

November 2004

Illinois

Environmental

Protection Agency

1EPNBOL/04-021

Bureau of Land

1021

North Grand Avenue East

P.O.

Box 19276

Springfield,

IL

62794-9276

Nonhazardous

Solid

Waste

Management and

Landfill

Capacity

in

Illinois

2003

Annual

U

Waste

disposed in

landfills,

•

Specification

pages

for 56

U

Waste handled by transfer

2001-2003

landfills,

111

transfer stations

stations, 2001-2003

Report

and 59

compost sites

•

Remaining

disposal Capacity

•

Waste generated

and recycled,

U

Waste composted,

as

of Jan.

1,2003,

and

Jan.

2003

2001-2003

Topics Covered

I, 2004

Printed on recycled

paper

---

Non hazardous

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

62794-9216

Printed

on

recycled paper

---

Contents

Additional Information and Acknowledgements

vU

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

Rl.1

Region Two:

Chicago Metropolitan

R2.l

Region Three:

Peoria/Quad

Cities

R3.l

Region

Four:

East Central

Illinois

R4.1

Region

Five: West Central

Illinois

R5.1

Region

Six:

Metropolitan East

St.

Louis

R6.l

Region Seven: Southern

Illinois

R7.l

Appendix

A:

Solid Waste

Landfill Owners and Operators: Alphabetic by Facility

Al

Appendix

B:

Solid Waste

Landfill Owners and Operators: Alphabetic by County

Bl

Appendix C:

Solid Waste

Landfills Ranked by Waste Received:

2003

Cl

Appendix 0:

Solid Waste

Landfills Ranked by Remaining

Capacities; as

of Jan.

1, 2004

Dl

Appendix

E:

Solid Waste Transfer Station Owners and

Operators: Alphabetic by

Facility

El

Appendix

F:

Solid Waste Transfer Station

Owners and

Operators: Alphabetic by County

El

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 List for 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:

2OO3~

---

Maps

and

Tables

--

State Solid Waste Surcharge Fees

2

National

Figures for 2000 Reported by USEPA

4

State of Origin ofWaste 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

Permitted 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 gainstrlosses)

Ri .1

Region One: Landfills:

Waste Accepted 2003; Remaining

Capacities Jan.

1,

2004

Ri .2

Region

One:

Transfer Stations:

Waste

Handled 2003

Ri .3

Region

One: Compost

Facilities: Waste

Accepted 2003

Ri .4

Region One:

Municipal

Waste Recycled

Rl.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 Iosses).

R3.1

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

lv

+

Nonhazardous Solid

Waste Management and Landfill

Capacity in Illinois:

2003

---

Maps

and Tables~

Region Five: Landfills and

Transfer Stations in 2003 (map depicting

capacity gains or losses)

R5.i

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.l

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.l

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 Capacity in Illinois:

2003

+

v

---

Additional

Information

and Acknowledgements~

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.il.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,

Renee 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 our 2003-2004 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 ourabandoned

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 +

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 Whitfield, 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.

Russell and

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

ManagementiSpringfield Transfer Station by Dan Emi,

E-n*r~menta1

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,

Springfielct

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

---

__________________________

Preface

I

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 many other 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 forwaste 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 for waste disposal.

Other landfills that expanded or were constructed at the beginning

of 2004,

include Winnebago Reclamation Services,

Rockford;

Prairie View Recycling and Disposal

Facility, Wilmington; Envirofil

of Illinois

Inc. 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 City of

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

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 ansi

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 coordinatorsis

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 locaftons

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 each facility’s location and hours of

operation, tipping fee, quantities

of wastes received for the

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 Capacity in Illinois:

2003 +

xi

---

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,

11

percent,

or about 6.2 million cubic

yards or

1.9 million tons,

came from

11

other states. We know this

because Illinois landfills

have reported these quantities to the

Illinois EPAsince

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 in Appendix 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

report recycling 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?

+

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

+

More transfer stations in

Chicagoland suburbs

and

elsewhere in

Illinois obtain

local

siting and permits to operate.

2003 Annual

•

Waste disposed

in landfills,

•

Specification

pages for

56

•

Waste handled by transfer

Re

ort

2001-2003

(in

gate cubic

landfills,

111

transfer stations

stations, 2001-2003

yards and

in gate tons)

and 59 compost sites

(in tons)

•

Remaining

disposal capacity

•

Waste generated

and recycled,

U

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 Capacityin 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 toimplement federal and state regulations.

Those

fees

are authorized under Senate Hill

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 ofwaste received each

year. Both of these fees

(Solid Waste Tipping Fee

and

Subtitle

D Fee) have been increased

beginning with the waste received on or afterJuly

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 are 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

D 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.Iyr.

$23,790

$3,120

between

10,000 and 50,000 cu. yds./yr.

$7,260

less than 10,000 cu.

yds.Iyr.

$1,050

$975

$210

2

+

Nonhazardous Solid Waste

Management and Landfill Capacityin Illinois:

2003

---

About

$1

million per acre

Delegated

Inspection

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 ofthumb says it takes about

$1

million per

acre to design,

build, permit, operate, and conductpost-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 TPI)

landfills. As with everything,

costs

have gone up, no doubt.

These costs

included pre-development 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 of waste

can

be locatedweeks

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

landfilling of liquids, motoroil,

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

Loads

are weighed and details

about them are recorded. They are then

taken to the exposed portion 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

milliongate 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).

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 of open 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 cu.

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 reportto

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

“gate 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.

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 ifiture.

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.

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

1,967

Percent

PPD2

4.5

AKA

Also

known as

CS

Compost site

LF

Landfill

LSW

Landscape waste

MRRF

Material Recycling and Recovery Facility

PPD/PCD

Pounds per person per day/Pounds per capita

per day

RDF

Recycling and

Disposal

Facility

TPD

Tons perday

1Ff

Tons per year

IS

Transfer station

National Figures

for 2000 Reported

by

39

Million

Tons

231.9

69.9

53.4

30.1

16.5

162.0

70

128.3

55.3

33.7

14.5

Source:

Municipal Solid Waste in the United states: 2000

Facts

&

Figures, U5EPA Office of solid

Waste and Emergency

Response,

June 2002

2

PPD

Pounds Per Person Per Day

4 +

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacityin 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

of page6, 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 have high values.

Waste

generated by 8.6 millionpeople of the Chicago Metropolitan region

then becomes a state-wide

problem, and also affects available

capacity in adjacent states of Indiana

and

Wisconsin.

Siting of new landfills or expansion ofexisting landfills in Northwest

and Central Illinois might help alleviate this situation. Land prices

are found to be lower inthese areas.

Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM),

Indianapolis, has not yet released its 2003

edition, but reported in its

“2002

Summary

of Indiana Solid Waste Facility Data” that

88

percent of waste imports come from 29

Illinois counties. Almost

1.4

million tons of Illinois waste were imported into

Indiana in 2002.

illinoiswaste 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.

Cook County, Illinois, (County Seat, Chicago) sent to Indiana’s

landfills and 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 putpressure 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

Iandfilled

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

C

1

Wisconsin

165,068

3

Other States

2

24.868

1

Total

6,206,855

100

1

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 ef

Region

2003

2003

2

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

3.2

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

+

2,399,721

+

4.4

100

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 2003.

Includes

5,800,977 cubic yards

of out-of-state waste (10

of state total) accepted by 26

Illinois landfills during2002:

Nonhazardous

Solid Waste

Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003 +

5

---

Illinois Landfills:

Remaining

Capacities Jan.

1, 2004 Versus Jan.

1,2003

Landfills

ReportIng

CapacIty

Capacity

Reported

Capacity.

Gate Cu. Yds.

Yearly ChanQe

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

Illinois ~

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

‘Includes capacity at one reactivated facility:

Sangamon Valley

Landfill which

re-opened

in

July 2003.

2

Does not include any capacity

forCommunity

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 declined only 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 of2l.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 Landfill

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

Estimated

Waste

Disposed, Cu. Yds.

Remaining Capacity,

Cu. Yds

Landfill

Life

Region

Population

2003

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

Illinois

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

Amounts reported

in

gate cu.

yds.

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..

6

+

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacityin 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

be able to accept in

the future. This volume

is known as remaining or available capacity, and

is expressed

in gate cubic yards,

meaning waste received at the

landfill’s gate before it is compacted. One

industrysul~ofthumbsaysift

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 lIlirutcotnties~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

Active landfills

accepting waste each year

I

‘98

‘99

‘00

‘01

‘02

‘03

Average

Landfill

Capacity Steady

Millions of gate cubic yards

‘93

‘94

‘95

‘96

‘97

‘98

‘99

‘00

‘01

‘02

‘03

‘04

800

725

650

575

500

425

350

275

200

Pushing Survivors To Build

Capacity

Available

landfill

space,

millions

of

gate cubic yards

While Disposal

Rates Remained Constant

Wastes landfihled, millions of

‘91

‘92 ‘93

‘94 ‘95

‘96 ‘97

‘98

‘99

‘00

‘01

‘02

‘03

180

150

120

90

60

30

0

‘94

‘95

‘96

‘97

‘94

‘95

‘96

‘97

‘98

‘99

‘00

‘01

‘02

‘03

‘04

15

12

9

6

3

0

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacityin Illinois:

2003 +

7

---

New Facilities Permitted to be Constructed or to Expand

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 landfihled

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 using burn 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:

landfilling:

73.1 percent; recycling: 25.3 percent

and

composting:

1.6 percent. These figures as outlined below in the pie chart might

be the

more accurate figures for Illinois.

One:

Northwestern

Illinois

Region

Landfill

Winnebago Rec.

Svs.

Rockford

Municipality

Opening

Date

Two:

Chicago

Metropolitan

Three:

Peoria/Quad

cities

4-27-04

Prairie View RDF

Details

Three:

Peoria/Quad

Cities

Design Airspace

(cu.

yds.)’

Wilmington

1-16-04

N

& S

Unit

Vertical &

Horizontal

expansion

Envirofil

of

Illinois Inc.

Macomb

Five:

West

Central Illinois

1,798,840

Indian Creek LE #2

Hopedale

223 ac.

Six:

Metro East St.

Louis

Sangamon

Valley LF

Springfield

Seven:

Southern

Illinois

4-20-04

57

ac.

horizontal/19 ac.

vertical

Milam RDF

30,196,438

6-30-04

Perry Ridge

7-7-03

36.27 ac.

Total

9,250,000

F. St.

Louis

10-16-03

DuQuoin

50.31 ac.

lateral exp.

2,661,136

5-2004

Includes space for waste, intermediate

ordaily cover and capacity (in-place cubic yards)

4.75

million exp.

5.135,625

141

ac.

19,450,000

14,872,900

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

Cemposting

1.6

Recycling

25.3

Landfllllng

73.1’!.

8

+

Nonha zardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003

---

Amount recycled

Solid waste coordinators have many priorities

to balance.

More

pressing priorities of public health concern such as West NileVirus

and

bioterrorism, plus limited funding for solid waste planning

studies, have diverted the attention of many 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 or higher.

4

~1

Municipal Waste Generated & Recycled

Estimated

Waste Generated

Waste Recycled

Region

Population

Tons

PCD1

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;

conceming 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 Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

2003+

9

---

On-Farm

Composting

Composting is increasing by 3.5 percent

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 of

that farmers 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).

Ifthe 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.

Landscape wastes were banned from Illinois landfills

beginning July

1,

1990. The number of compost 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 of the

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 ofthe

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,

run-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 not required

to

meet are posting an entrance sign and record keeping of

complaints. They are not subject

to any of the 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.

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

5

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.)

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill 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.state.il.us

has more details about

the rule-making process.

In 2003,44 of the

91

active transfer stations (48.4 percent)

voluntarily reported handling nearly 5.3 million tons of trash, or

nearly

30.4 percent ofwaste 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 of transfer stations can

be expected to grow, as will the amount of waste they will handle.

The Agency requested data from transfer stations, but not all of the

facilities chose to voluntarily return the survey;

so it is assumed that

transferred amounts of waste 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 wastetires 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/Iand/tires/

images/project-tread.pdf

For

further information on the Illinois

EPA’s Used Tire Program, go

to http://www.epa.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 wilt 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 thatwere 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 result of

oversight by 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: Northwestern 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

1

Each

region

contains active sites

that did

not report amounts of waste

accepted.

Nonhazardous Solid Waste Management and Landfill Capacity in Illinois:

20034

11

---

Alternative re-use of

Permitting requirements of Illinois 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 orother 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

ofthe 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.epa.state.iI.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.•

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 identifying 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 of permit 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 ofthe 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