Ohio EPA Acts on Discoversy Thet Landfill Leachate Could Pose A Threat to Public Health

The phrasing of this article is quite surprising. Elsewhere it has long been recognised that leachate can, if it gets into water supplies, be a major hazard to human health. In any landfill in other than a desert environment there is always enough leachate to jeopardise aquifers and watercourses if these are present in the local geology, and once in an aquifer the leachate may then migrate to be drawn into public water supply wells.

(Please note that the video below is included to point out the hazardous nature of leachate, and is not connected with the article.)

Throughout the EU this has been recognised for nearly 30 years now, since the Council passed a law (Directive) on all EU nations that as a matter of principle makes it illegal to pollute any uderground water, whether used for public extraction wells or not. The journalist who wrote this article is clearly not aware of these facts, howecer, it is good that the dangers of leachate to public health are being treated seriously in Ohio, and the authorities are acting on behalf of the people to ensure they are kept safe. Please read the original article, not just our excerpt below, but follwing the link at the bottom:

The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency proposed rule changes for construction and demolition debris landfills, which could mean more protection for Ohio's groundwater but higher operating costs for some landfills in the Mahoning Valley.

According to officials at the Ohio EPA, acting on a request by Ohio legislators, the agency conducted a leachate study and determined that leachate from Ohio CDD landfills could pose a threat to public health and the environment if it were to be released to groundwater or surface water.

''What we've done is added some provisions for making sure that doesn't happen,'' said Linda Fee Oros, spokeswoman with the Ohio EPA.

If adopted, those new restrictions could apply to two licensed CDD landfills in Trumbull County, Total Waste Logistics LAS LLC in Girard and the Lafarge-owned Lordstown Construction Recovery in Lordstown.

A CDD landfill differs from other types of landfills, including municipal landfills, in that it can only take materials from buildings, said Linda Fee Oros, spokeswoman with the Ohio EPA.

But Tim Page, general manager of Lordstown Construction Recovery, said he does not believe increased regulations on landfill leachate will not hinder operations there.

''Our leachate is not circulated. It's all treated and hooked up to the sewers and sent through the sewers,'' he said.

Page said his company is in discussions with the Ohio EPA regarding the proposed changes, but that they are very early in the process and that nothing has been decided.

Another area being discussed is in the increase in financial assurance required to be paid when licenses are issued each year.

''What they are asking for is more dollars per acre to be spent because the cost of closure has increased over the past few years,'' Page said. ''The materials you bring on site, the fuels and machinery, has gone up. So, there's definitely a need for an increase there of some sort.''

Not unlike other businesses, these types of landfills can be affected by the economy, which could cause them to close. If the business is unable to pay to properly close, the responsibility is then burdened on the state.

''You may have hard financial times and need to close. If the business doesn't generate enough money to pay for those costs, that would be a financial impact,'' Page said.

CDD landfills can only accept debris from construction and demolition activities; packaging resulting from the use of construction materials where the packaging is incidental to the load; tree stumps, trunks and branches exceeding 4 inches in diameter where the branches are clean of leaves and small branches; and asbestos-containing materials as long as a NESHAP air permit has been granted.

A CDD landfill is required to keep records of accepted and rejected waste loads, activities and the working face, preventing fires, proper management of surface water and leachate and prevention of nuisances or health hazards.

They are also required to monitor ground water if the facility is located near wells or an aquifer.

The process to have the proposed changes becoming rules is still in its early stages and the Ohio EPA is working to fine tune their proposals.

''At this point, we are looking at the comments we received and are working to incorporate those into our rules if changes are needed,'' Oros said.

A hearing will be held with Ohio's Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review regarding the possible rule changes. No date has yet been set for the hearing.

View the original article here

New EPA Leachate Monitoring Rules Affect Local Landfills

New landfill rules will mean increased costs for old landfills in the US County, and include, five key areas, for a post-closure care period, post-closure care financial assurance, more post-closure care period imonitoring if there are judged to be health or environmental effects, and a procedure to adjust final closure financial assurance.

The full details are given from the Zanesville Post article which descrobes them, below. Please visit the original site:

ZANESVILLE -- The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency has proposed new rules that would require the state's licensed construction and demolition debris landfills to regularly test groundwater for an expanded number of contaminants.

Two of the state's 55 licensed landfills which would be subject to the new rules are local -- Sidwell Materials' site off of Limestone Valley Road in Newton Township and the County Road 286 landfill in Coshocton County.

Sidwell Materials Asbestos Hazard Evaluation Specialist Drake Prouty said the company will abide by whatever rules and regulations ultimately are set forth by the agency.

He said that EPA representatives visit the landfill at 4620 Limestone Valley Road quarterly and for unannounced spot testing of groundwater at the 9-acre site, and no problems have been found.

A legislative study committee and the EPA proposed tougher regulations regarding water monitoring or leachate at the bottom of landfill sites in 2005, but backed off after officials complained the new regulations would be too expensive to comply with.

That proposal would have allowed for 64 different toxic chemicals to be tested for, instead of the 19 currently required by the EPA. The new proposal expands that number to 77 pollutants which could "leach" in to groundwater supplies, including iron, sulfate, manganese and even toxic adhesives.

Based on the prior study which determined lthat landfill leachate poses a threat to public health and the environment if released to ground water or surface water, and public comments received on the draft rules issued earlier this year, Ohio EPA developed the current proposed rules.

The amended proposed rules focus on five key areas:

- Five-year post-closure care period.

- Post-closure care financial assurance provided by the facility.

- Extension of post-closure care period if there are health or environmental effects.

- A procedure to adjust final closure financial assurance with the issuance of an annual license.

- Monitor landfill eachate at the bottom of the landfill for an established list of contaminants, and if detected, monitor ground water for the detected contaminant.

View the original article here

Long-Term Leachate Emissions From Municipal Solid Waste Landfills Are Unknown

The Swiss have invariably been highly environmentally aware, and for a long time have looked after their environment in an exemplary fashion. The 'Guidelines to waste product control in Switzerland ' ( EKA, 1986 ) were set in 1986, well before many states. One mandatory objective of this as a code of sound practise has been that all waste product management procedures need to provide materials which either are reusable or can be dumped in a rubbish heap without any negative or damaging environmental impact for long-term periods. This type of landfilling would be called 'final storage ' and the wastes in the final storage must naturally by inference have 'final storage quality'. Emissions from a last storage quality dump must be a close fit with the quality in the natural environment without any extra treatment. Another imperative objective of the Swiss waste product control policy is that each generation handles its waste to a standing of last storage quality. So that the reactions in a dump to take it to last storage quality have to be quick enough to all be finished inside thirty years, and ideally less.

As an effect of this policy, has each borough's solid waste landfills been proved to be able to get to the last storage quality within about 30 years after disposal? The final storage concept focuses predominantly on the solid waste itself stabilizing so that the new generation won't have to depend instead on the synthesised or natural barriers round the rubbish heap body, and the answer's a powerful no! The dump body has to reach an 'inert ' state so that the emissions from the rubbish heap have compatibility with the environment for long-term periods regardless of the retardation and attenuation capacities of surrounding materials. But this inactive state depends on geochemical properties of the dump site materials. The concern is that compounds in the inactive dump body may become 'mobile ' when the physical and chemical conditions in the rubbish heap change, and this will continue to be damaging even centuries after the dump was filled and revived.

A correct lining and a correct geological environment are basic absolute must-haves for last storages. They're compulsory for containment, for monitoring and, last although not least, for environmental security reasons.

Ditched in a dump, community solid waste ( MSW ) will at last come into contact water, which enters the rubbish heap continuously thru rain, even after capping as the seal can't ever be perfect over a period of time. As a result of this contact, many chemical and microbiological reactions occur. Natural compounds can be modified to other natural chemicals or inorganic compounds. Inorganic compounds can experience many chemical reactions and can be changed to other inorganic compounds.

The products of these reactions and parts of non-reacted MSW can, and at last will, be transported by leachate and by gas into the encompassing area. In addition, many physical processes, like adsorption, dissolution, rain, etc, can occur simultaneously. a MSW rubbish heap can be accepted as a 'partly continued chemical and microbiological fixed bed reactor'. Now that isn't a great thing to have in communication with groundwater which should regularly later be used as drinking water. It is also regarded as therapy facility where the target it is to get it to self-treat to a rubbish heap body of last storage quality. Major research and monitoring of landfills is a new development, controlled landfills having existed for 20 years or so already.

The present controlled landfills so are still in the exhaustive reactor phase in which radical microbiological decompositions occur.

The behavior of landfills in this period can be considered roughly properly using current models. But no experience exists regarding the long term behavior ( over even 30 years ) of MSW landfills. Thanks to the highly difficult nature of the systems, a specific prediction of long-term behavior of MSW landfills is almost impossible. So it's no exaggeration to claim that long-term leachate emissions from city solid waste landfills are unknown, and yet all across the globe each day, new and larger landfills are being built and stuffed with waste. It's all a big experiment and science hasn't determined the result. Even the Swiss, who are possibly some the most responsible guardians of the environment in the world have fallen far short of their 1986 ideals.

How can we be so complacent? Shouldn't we all be worried?

Article is based upon the paper "Long-Term Leachate Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, Hasan Belevi and Peter Baccini, Switzerland, presented at the International Symposia on Sanitary Landfills held in Sardinia (Italy)"

Many people find this fact to be of great concern. Is all of landfilling just a huge experiment which might cause huge problems in the future? Part 2 of this article is available were we further discuss landfill final storage quality. Go there now to read more!

Landfills pose a health risk - Malaysia Star

MOST people object to having a landfill near their houses. We generate rubbish but once it enters the dustbins or recycling bin, we want nothing more to do with it.

The main reason is fear of possible health problems arising from contact with pollutants escaping from waste management sites, but the problem is set to grow over the next decade due to our throwaway lifestyle.

Each year, we produce more than nine million tons of household waste, but only recycle 3% of it. There is no positive sign that waste generation is decreasing. As a result, a large number of former mines and quarries have been lined with water-proof material and filled with rubbish. As suburbia spreads and brown field sites are developed, more Malaysian families than ever before are living close to landfill sites.

In landfill sites, bacteria break down food and other organic materials, producing potentially pollution liquids and gases such as ammonia, acids and heavy metals, mixed into a nasty cocktail called leachate.

All these contaminants are cause for concern if they end up in natural

water-courser and drinking water supplies. Many such cases have been recorded lately in Malaysia.

Leachate can destroy the well balanced eco-system and is very harmful to human. It is clear that poorly managed landfill will lead to serious environmental problem such as the recent incidence of raw water pollution caused by leachate seepage from a landfill.

Hence, leachate management becomes an important issue in deciding which strategy to apply in any planning process involving the closure of dumps and siting and development of landfills. The main objective of any leachate management will be to ensure that landfill waste does not impose any unacceptable short term or long term risks to the environment or to public health.

ETHAYA RAJAN MOKANATAS,

Kuala Lumpur.

View the original article here