appendix d the state of garbage in missouri (1999) · buying recycled products: consuming wisely...
TRANSCRIPT
APPENDIX D
THE STATE OF GARBAGE IN MISSOURI(1999)
Missouri Department of Natural ResourcesDivision of Environmental QualitySolid Waste Management Program
1999The State of Garbage
inMissouri
Table ofContents
Introduction
This report examines the status of solid waste management in Missouri and
presents a historical overview. It alsoserves as a snapshot of the current stateof solid waste management in Missouri.Additionally, potential policyconsiderations regarding solid wastemanagement practices in Missouri aredescribed.
Information in this document is themost comprehensive examination of themanagement of solid waste in Missourithat has been compiled to date.
This report will serve both to informinterested parties and to stimulatediscussion as Missouri�s solid wasteplanning process moves into a period ofincreased coordination with localorganizations around the state.
Currently, Missouri is managing its solidwaste well. The Department of NaturalResources continually strives to stayabreast of changes in solid wastemanagement issues brought about bypublic concerns, legislative trends, newtechnologies and changes in theeconomy.
One question drives our solid wasteplanning process: How can we helpMissouri citizens, businesses and localgovernments improve solid wastemanagement to better protect publichealth and the environment?
A Short History of Solid Waste in Missouri ............ 2
What�s in the Trash Can? ....................................... 8
Missouri Waste Characterization Studies
What�s NOT in the Trash Can?............................. 12
Missouri�s Waste Reduction Efforts
Status of Integrated Solid Waste Management ...... 16
Waste Reduction (Prevention)
Reuse
Recycling
Incineration With Energy Recovery
Disposal
Incineration Without Energy Recovery
Landfilling
Missouri�s Next Step ........................................... 32
APPENDIX ......................................................... 34
In the title of this publication, we recognizethat �garbage� is only one fraction of the totalwaste stream. However, because the term isuniversally associated with solid waste, weallowed ourselves artistic license.
-1-
-2-
First attempts at solidwaste managementbegan in 1955, when
the state passed the CountyOption Dumping Ground Law.This attempt to regulate solidwaste disposal statewide wasineffective because only 22 ofMissouri�s 114 countiesexercised their option ofadopting the law.
Solid waste managementimproved with the Solid WasteDisposal Act, enacted in1965as Public Law 89-272 by theU.S. Congress. Theact funded astatewide survey ofsolid wastepractices. Thissurvey, conductedfrom 1968 through1970 by theMissouri Division ofHealth, concludedthat solid wastemanagement inMissouri waslargely unplannedand was causingserious threats topublic health andthe environment.
The survey located some2,600 dumps andcharacterized 457 authorizedland disposal sites. Ninety-seven percent of theauthorized sites contributed toair, land or water pollution.Almost all sites allowed openburning of waste.
Primarily in response to thefindings of the survey, theMissouri Solid WasteManagement Law was passedin 1972. The law requiredlocal governments to plan and
implement sound solid wastemanagement practices. It alsogave them the authority toenact ordinances, collect fees ortaxes and enter into contractsnecessary for carrying out theseresponsibilities. By giving theDepartment of NaturalResources the authority toestablish criteria for landdisposal, this law essentiallyoutlawed open dumping ofwaste.
The result was a vastimprovement in solid waste
A Short History of SolidWaste in Missouri
-3-
management across thestate. By 1975, more than550 town-operated dumpswere closed, replaced by125 engineered landfills.By 1981, over 400communities hadimplemented solid wastemanagement plansaddressing storage,collection, transportationand disposal of residentialand commercial waste.
The next significant advancein solid waste managementoccurred in 1986 whenSenate Bill 475 amendedthe Missouri Solid WasteManagement Law. These newchanges focused on improvingresource recovery and solidwaste disposal practices. TheEnvironmental Improvementand Energy Resources Authority(EIERA) was required to carryout a study on the quantity ofMissouri�s solid waste, itscomposition, managementpractices and recovery potential.The result of EIERA's effortswas a seven volume report,Statewide Resource RecoveryFeasibility and Planning Study,published in 1987.
The report included 18recommended actions for thestate of Missouri to increaseresource conservation andrecovery.
The Department of EconomicDevelopment was directed toencourage the development andexpansion of businesses andindustries that provide marketsfor recycled materials andenergy recovered from solidwaste.
The State of Missouri Office ofAdministration was directed topurchase more recycledproducts, to promote therecycling of paper, oil and otherrecovered materials. In capitalimprovement projects, theOffice of Administration wasdirected to consideralternatives that use recycledmaterials for construction or
that use solid waste for energyproduction.
Important changes in solidwaste disposal included arequirement for all new andactive landfills to provide afinancial guarantee that allactivities necessary to properlyclose the site would becompleted. It required sanitarylandfills to provide formonitoring and maintenance ofthe site for 20 years afterclosure.
Requirements were made forleachate collection systems,collection of groundwatermonitoring data and for landfilloperation by state-certified
Callaway County 4th graders arrive for a day at Little Dixie Lake to study environmentalexhibits and displays. They are getting ideas for their annual poster contest.
-4-
• Recovering and using energyfrom solid waste
• Incinerate or disposing ofwaste in a sanitary landfill
In 1990, the next majorrevision of Missouri's SolidWaste Management Law(Senate Bill 530) recognizedthe importance of the hierarchyand incorporated many of itsconcepts. To focus the effortsof individuals, businesses, stateand local government, a goalwas set to divert 40 percent ofthe waste stream from landfilldisposal.
environmental impacts of solidwaste management and tomaximize waste prevention,resource recovery andrecycling. A copy of the policymay be found in the Appendix.Following the hierarchy involvesthe following steps, using eachalternative to the greatestextent possible beforeproceeding to the next:
• Reducing the amount of solidwaste that is created
• Reusing, recycling orcomposting solid waste
technicians. To ensure thatthese new requirements weremet, the bill enhanced theDepartment of NaturalResources� enforcementauthority by instituting civilpenalties for violations of theSolid Waste Management Law.The department was alsoempowered to suspend orrevoke landfill permits andprocessing facility permits.
The Solid Waste ManagementLaw was further amended in1988. These amendmentsincluded requirements forinfectious waste managementand provided for denial of solidwaste permits based on theviolation history of theapplicant. The amendmentsalso defined and allowed lessstringent requirements forutility waste landfills andrequired city or countyordinances to be consistent withtheir solid waste managementplans.
Although the amendments in1988 did not address wastereduction or recycling, interestin alternatives to disposal wasgrowing. In 1989, thenGovernor John Ashcroftannounced the Missouri Policyon Resource Recovery. Thispolicy directed state and localgovernment to apply theintegrated waste managementhierarchy to minimize the
Solid Waste Management Regionsof Missouri
Solid Waste Management Regional Boundaries
-5-
The law created 20 solid wastemanagement districts acrossthe state to foster regional cityand county cooperation to helpachieve this goal. Regionalplanning based on thehierarchy was seen as a criticalmechanism for change. Duringthe next several years, thedistricts played a significantrole in the development of aninfrastructure for recycling.
The revised law levied a landfilltonnage fee to create the SolidWaste Management Fund. It
also designated the fund�sdistribution for resourcerecovery grants, reduction ofillegal dumps and statewideeducation and training insolid waste management,among other incentives.Solid waste education isprimarily an effort to reducewaste through changingattitudes and behavior.
The law also banned leadacid batteries, majorappliances, waste oil, wholeautomobile tires and yardwaste from landfill disposal.
In 1994, Missouri adopted newlandfill regulations thatrequired compliance with newfederal Subtitle D standards forlandfill location restriction,operating and design criteria,groundwater monitoring andcorrective action, and closureand postclosure requirements,including financial assurance.
In 1995, the most recent majoramendment to Missouri�s solidwaste management lawsignificantly changed thepermitting requirements and
Waste ReductionMaterials Exchange Programs of Missouri Directory
Model Plan Guidelines for Comprehensive Solid Waste Management
Waste Reduction Tips for Businesses
Waste Reduction Tips for Households
RecyclingMissouri Buys Recycled Recycling Economics: Higher Costs are an Illusion
Show-Me State Sets Recycling Precedents
Three R�s: Reduce, Reuse and Recycle
Buying Recycled Products: Consuming Wisely
How to Dispose of Christmas Trees
Total Recycling System, Fact Sheet
�Solid waste education is primarily aneffort to reduce waste through changing
attitudes and behavior.�Educational and Informational Materials Developed by the Department
CompostingCircle Compost Bin
Homeowners� Composting Guide
Wood and Wire Stationary 3-Bin System
Wood and Wire Cage Type Composting Bin
Worm Composting System: Compost Bin Design
Educational MaterialsWild Wood Babes, Adventures in Waste Reduction
Wild Wood Babes, Learn About Reuse
Recycle with the Wild Wood Babes
3 Rs Coloring and activities books for children grades K-3
Quart Jar Worm Farm Design Sheet
Soft-Drink Bottle Hummingbird Feeder
Educational VideosTalkin' Trash: The Buy-Recycled Loop Includes Teachers Guide, Grades 4-8
Break It Down: The Compost Connection Includes Teachers Guide, Grades 4-8
-6-
process for solid wastefacilities. It requiresinspections during closure,post-closure and correctiveaction plans and changedmany provisions of the wastetire law. The provisionsinclude requiring financialassurance for some tirehandlers, and revised the lawrelating to solid wastemanagement plans. Theprovisions also revised thelaw relating to the SolidWaste Management Fund andthe Solid Waste AdvisoryBoard.
New regulations for permit-exempt and beneficial-usepilot project activities cameinto effect July 30, 1997.While the new regulationshave expanded opportunitiesfor waste reduction anddiversion, the beneficial
reuse of some types of solidwaste may require morespecialized testing, andpermits from other programswithin DNR or from otheragencies.
Some waste types mayrequire site-specificconditions that may prohibittheir beneficial reuse. Thedepartment will need toprovide guidance throughtechnical bulletins or otherpublications, and streamlinethe approval process to makethe new regulations moreeffective.
Fly ash, a waste generated incoal powerplants, is usuallydisposed of in landfills. Thedepartment worked with theelectric power industry todevelop a general set oftesting standards andconditions under which fly
ash could be usedwith minimaldepartmentaloversight. Theseground rules cansubsequently beapplied to almost anyfly ash project,speeding theapproval process andsaving both taxpayersand industry money.This generalapproach will be
useful for other beneficialreuse projects.
During the spring andsummer of 1999, GovernorMel Carnahan signed into lawtwo significant pieces oflegislation affecting solidwaste management. First, thestate's 50-cent per tire fee,collected on each new tiresold in Missouri, wasextended to January 1, 2004.
This will enable DNR tocontinue the cleanup of wastetire dumpsites and encouragethe recycling of scrap tirematerials. The second pieceof legislation will allowconcerned citizens toparticipate earlier and moreoften in the siting andpermitting process forlandfills. The process willcreate opportunities for opencommunication between the
-7-
department, the landfillpermit applicant and theresidents living near aproposed facility.
SummarySince the mid-1950s,Missouri has made atransition from unhealthyopen dumps to today�sengineered, permitted andregulated landfill sites.Integrated solid wastemanagement planning, whichrecognizes that some�wastes� may actually beresources, is widely practicedthroughout the state.
Missouri set its goal toachieve a 40 percentreduction in waste generatedfor disposal by January1998. See the chapter,What�s NOT in the TrashCan, to read more about thisgoal.
Solid Waste Management Program displays explain the work of the program tocitizens at an Earth Day celebration at Whiteman Air Force Base.
-8-
To evaluate previous efforts and formulate future waste
management strategies, a studyof the composition and quantityof solid waste is essential. Eachyear the department estimatesthe quantity of waste generatedand the amount landfilled. By1998, Missourians weregenerating close to eightmillion tons of solid waste
annually. The next chapter willdiscuss this evaluation further.
An understanding of thecomponents of the wastestream enables decision makersto set priorities and focusresources.
One factor that must beconsidered is the source or typeof generator of the wastestream. Although hard data hasnot been compiled, the chart
below provides one estimate ofthe relative proportions of themajor waste streams inMissouri. Two studies have beenconducted which look at themunicipal solid waste (MSW)stream's piece of the pie, whichincludes residential andcommercial waste.
The Statewide ResourceRecovery Feasibility andPlanning Study completed in
What�s in the Trash Can?
Components of the Missouri Solid Waste Stream
Figure 1
-9-
Missouri Solid Waste CompositionMATERIAL CATEGORY
1987EIERA Study
1996-7M.A.P. Study
Percent by Weight Percent by WeightCardboard 15.3% 6.7%
Newsprint 6.6% 7.9%
Magazines 1.7% 3.7%
High Grade (office) Paper 3.0% 3.6%
Mixed Paper 12.7% 15.5%
PAPER TOTALS 39.3% 37.3%Clear Glass 3.0% 3.2%
Brown or Amber Glass 0.8% 1.5%
Green Glass 0.7% 0.4%
Other Glass N/A 0.6%
GLASS TOTALS 4.5% 5.8%Aluminum Beverage Cans 1.0% 1.5%
Other Aluminum 0.5% 0.8%
Other Non-ferrous 0.1% 0.2%
Steel (Ferrous) Food Cans 2.0% 3.1%
Other Ferrous 3.4% 1.1%
Oil Filters N/A 0.1%
METAL TOTALS 7.0% 6.9%PET #1 (primarily plastic beverage
containers) 0.3% 1.7%
HDPE # 2 (primarily plastic milk jugs) 0.4% 2.1%
Plastic Fi lm or Wrap N/A 3.7%
Other Plastic 7.0% 6.9%
PLASTIC TOTALS 7.7% 14.4%Food Waste 8.3% 18.7%
Yard Waste 8.3% N/A
Other Wood Waste N/A 0.8%
Textiles 3.9% 4.0%
Diapers 1.5% 4.2%
Other Organics 12.2% 3.2%
ORGANIC TOTALS 34.2% 30.8%Fines 2.9% 3.3%
Other Inorganics 3.4% 1.5%
INORGANIC TOTALS 6.3% 4.8%TOTAL *99.0% 100.0%* does not sum to 100 percent due to rounding Source: Statewide Resource Recovery Feasibility and Planning Study, Volume II Solid Waste Characterization Report, December 1987, Environmental Improvement and Energy Resources
Authority; and The Missouri Waste Composition Study, 1997, Midwest Assistance Program
Table 1
-10-
1987 by EIERA included anexamination of the municipalsolid waste streams at fourlandfills. A summary of theresults of this study are shownin Table 1. This datacontributed to the developmentof recommendations in thestudy.
The percentage of yard waste,coupled with the fact that thismaterial could be easily sourceseparated, indicated thepotential for diverting thismaterial from landfills. Thehigh percentage of cardboardrevealed that the commercialsector could play an importantrole in waste diversion. Thedata from this study alsobecame an importantcomponent of the1991 ModelPlan Guidelines for
Comprehensive Solid WasteManagement, developed by thedepartment's Solid WasteManagement Program.
During 1996 and 1997, theMissouri Waste CompositionStudy was conducted by theMidwest Assistance Program(MAP). This study, fundedthrough a statewide DNRproject grant, focused on thecomposition of and changes inthe MSW stream. Samples ofMSW were taken from wastehaulers at landfills or transferstations in 19 of the 20Missouri Solid WasteManagement Districts.Although the methodology usedwas somewhat different thanthat employed by the 1987EIERA study, the results fromeach can be compared Table 1.
The MSW portion of thetotal waste stream usuallygets the most attention.However, industrial processwaste and wastes generatedby construction anddemolition activities togethermake up approximately 43percent of the total wastestream. These types of wastehave great potential forreduction, reuse andrecycling.
The 1987 StatewideResource RecoveryFeasibility and PlanningStudy quantified the amountof industrial waste generatedin the state using a statisticalmodel based on employmentdata. This study did notattempt to determine thecomposition of the industrialwaste stream. More data willbe available when a currentstudy by MAP, funded by aDNR project grant, iscompleted. In the MAPstudy, industrial,construction and demolitionwastes will be examined atlandfills to better understandthe types of waste and theirrelative quantities.
Recyclables are hand sorted at Civic Recycling in Columbia.
-11-
The Missouri Waste Composition Study was ableto draw several conclusions, summarized here:
1. The Missouri MSW stream haschanged significantly over the past 10years.Two seasonal waste sorts at four Missouri landfillsindicate a significant increase in plastics. Thisincrease is due in large part to containers andpackaging, especially plastic materials PET andHDPE. There has also been a large increase infood wastes, increasing from 8.3 percent in 1987to 18.7 percent in 1996.
On the positive side, there was a dramaticdecrease in the amount of other organics such asyard waste in the MSW stream. The amount ofthese carbon-based materials fell from more than21 percent in 1987 to 3.2 percent in 1990,thanks largely to the yard waste ban in 1990�sSenate Bill 530.
2. There is very little volume change inthe MSW stream from one season tothe next.With the possible exception of the holiday season,it appears that the composition of the MSWstream remains constant throughout the year.
3. There are some local factors thataffect changes in the MSW streamthroughout Missouri.On the whole, the composition of the MSWstream remains fairly constant from one area ofthe state to another. However, there are somelocal factors that seem to affect it. Metropolitanareas tend to have a much higher percentage ofnewsprint and �other organics.� Tourist areashave higher concentrations of glass, aluminumbeverage cans and plastics.
4. Recycling programs that provideeconomic incentives have a definiteeffect on the MSW stream.Recycling programs vary greatly from one areato another, and the effects on those wastestreams also vary. However, some communitieshave been particularly successful. For example,the City of Maryville diverts approximately 12percent of its total waste stream throughrecycling alone. A probable reason for thissuccess is that the city-owned landfill does notcharge haulers to accept recyclable materials.
The City of Chillicothe has had similar successby using a unit-based pricing system, offeringcurbside recycling as an incentive to reducedisposal costs.
The City of Columbia uniquely offers yetanother method intended to encourage re-cycling, a beverage container deposit ordinance.
Considerably less glass, PET and aluminum canbe found in Columbia�s waste stream as a resultof this law, designed to encourage the return ofused beverage containers.
5. There are economic opportunitiesavailable in recycling a portion of theMSW stream.Approximately 37 percent of the materials inthe MSW stream are economically feasible torecycle. Recycling all these materials wouldgenerate an estimated $137 million per year.However, the actual benefit would exceed $160million per year, since $36 million would beavoided in landfill tipping fees (figures based onthe 1997 market).
Other benefits of an increase in recyclinginclude conserving natural resources, reducingthe energy costs in the production of goods,extending the life span of landfills, andproviding employment opportunities in therecovered materials industry.
What are some insights that can be gained bystudying the waste stream?
-12-
To evaluate Missouri�sprogress in reducingwaste, the department�s
Solid Waste ManagementProgram strives to obtain themost accurate data on wastereduction possible. The methodfor tracking waste reduction hasevolved over time, but theprogram�s current method of
person per year, or 7.3 poundsper person per day.
Since October 1990, Missouriwaste disposal facilities havebeen required by law to reportthe amount of waste they receiveon a quarterly basis. Thesetonnage reports include in-statewaste disposal and waste that is
tracking still uses 1990 as thebase year for measurement. Inaccordance with the goal set in1990, DNR estimatedMissouri�s waste disposal forbase year 1990. The base yearestimate concluded that 6.8million tons of solid waste wassent to landfills for disposal in1990. That is 2,660 pounds per
What�s NOT in the Trash Can?Missouri Waste Reduction Efforts
Annual Waste Generation, Disposal & DiversionsnoTniserugiF 0991 1991 2991 3991 4991 5991 6991 7991
etsaWdiloSnidetareneG
iruossiM
000,045,7 535,185,7 299,436,7 466,996,7 284,367,7 108,066,7 520,698,7 520,149,7
etsaWdiloSlasopsiDllifdnaL
000,008,6 593,244,6 446,797,5 366,326,5 771,258,5 522,107,5 337,033,5 365,825,5
atipaCrePlaunnAlasopsiD
33.1 52.1 21.1 70.1 01.1 70.1 99.0 20.1
etsaWdiloSdetreviD
000,457 041,931,1 843,738,1 100,670,2 503,119,1 675,959,1 292,565,2 264,214,2
diloSfotnecrePdetreviDetsaW
%01 %51 %42 %72 %52 %62 %33 %03
Table 2
-13-
Table 2. Thesenumbers includeindustrial andcommercial wastedisposal.
The latest surveyconducted by thedepartment�s SolidWaste ManagementProgram indicatesthat the amount ofsolid waste going tolandfills in 1997 wasreduced by 30 percent
since 1990. Waste reductionpercentages for all years from1990 through 1997 are noted inFigure 2.
Historically this number hasfluctuated due to a variety offactors, including enactment oflegislation, market demand forrecovered material, landfillclosures and import/exporttrends. The 1997reduction estimateshows a 3 percent dropfrom the 33 percentfigure calculated for1996. However, per-capita disposal isshown to havedecreased significantlysince 1990 in Figure3.
In 1990, per personsolid waste disposal
exported out of state throughtransfer stations.
Waste hauled across state lineswithout going through a transferstation is estimated by phonesurvey of landfills in the statesbordering Missouri. Thedepartment�s Solid WasteManagement Program usesdisposal totals calculated fromthe sum of the tonnage reportand the export survey.
To control for populationchanges, census projectionsfrom the Office ofAdministration, Division ofBudget and Planning, were usedto determine per person disposalrates for each year. Thiscalculation yielded the yearlytotal solid waste disposaladjusted for population shown in
was 2,660 pounds per year. Bythe end of calendar year 1997,per person solid waste disposalwas 2,040 pounds per year, areduction of 620 pounds perperson per year.
Factors that have had an effecton the waste reduction rateinclude a robust period ofeconomic activity and theconstant per-capita generationrate. A constant generationrate was decided on in 1990 asa standard to measure annualreduction progress. While thishas been useful for purposes ofcalculating reduction rates, it ispresumable that the generationrate fluctuates with theprevailing economic climate.
Although the 40 percent wastereduction goal has not yet been
Figure 2
Figure 3
19901991199219931994199519961997
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
1.25
1.5
Per Capita Disposal
Per Capita Generation
Generation vs. Disposal
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Per
cent
Tons
per
Yea
r
Reduction by Year in %
-14-
achieved, Missouri�s goal tomaximize waste reduction isongoing. DNR promotes anintegrated approach to solidwaste management using acombination of alternatives.
These alternatives arediscussed in the followingchapter.
Bales of corrugated recycled cardboard being prepared for shipping.
Drop-off collection center in Kirkwood.
-15-
-16-
Integrated Solid WasteManagement
While the focus fromthe 1950's to thelate 1980's was on
safe collection and disposal, the1990's has seen a shift toreducing the amount of wastegenerated and usingalternatives to disposal.
As discussed in the chapter AShort History of Solid Waste,a policy of applying theintegrated waste managementhierarchy was adopted in 1989and influenced the legislationpassed in 1990. This approachwould enable Missourians to
• minimize the amount of solidwaste that requires disposal,
• reduce environmental andpublic health threats,
• increase the manufacture anduse of products made fromrecycled materials, and
• preserve our naturalresources.
Integrated waste managementmeans managing waste by acombination of methods thatinclude waste reduction,materials reuse, recycling,composting, incineration with
-17-
• local recycling marketdevelopment,
• management of materialsbanned from disposal, suchas used oil and majorappliances,
• options for financing newservices, and
• the Missouri statutory andregulatory framework forsolid waste planning.
During 1993 and 1994,plans were submitted by eachof the 20 solid wastemanagement districts, guidedby the Model Plan. In 1996,to assess the progress indeveloping integrated solidwaste management systems ineach district, the programworked with the districts tocreate a survey.
To assist cities, counties andsolid waste managementdistricts in planning local solidwaste systems that use theintegrated approach, thedepartment developed anddistributed the Model PlanGuidelines for ComprehensiveSolid Waste Management in1991.
The Model Plan guidesplanners through a processwhich emphasizes publicparticipation in setting goalsfor diverting waste and the useof proper disposal methods.This guidance includes
• methods for evaluating thetypes and amounts of wastegenerated,
• options for managingrecyclables and yard waste,
energy recovery and landfilling.These alternatives are arrangedin a hierarchy that maximizeswaste reduction and resourcerecovery and uses incinerationand landfilling only as neededfor those wastes that cannot befeasibly recovered.
Efforts to prevent thegeneration of waste shouldprecede other wastemanagement options that dealwith the waste after it isgenerated, as in recycling. Theunderlying thought is that solid
waste that is not produced does
not require management.
The next level of the hierarchyincludes reuse, recycling andcomposting. These techniquesrequire a greater input ofresources to implement, buthave the potential to divertlarge amounts of waste fromdisposal. Through thesetechniques, waste materials canpotentially go through severalcycles of use.
Energy recovery, the next levelof the hierarchy, also useswaste as a resource, butessentially the material can onlybe used once. Finally, theresidual waste stream must beproperly managed throughincineration or landfilling at apermitted facility.
Modern sanitary landfills are designed to help protect Missouri�sgroundwater.
-18-
The districts then inventoriedeach of their member citiesand counties about theservices available and neededfor managing solid waste.Each survey, usually referredto as the assessmentinventory, addressed solidwaste collection, recycling,yard waste management, andservices for banned items.
Several goals wereaccomplished by theinventories.
• Lists were compiled ofavailable services to answercitizen inquiries,
• gaps in services for someareas were indicated,
• achievements since thepassage of SB 530 werehighlighted and
• information was madeavailable to help developtargets for grant funding andto assist planning efforts atboth the state and local level.
The districts were required torevise the inventories in 1998,which will continue to help inplanning local and stateprograms.
With the information from the600 communities surveyed inthe 1996 assessmentinventories and otherdepartmental sources, the
following sections discuss eachwaste management alternativeand information that isavailable about the current useof each method.
Waste ReductionWaste reduction, or prevention,may include changing a productdesign, making consumer goodsrepairable and more durable,and/or changing processingmethods and consumerbehavior and buying habits.
Waste reduction can bemeasured by examining ourwaste generation rates. Factorswhich contribute to ourgeneration rate includeexcessive packaging, theelimination of most refillablecontainers, tax incentives
favoring virgin materials, athrowaway approach to goodsconsumption and a scarcity ofgoods that can be repairedinstead of having to bediscarded. To reduce theamount of waste generated,programs must be developedand implemented that will causechanges in consumer habits andbusiness practices.
Public information campaignsand educational programs canencourage purchasing productswith the least amount ofpackaging necessary for safeproduct delivery, repairingdurable goods instead ofreplacing them and bulkpurchasing.
It is difficult to quantify theamount of waste reduction
Recycling collection center in Columbia
-19-
being practiced today. Thereare programs implemented bythe department and the solidwaste management districtswhich, when successful, doresult in a reduction in thegeneration of waste. Oneparticularly effective techniquewhich increases wastereduction, as well as reuse,recycling and composting, isunit-based pricing.
This technique, also called�pay-as-you-throw,� refers to asolid waste collection systemthat bases the collection fee onthe amount of waste set out
implementation. To date, twostatewide waste recovery andrecycling grants have funded�pay-as-you-throw� projects.
ReuseThis method of wastemanagement involves reuse ofpotential waste materials.Examples of reuse are a familythat saves margarine tubs tostore leftover food, uses oldclothes as batting to stuffhandmade Christmas toys,donates used consumer goodsto charity or buys beverages inreturnable bottles.
for disposal. Each customerhas an economic incentive toreduce their generation ofwaste or divert more materialsto recycling and compostingoperations. According to arecent survey by the MidwestAssistance Program, in 1995five communities in Missouriwere using unit-based pricingfor residential waste disposal.
The department promotes thistechnique through thedistribution of guidancematerials, sponsoringworkshops and providing grantfunding for local
-20-
Another type of reuse takesplace in thrift shops andsecondhand furniture stores.Reuse keeps materials out ofthe waste stream with verylittle environmental impactsince no re-manufacturing isinvolved.
Many consumer goods, suchas clothes, toys, appliancesand housewares can be easilyreused. This is done byfinding a new purpose for theitem in the home, or byselling or donating items inthe community. Businessesand government offices oftenpractice reuse, but may findthat they have more discardsthan they can reuse internally.
Missouri has several materialsexchange programs thataccept potential wastematerials (old computers,production scrap, carpetsamples, overruns) frombusinesses, industry andhouseholds for reuse in otherbusinesses, non-profits or inclassrooms. Since theseprograms do not have anyrequirement to reportinformation to DNR, it isdifficult to maintain acomprehensive list. Thefollowing list represents thematerial exchange programswhich are known by thedepartment:
• The Surplus Exchange -Kansas City
• The Learning Exchange -Kansas City
• Refunction Junction - Joplin
• Computers to Crayons -St. Joseph
• ETC. - Springfield
• Corporate Closet - JeffersonCity
• Resource Recovery Project -St. Charles
• St. Louis Teacher�s RecycleCenter - St. Louis
Industrial process wastes mayalso be suitable for reuse. Amaterials exchange programcan be used to link business,office and industrial wasteswith entities that can reusethem.
Missouri participates in theIndustrial Materials ExchangeService that is sponsored bythe Illinois EnvironmentalProtection Agency and theIllinois State Chamber ofCommerce. This serviceattempts to match companieshaving materials for which theyno longer have use withcompanies seeking rawmaterials. A typical edition oftheir directory will listinorganic chemicals, plastic,
rubber, textiles, wood, paperand metals. The EnvironmentalImprovement and EnergyResources Authority (EIERA)distributes the directory inMissouri.
Reuse of items at work and athome is actively promoted bythe department throughinformational materials, publicdisplays, solid waste planningguidance and other outreachactivities. Grants at the state orsolid waste district level may beavailable to fund certain reuseactivities.
RecyclingAlthough waste reduction is atthe top of the hierarchy model,today�s products, lifestyles andbusiness practices will continueto cause a great deal ofmaterial to be generated athome, work or leisure.Recycling is the wastemanagement option thatgenerally diverts the greatestamount of material from thewaste stream. The developmentof a viable recyclinginfrastructure across the stateinvolves a combination ofcollection, processing,marketing and sales of recycledproducts. The benefits ofrecycling can go beyond theenvironmental impact to an
-21-
economic one that includes thecreation of new businesses andjobs.
In some parts of the country,landfill costs have risen to suchhigh levels that recycling is acost effective managementalternative. In Missouri, as inits neighboring states, landfillcosts have not risen assignificantly, making it morecritical to use careful planningto create sustainable programs.For some materials, both thedistance to markets andfluctuations of the marketsmake recycling a risky venture.However, we have madeprogress and continue toincrease recycling opportunitiesacross the state. The numberof communities with access torecycling services has risen
from 47 in 1989 to 358 in1996 as seen in Figure 4.These programs made asubstantial contribution to the1997 diversion rate of 30percent, discussed in Chapter 4.
This progress has been achievedby efforts at all levels - individualcitizens, local and stategovernment, solid wastedistricts, large and smallbusinesses, public institutionsand not-for-profit entities. Asdescribed in Chapter 2, legis-lation and policy has enabled thedepartment to promote andsupport recycling by
• the creation of solid wastemanagement districts to helpcities and counties workcooperatively in the
development of local recyclingservices,
• requiring that solid wastedistrict plans address recyclingservices for both rural andurban communities,
• creating and distributingplanning guidance andinformational and educationalmaterials that relate torecycling,
• minimizing regulatoryrequirements for recyclingfacilities,
• providing grant funds toassist in developing theinfrastructure for collectionand processing of recyclablesand organics,
• developing markets forrecyclables to help develop asustainable infrastructure, and
• providing technical assistance
to public and private sectors.
Recycling CollectionServicesA major determining factor inthe success of a recyclingprogram is the type ofcollection provided to thepublic sector. Two types ofcollection are curbside anddrop-off. Of the 600communities surveyed, 358communities that haverecycling services, 198 include
4768
107143
193
240
301
358
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
Recycling Collection Services inMissouri Communities
Figure 4
-22-
curbside collection. Thecurbside service is operated bythe municipality in 32 cities.Another 94 communitiescontract with private haulers toprovide curbside service. Theremaining communities areserved by 194 private haulers,nine non-profits, and one solidwaste management district.
Drop-off services also rangefrom public to private. Of the253 communities with drop-offrecycling, 102 are operated bymunicipalities and 13 bycounties. In 35 cities, the localgovernment contracts with aprivate business to operate theservice. Drop-off collectionsites are also provided by 174
private businesses, 51 non-profits and one district.
Many of the recycling servicesin Missouri manage sourceseparated recyclables. Overhalf of the curbside programsuse a type of commingledcollection, in which severaltypes of recyclables may beplaced in the same bin or bagfor pick up. Since thesecommingled recyclables arekept separate from mixed solidwastes, they can be easilysorted at a recycling center forprocessing and transport.
In Missouri, a facility whichaccepts recyclables that aremixed with other solid wastesat the point of generationrequires a solid waste
processing permit. Recyclablesseparated at a facility usuallyhave some contaminationmaking them more difficult tomarket, especially incompetition with clean, source-separated recyclables.
The City of St. Peters obtaineda permit to operate this type offacility, usually called amaterials recovery facility. Theykeep contamination to aminimum by requiring thatrecyclables be placed in plasticbags, provided by the city, priorto being collected with mixedwastes. At the materialrecovery facility the bags ofrecyclables are separated fromthe mixed wastes beforeentering the sort line.
Recognition of the importanceof government leadership inpromoting recycling led to theestablishment of the StateRecycling Program in 1989.This program is administeredby the Office of Administration(OA). Program oversight is theresponsibility of the OA staterecycling coordinator.
The 1989 legislation requiredeach executive agency of stategovernment to develop a planfor recycling that would includecollection of paper and otherrecyclables generated in stateoffices. Since the legislation
The 1999 annual Missouri Recycling Association Conference was held in St. Louis.
-23-
did not provide funding or stafffor each agency�s efforts, aninteragency committee wasformed.
By working with the committee,the state recycling coordinatorcan more easily disseminateinformation about thecollection program, track theprogram�s progress, conductspecial events and receive inputfrom the various agencies.
Paper products make up themost significant fraction ofrecyclables generated ingovernment offices. From1992 through fiscal year 1997,2,026 tons of office paper wascollected in the centralMissouri state offices. Thereporting for fiscal year 1998included the accomplishmentsof state offices throughout thestate, resulting in a total of
1,581 tons of recoveredmaterials. This figure includedcardboard, aluminum cans,newsprint, telephone books,scrap metals and tonercartridges.
Additionally, over 76,000gallons of motor oil and otherautomotive fluids wererecovered. Several agenciesrecycled tires, batteries,fluorescent bulbs, pallets andvideo cassette tapes. Foodwaste composting has beenimplemented in one of theDNR office buildings. TheDepartment of Transportationreceived the 1998 OA AnnualRecycling Award for initiatingprocedures to recycle lead paintwaste removed during bridgerepainting operations.
The OA, in cooperation withthe EIERA, produces an annual
report providing more detail onthe progress of this collectionprogram.
Recycling MarketDevelopmentThe Solid Waste ManagementFund has contributed to thedevelopment of all componentsof the total recycling process.Figure 5 provides a breakdownof the types of recycling projectgrants that have been awardedthrough the Waste Reductionand Recycling Projects.Additionally, a portion of theFund is set aside each yearspecifically for marketdevelopment, administered byEIERA�s Market DevelopmentProgram, in cooperation withDNR and the Department ofEconomic Development.
The Market DevelopmentProgram has used these fundsto provide direct financialassistance and technicalassistance to manufacturers ofrecycled products, to researchand track recycling markets andto promote purchasing ofrecycled products. Part of thiseffort resulted in the MissouriBuys Recycled Initiative, apartnership between the publicand private sectors toencourage businesses to buyproducts such as asphalt, officeand computer paper, furniture
Aluminum can crushing and bailing at a recycling facility.
-24-
Figure 5
Waste Reduction & Recycling ProjectsGrant Funds Distributed 1993-1998
19961996
19931993
19981998
19951995
19971997
19941994
Waste Reduction
Recycling Education
Energy
Collection/Processing
Research & Development
Market Development
Composting
-25-
and plastic lumber made fromrecycled materials.
Procurement of recycledproducts by state governmentagencies has also been anintegral part of supportingmarket development. Since1990, purchases of recycledpaper products have grownfrom a little over $2 million tomore than $7.9 million in fiscalyear 1997. While this exceededthe 40 percent statutory goalfor paper products, otherfactors have limitedimprovements in other recycledproduct purchases reported forthe last two years.
Changes in purchasing policiesand procedures have made itmore difficult to capture thetotal amount spent on theseitems. Many products producedusing recycled materials do notcompete in price with productsmanufactured from virginmaterials, which are produced
at greater economies of scaleand may benefit fromgovernment subsidies.
The OA state recyclingcoordinator is committed toimproving the tracking ofrecycled content purchases, andincreasing both the amount anddiversity of these purchases.
To encourage and support usingrecycled content newsprint inpublishing Missourinewspapers, legislationestablished a recycled contentusage goal in 1990. Beginningwith a goal to use 10 percentrecycled content newsprint in1993, the percentage graduallyincreases to 50 percent in theyear 2000.
The most recent reports fromnewspapers across the stateshowed that they had achievedthe target for 1998, using anaverage of 40 percent recycledcontent newsprint. Several
major Missouri newspapersreported recycled content usageof over 50 percent. In 1998alone, the combined efforts ofMissouri publishers resulted indiverting nearly 77,000 tons ofpaper from disposal.
CompostingComposting is the process ofdecomposing organic wastessuch as grass, sawdust, woodchips and vegetable waste bymicroorganisms. The materialsare broken down into simplerand more stable compoundssuch as water and carbondioxide. The process occursnaturally and can beaccelerated by mechanicaldigestion, by grinding wastesinto smaller particles, and bymaintaining optimumtemperatures, oxygen levels,nutrients and moisture in thecompost.
As a waste managementalternative, composting may bedone on site by the homeowneror by a municipality, county orregion at a central facility.Composting makes a valuableproduct from a potential waste.With the appropriatedepartment permits,composting may also be used asa volume reduction techniquefor solid waste.
-26-
Phot
o by
Den
nis
Han
sen
This covered compost bin shows that waste management alternativesdon�t have to be unattractive.
Yard WasteIn Missouri, the majority ofcomposting activities addressyard waste, which is bannedfrom disposal in landfills. Manyof the same policies used topromote recycling are employedin promoting composting andmulching techniques. The solidwaste management districtsreported that citizens of 271communities had access to yardwaste management options in1996 as seen in Figure 6.Although the 1992 yard wastedisposal ban stimulated growthin composting programs, inmany parts of the state, openburning is the currentmanagement method for yardwastes.
In 230 communities, yardwaste is collected curbside. Intwo counties and 78 cities thisservice is provided by the localgovernment. In 79
communities, the localgovernment contracts withprivate haulers for service. Theremaining communities areserved by 71 private haulers.Drop-off yard waste servicesare operated by 120 cities and26 counties. Four communitiescontract for drop-off service. Inaddition to the contracted
services, there are 15 privatedrop-off facilities.
To minimize the need forcentralized composting, backyard composting has beenpromoted by the departmentand many local programs.
Other OrganicsComposting can also be utilizedto manage other organiccomponents of the wastestream. Homeowners,businesses and institutions areencouraged to use on-sitecomposting to manage the foodwastes they generate. Thedepartment also encourageslarge scale composting of foodwastes, paper, biosolids andsome animal wastes. Recentchanges to the regulations forsolid waste processing facilities
-27-
provide some permitexemptions for compostingthese materials.
There has been minimalinterest in Missouri forbiosolids composting(composting sewage sludge orco-composting sewage sludgewith other organics). Thismanagement option is beingconsidered as land available fordirect application decreases.The department�s WaterPollution Control Programdesignates application ratesand site specifications.
If proper design and operationstandards are followed,biosolids can be co-compostedwith yard waste and otherorganic waste streams to createa usable soil amendment. The
City of Nixa in southwestMissouri recently began co-composting biosolids with theiryard waste. If successful, thisoperation could lead other
communities in the samedirection.
Although there has been someinterest in food wastecomposting, the majority ofimplemented programs havebeen small-scale, such as theplacement of worm bins inschools or offices. One solidwaste processing permit hasbeen issued for a compostingoperation for fruit andvegetable wastes, but thefacility has not yet beenconstructed.
A small number of facilitiesthat compost the entire solidwaste stream are in operationin the United States. Thisprocess, generally calledmunicipal solid waste
95 109142
177205
233257 271
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
Yard Waste ban goes intoeffect Jan. 1, 1992
A method of composting called vermi-composting uses a type of earthworm. Theworms process food wastes and produce castings, a valuable soil enhancing by-product.
Yard Waste Collection Services inMissouri Communities
Figure 6
-28-
composting, requires aprocessing facility permit inMissouri. To date, no permitapplications have been receivedfor this type of facility.
Design and operation costs formunicipal solid wastecomposting facilities mayrequire higher tipping fees thancurrently charged at Missourilandfills. In some cases,problems occur in marketingthe compost produced at thesefacilities due to contaminants,such as glass, plastic or metals.This compost may also containconcentrations of heavy metalsand other substances sincehousehold hazardous waste is afraction of the municipal solidwaste stream.
Energy RecoveryEnergy recovery, sometimescalled waste-to-energy followswaste reduction, reuse,recycling and composting inthe hierarchy of wastemanagement options. Increasesin landfilling costs, coupledwith higher costs for fossilfuels, have made energyrecovery from solid waste morefeasible in some parts of thecountry. In addition toproducing energy, waste-to-energy plants reduce thevolume of waste left fordisposal.
Missouri has no permittedpublic incinerators that usemixed waste from residentialand commercial sources forfuel. A number of universitiesand small communities have
This Union Electric Power Plant uses scrap tire chips as part of its fuel,replacing a portion of coal burned.
Phot
o co
urte
sy o
f Uni
on E
lect
ric
used pelletized paper waste intheir boilers to produce heat.Waste tires provide anotherpotential energy source as well.
Waste DisposalWhen alternatives that divertsolid waste from disposal aremaximized, the remainingfraction of the waste streamrequires proper management.The following sections look atdisposal methods and how theyare utilized in Missouri.
Incineration withoutEnergy RecoveryIn some parts of the country,incineration has been used toreduce the volume andputrescibility of the wastestream, but energy is not recov-ered in the process. This type ofincineration usually takes placein older burn units that weredesigned and built prior to theenergy shortages in the 1970sand environmental concerns.Incineration is less desirablethan energy recovery becausethe potential energy resourcesof the incinerated material arelost.
Concerns about incineration asa waste management toolusually focus on potential airemissions, high startup andoperating costs, proper disposal
-29-
of the incinerator residue andthe composition andconsistency of the incomingwaste stream.
LandfillsIn Missouri, engineeredlandfills are the final restingplace for approximately 70percent of the solid wastegenerated. Solid waste landfilltypes in Missouri includesanitary, demolition, specialwaste and utility waste.
Sanitary landfills arepermitted to accept solidwastes resulting fromindustrial, commercial,agricultural and residentialactivities. Laws andregulations further definewaste types that may be
accepted, as well as thosethat may not, such asregulated hazardous wastes.
Demolition landfills mayaccept only those wasteslisted in the regulations,generally including solidwastes generated byconstruction, remodeling,repairing or demolishingbuildings, streets, bridgesand other structures.
Special waste landfillstypically are located on thesite of a manufacturingoperation to manage auniform waste streamgenerated in themanufacturing process.
Utility waste landfills areused for ash and otherwastes generated primarily
from the combustion of coalat power plants.
Sanitary LandfillsThe number of permittedsanitary landfills has steadilydeclined since 1992 as seenin Figure 7. Changes infederal regulations,commonly referred to asSubtitle D, prompted therapid decline seen in 1994and 1995. These regulationsgreatly reduce the possibilitythat landfills will becomesources of pollution. At thesame time, the new designand operational requirementsprompted many landfills tore-evaluate the costs of doingbusiness. In Missouri, thisresulted in the closing ofmany small, often publiclyowned landfills.
The majority of sanitarylandfills currently operatingin the state are privatelyowned. Pages 38 and 39 inthe Appendix provide a mapand a list of the sanitarylandfills that are currentlyactive. Although annualtonnages for each facility canfluctuate due to changes inwaste flows and contractualagreements, they areprovided to give a picture ofthe relative sizes of the eachlandfill�s waste handlingactivities.
7273 75
69
52
30 30 28 27
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
801990 through 1998
Number of Landfills Receiving Municipal Solid Waste
Figure 7
-30-
private hauling services.Information on the services forresidential solid wastecollection in 515 communitiesis available from the 1996assessment inventories.
Of these, 50 cities operate thesolid waste collection routes.Another 270 communitiesprovide service throughcontracts with private haulers.In the remaining 124communities, services areprovided by private haulers.This includes 58 cities which
Demolition LandfillsCurrently, there are fourpermitted demolition landfillsin Missouri. They are listed inTable 4 in the Appendix.Relative to sanitary landfills,demolition landfills handle asmall amount of the state�ssolid waste. The landfill at A.P.Green Refractories acceptsonly the off-specification wastesgenerated in the plant�smanufacture of refractorybrick. The three remainingdemolition landfills wereconstructed to acceptconstruction and demolitionwastes from local businessesand the general public.
Transfer StationsAs the number of landfillsdeclined, the number oftransfer stations rose, as shownin Figure 8. Transfer stationsare facilities where severalsolid waste collection vehicles(packer trucks) unload theirrefuse, which is then loadedonto a larger vehicle forhauling.
In Missouri, these facilitiesrequire a solid waste processingpermit. With landfills fewerand farther apart, transfer ofthe waste to larger trucksdesigned for more efficientoperation over long haulsreduces costs. Transfer stations
may also have a positive impacton landfill operation. Lesstraffic in and out of the facilityand reduced on site congestionof collection vehicles can beexpected.
Table 7 in the Appendix liststhe permitted transfer stationscurrently operating in Missouri.The majority of the 47facilities are privately owned.Cities or counties own 14 ofthe facilities.
Solid Waste CollectionWhat about the trip to thelandfill? In Missouri, the typeof service varies from municipalwaste collection to free market
Figure 8
26 27 2729 30
37
4648
53
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
801990 through 1998
Number of Transfer Stations
are each served by one haulerand 26 that are served by twohaulers. The remaining 40communities are served bythree or more private haulers.
-31-
-32-
The progress that hasbeen made in Missourihas been accomplished
through hard work andcommitment from citizens,state and local government,solid waste managementdistricts and the solid wasteindustry. Sound planning forsolid waste managementsystems is essential tocontinued environmentalprotection through appropriate
solid waste management. Thedepartment recognizes theimportance of planning and hasbegun the process of developinga comprehensive statewidesolid waste management plan.
The state�s solid waste plan willbe developed in cooperationwith local governments,regional planning commissions,solid waste managementdistricts and appropriate stateagencies. The process will use
stakeholder groups comprisedof individuals from these areas,as well as several other sectorswith a strong interest in solidwaste issues:
• business and industry
• citizens and non-profitgroups
• educational, medical andother large institutions.
Missouri�s Next Step
-33-
The plan process will includeseveral steps:
First, an exami nation of thecurrent situation in solid wastemanagement to determinewhere we are. This document,The State of Garbage inMissouri, will serve as asignificant component of thisstep in the planning process bydocumenting existingconditions. The results of thewaste characterization studiesdescribed earlier in thisdocument are also key planningcomponents. Additionally, astudy of industrial, constructionand demolition waste iscurrently underway and, whencompleted, will be a componentof this step.
A public opinion survey isscheduled to be conducted inthe fall of 1999 to lend insightto the views Missouri citizenshave regarding solid wasteissues. As well, the plan will becomprised of a number ofcomponents which are integralto clearly and accuratelydepicting the complete pictureof solid waste management inMissouri. These include severalsocial, economic, physical anddemographic characteristics ofthe state.
The second major plan
component will entail creating
goals and objectives for thefuture of solid wastemanagement in Missouri. Thedepartment will work with thegroups previously mentioned,which include state and localgovernment, businesses andnon-profits, to determine wherewe would like to be in the nextcentury. Goals will be developedthat address each level of theintegrated waste managementhierarchy that has guided localand regional planning. Suchgoals may include wastereduction targets for specifictypes of waste generators,further improvements indisposal practices, or ways toreduce illegal dumping.
The third plan component willinvolve evaluating the beststrategy for achieving thedesired goals. This strategy mayinclude adopting new policies,increasing financial and otherincentives, or otherrecommendations for action. Inthis step of the planningprocess, the financialand resource costs willbe considered forvarious options. Thisplan component willexplain how stateefforts can becoordinated with city,county and solid wastedistrict efforts.
Ultimately, this plan componentwill describe roles andresponsibilities for citizens,government and business thatwill be needed for the plan tosucceed.
The statewide planning processwill be an important focus ofthe department's Solid WasteManagement Program for thenext several years. Theapproach of a new millenniumhas induced a frenzy of short-term planning efforts to avoidproblems that may occur whenthe year 2000 begins.Protecting the environment forfuture generations requireslong-range planning. The SolidWaste Management Programwill be entering the newmillennium focusing ondeveloping and implementing astatewide solid wastemanagement plan to effectivelyguide solid waste managementdecisions that will protectMissouri's environment forfuture generations.
Playground surfaced with rubber chips madefrom waste tires.
-34-
Appendix
-35-
260.003 General Provisions
260.200 Definitions
260.203 Infectious waste, treatment of--hospitals,department of health to promulgate rules--transportationof--registration of hospitals proper disposal. penalty--feeon delivery, exceptions--inspection fee, amount, fund,refund of, when.
260.204 Permit for treatment of infectious waste,not to be issued, when.
260.205 Permit required to operate facility, andconstruction permit to construct facility, requirements,exceptions, fees--plans to be submitted--permits revokedor suspended, when--disclosure statement, requiredwhen.
260.206 Owner or operator shall provide qualityassurance and quality control oversight of inspectionsduring area closure, postclosure and corrective actionplans, requirements department may suspend, revoke ormodify permit.
260.207 Permit not to be issued, when--notice todepartment of certain crimes, penalty for failure tonotify--reinstatement, when.
260.208 Contracts with specified parties prohibitedwhen--notice of certain convictions required, penalty.
260.209 Property acquired outside city, county ordistrict for solid waste disposal, compliance with zoningordinances required.
260.210 Prohibited acts, exception--search warrantsto issue, when--investigations, department may conduct,how--demolition waste, disposal of, requirements--building permits. notice of disposal of demolition wasterequired, form--exceptions.
260.211 Demolition waste, criminal disposition of--degrees, penalties.
260.212 Solid waste, criminal disposition of--degrees, penalties.
260.213 Disclosure of landfill, sale of property,required.
260.215 Solid wastes. how handled--duties of citiesand counties--exemptions--charges, how stated, howcollected.
260.216 Solid waste disposal in receptacle of--another, prohibited--penalty.
260.218 Vehicles transporting solid wastes,weight limits.
260.220 Plans to be submitted, contents of�disapproval, effect of.
260.225 Duties of department--rules andregulations, promulgation of, procedures--modelsolid waste management plans, contents,coordination with other state agencies.
260.226 Closure of facility, plan to besubmitted, contents--notice, when--financialassurance instrument, release of, when--exceptions.
260.227 Postclosure plan, contents--financialassurance instrument required--owner or operationof sanitary or demolition landfill to take correctiveaction, when--plan required--financial assurance,amount, form required, released when.
260.228 Failure to implement closure,postclosure plan or corrective action plan,forfeiture of collateral, when.
260.230 Department may order repairs,alterations, construction or reconstruction, wheninjunctive relief, when.
260.235 Hearing, when, procedure--review,how injunction based on seriousness of threat toenvironment--performance bond required,forfeited, when.
260.236 Severability of provisions.
260.240 Violations, how proceeded against--county regulations, how enforced, penalty forviolation--exceptions.
260.241 Permit not to be issued, when.
260.242 Fly ash produced by coal combustion,exemption from solid waste permittingrequirements, conditions--certain counties.
260.243 Buffer zone required, commercialprocessing facility, how determined.
260.245 Tax, how levied�limitation--form ofballot.
260.247 Annexation or expansion of solidwaste private services by city, notice to certainprivate entities, when--city to contract with privateentity, duration, terms.
CHAPTER 260Missouri Solid Waste Management Law
Index of Contents
-36-
260.249 Administrative penalties--not to be assessedfor minor violation, definition--amount set by rule,payment when--appeal effect--surcharge due when--unpaid penalty, collection--time limitation to assessviolation--judicial appeal--civil action effect, exception.
260.250 Major appliances, waste oil, yard waste andbatteries, disposal restricted--recycling of certain items,addressed in solid waste management plan.
260.253 Department to provide technical assistanceand public education programs on collection of usedmotor oil--household consumer used motor oil, duty tomaintain toll-free telephone for information.
260.254 Grants for household consumer used motoroil collection systems, requ irements-- --centers not toaccept motor oil from commercial operation.
260.255 Newspaper, duty to recycle,requirementsstatement to be filed with department,penalty.
260.260 Batteries, lead--acid, disposal of restricted,penalty.
260.262 Retailers of lead--acid batteries, duties,notice to purchaser, contents.
260.264 Notices to public, batteries, duties ofdepartment.
260.266 Wholesalers of lead--acid batteries,dutiesstorage of batteries, requirements.
260.267 Restriction on sales of certain batteries,effective dates--sale of nonbutton cell mercuric oxidebattery requirements, duties of manufacturer, violation,penalty.
260.270 Waste tires, prohibited activities--penalties--site owners, no new waste tire sites permitted, when,exception--registration required, duty to informdepartment, contents--rules and regulations--permit fees--duties of department--inventory of processed waste tiresnot to exceed limitation--auto dismantler, limited storageof tires allowed--recovered rubber, use by highways andtransportation department, how.
260.273 Fee, sale of new tires, amount--collection,use of moneys--termination.
260.274 Grants. use of waste tires as fuel. who mayapply--limitations--advisory council. duties.
260.275 Waste tire site. closure plan, contents--financial assurance instrument, purpose how calculated.
260.276 Nuisance abatement activities. departmentmay conduct--costs, civil action authorized, exception--
resource recovery or nuisance abatement bids oncontract, who may bid--content.
260.278 Performance bond or letter of creditrequired for transporter of waste tires, when--provisions required--forfeiture of bond, when,procedurc--bond requirement ceases, when.
260.280 Container defined--plastic ring or holdingdevice must be biodegradable within two years--acceptable rings or holding device, department tofurnish list--violations, penalty--effective when.
260.281 Plastic, plastic bottles or rigid plasticcontainer detined--containers, must have coded label,content, form--exempt products, rules established bydepartment--violations, penalty.
260.285 Manufacturer recycling flexible cellulosecasing eligible for tax credit--claim procedure--fraudulent claim, penalty--expires when.
260.300 Regions, division of state into--procedures, purpose.
260.302 County may apply for change in region,when, procedures.
260.305 Creation of district, procedures--boundaries, limitations--petition to establish--district abody corporate and politic, when--election.
260.310 Contractual authority, powers.
260.315 Council, selection of members, terms,meetings--powers--select ion of executive board, terms.
260.320 Executive board, meetings, selection ofofficers--powers, duties--contractual authority.
260.325 Solid waste manaagent plan, submitted todepartment, contents, procedures--approval, revision ofplan--funds may be made available, purpose.
260.330 Landfill fee, amount--solid wastemanagement fund, created, purpose--department toenforce--transfer station, fee charged.
260.335 Distribution of fund moneys, uses--grants.distribution of moneys--advisory board, solid waste,duties.
260.342 Educational and informational programs,department to conduct, how.
260.345 Solid waste advisory board, members--qualifications--duties and powers--removal of boardmember for failure to attend meetings, when.
-37-
STATEMENTIt is the policy of the State of Missouri tointegrate appropriate resource-recoveryphilosophies and practices into all relevantactivities in order to minimize the amount ofsolid waste that requires disposal, reduceenvironmental and public health threats,increase the manufacture and use of productsmade from recycled materials and preserve ournatural resources.GOALS
The goals of the policy are as follows:To incorporate solid waste reduction, recyclingand resource recovery into the solid wastemanagement activities of state and localgovernments, industries and citizens.To apply an integrated waste managementhierarchy when managing local and regionalsolid-waste streams to minimize possibleenvironmental impacts associated with any onetechnology and to achieve the maximum feasibleuse of waste reduction, recycling and resourcerecovery. This hierarchy is as followsFirst - reduce the amount of solid waste createdSecond - reuse, recycle and compostThird - recover and use energy from solid wasteFourth - incinerate or dispose of in a sanitarylandfillTo facilitate the use of recycled materials byMissouri manufacturers and encourage thedevelopment of markets for recycled materialsby incorporating solid waste reduction, recyclingand resource recovery concepts into programsinvolving procurement, industrial development,capital works and other appropriate areas.To coordinate technical and financial assistancefor solid waste reduction, recycling and resourcerecovery in accordance with state and local solidwaste management plans.
OBJECTIVES FOR STATE GOVERNMENTState government shall assure that theimplementation of state, regional and local solidwaste management systems and plans supportthe Missouri Policy on Resource Recovery, theMissouri Solid Waste Management Law andRules and Missouri Resource RecoveryFeasibility and Planning Study.State government shall coordinate financialassistance to promote programs for wastereduction, resource recovery, marketdevelopment for recovered materials, recycled
materials procurement and solid wastemanagement programs that are in accordancewith the Missouri Policy on Resource Recovery,the Missouri Solid Waste Management Law andRules and Missouri Resource RecoveryFeasibility and Planning Study.State government shall provide a clearinghouseof consumer information regarding the need tosupport resource recovery; to utilize anddevelop new resource recovery programs aroundexisting enterprises; to promote thedevelopment of markets for recoveredmaterials; to request and purchase recycledproducts; and to participate in resourceconservation activities and other relevant issues.State government shall update the state�s solidwaste management plan so it addresses thestate resource recovery policy.State government shall assure that theimplementation of state and local solid-wastemanagement systems and plans are based uponthe integrated solid-waste managementhierarchy.
OBJECTIVES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTTo promote waste reduction, marketdevelopment for recovered materials andresource recovery, local governments, industriesand citizens shall coordinate and implementeconomically feasible policies for integratedwaste-management systems, and shall increaseprocurement of products made from recycledmaterials.Local and regional solid-waste managementshall be mutually supportive and consistent withthe Missouri Policy on Resource Recovery,Missouri Solid Waste Management Law andRules and the Missouri Resource RecoveryFeasibility and Planning Study.Local solid-waste management plans shallimplement solid-waste management systemsbased upon the integrated solid-wastemanagement hierarchy, protect the public healthand the environment and meet the residential,commercial, industrial and agricultural needs ofthe region.OBJECTIVES FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTIONThe state legislature shall appropriate funds tofully implement the Missouri Solid WasteManagement Law, especially those areas thatimplement the state�s resource-recovery policy.The state legislature also shall promotelegislation consistent with the state resource-recovery policy.
Missouri Policy on Resource RecoveryMissouri Policy on Resource Recovery
-38-
Sanitary Landfills
Figure 9
-39-
1 City in which the facility is located, or which is nearest to the facility location.
2 This number represents the tons reported on tonnage fee reports submitted to thedepartment during the most recent 12 month period for which data is available: the4th quarter of 1997, and the first three quarters of 1998.
Table 3
Sanitary LandfillsNo. Facility Name Owner City 1 Annual
Tonnage 2
1 Backridge Sanitary Landfill Browning-Ferris Industries LaGrange99,528
2Black Oak Recycling and DisposalFacility
Waste Management ofMissouri, Inc.
Hartville259,037
3Bridgeton (West Lake Sanitary LandfillInc.)
Allied Waste Industries, Inc. Bridgeton890,868
4 Butler County Sanitary Landfill Allied Waste Industries, Inc. Poplar Bluff126,927
5 Central Missouri Landfill, Inc. Central Missouri Landfill, Inc. Sedalia82,124
6 City of Columbia Sanitary Landfill City of Columbia Columbia127,834
7Courtney Ridge Recycling and DisposalFacility
Waste Management ofMissouri, Inc.
SugarCreek
406,276
8 Ellis Scott Sanitary LandfillAllied Waste Industries ofMissouri
Clinton31,556
9 Fred Weber Inc. Sanitary Landfill Fred Weber Inc.MarylandHeights
338,752
10 Fulton Sanitary Landfill City of Fulton Fulton10,047
11 Jefferson City Sanitary Landfill Allied Waste Industries, Inc.JeffersonCity
183,999
12 Lamar Sanitary Landfill Browning-Ferris Industries Lamar164,630
13 Lee's Summit Sanitary Landfill City of Lee's SummitLee'sSummit
75,955
14 Lemons Landfill Corporations, Inc. SLF Allied Waste Systems, Inc. Dexter196,688
15 Maryville Sanitary Landfill City of Maryville Maryville10,722
16 Moberly Municipal Sanitary Landfill City of Moberly Moberly11,884
17 Northside Sanitary Landfill Northside Sanitary Landfill Washington29,037
18 Rye Creek Sanitary Landfill Rye Creek Corporation Kirksville23,329
19 Show Me Regional Sanitary Landfill Allied Waste Industries, Inc. Warrensburg70,760
20 Southeast Sanitary Landfill Allied Waste Systems, Inc. Kansas City317,097
21 Springfield Sanitary Landfill City of Springfield Springfield96,295
22 St. Joseph City Sanitary Landfill City of St. Joseph St. Joseph109,235
23 Struckhoff Sanitary Landfill Struckhoff Sanitary Landfill Washington19,564
24 Superior Maple Hill Teter Sanitary Landfill Macon101,303
25 Superior Oak Ridge Landfill Superior Service, Inc. Valley Park242,202
26 Sutton & Sons Cardinal Waste, Inc.BowlingGreen
31,430
-40-
Demolition, Special Waste &Utility Landfills
Figure 10
-41-
1 City in which the facility is located, or which is nearest to the facility location.
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Demolition Landfills
.oN emaNytilicaF renwOfoepyT ytiC 1
5noitatSrewoPreviRsemaJ
etsaWytilitUcilbuP dleifgnirpS
6 hsAylFesortnoM.oCL&PCK etavirP notnilC
7 noitatSrotareneGyelbiS etavirP yelbiS
8 noitatSrotareneGtsewhtuoS cilbuP dleifgnirpS
9 retneCygrenElliHsamohT etavirP lliHsamohT
.oN emaNytilicaF renwOfoepyT ytiC 1
01tnalPadaveNs'.oCM3
etsaWlaicepSetavirP adaveN
11dnaLtriDliOocomA
ytilicaFtnemtaerTetavirP keerCraguS
21.oCretaWytnuoCyrneH
tiPlasopsiDegdulSetavirP notnilC
31 gnilcyceR.C.K etavirP ytiCsasnaK
41noitamalceRlliHtcepsorP
tcejorPetavirP siuoL.tS
Utility Waste Landfills
Special Waste Landfills
1 City in which the facility is located, or which is nearest to the facility location.
.oN emaNytilicaF renwO ytiC 1 launnAegannoT 2
1noitilomeDneerG.P.A
llifdnaLneerG.P.A
seirotcarfeRocixeM
410,5
2 .cnIllifdnaLsselreePsselreeP
.cnIllifdnaLkraPyellaV
831,641
3noitilomeDlliHkcoR
llifdnaLlliHkcoR
.oCseirrauQsiuoL.tS
399,321
4noitilomeDkeerCeyR
llifdnaLkeerCeyRnoitaroproC
ellivskriK645,3
1 City in which the facility is located, or which is nearest to the facility location.
2 This number represents the tons reported on tonnage fee reportssubmitted to the department during the most recent 12 month period forwhich data is available: the 4th quarter of 1997, and the first three quartersof 1998.
-42-
Transfer Stations
Figure 11
-43-
Table 7
1 City in which the facility is located, or which is nearest to the facility location.
Transfer Stations
N o. Facility Name Ow ner C ity 1
1 B e tha ny T. S . S upe rio r o f M issouri, Inc . B e thany
2 B FI T. S . & Re cyc li ng Fa c ili ty Wa s te S ystem s of No rth A m e rica, Inc . S t. L ouis
3 C ap e G ira rdea u W a ste T. S . C ity of C ap e Gi rarde au C ap e Gi rarde au
4 C ass C ounty So li d Wa ste T. S . A llie d Wa stes Ind ustrie s, Inc . Harrisonville
5 C hillico the T. S . C i ty of C hi llicothe C hi llicothe
6 C hr is tia n D ispo sa l, Inc . T. S . C hristia n D i sp o sa l, Inc . W infie ld
7 C ity o f Me xico T. S . S upe rio r Se rvice s, Inc . M e xi co
8 C ity o f Bo onville C ity o f B o o nvi lle T. S . Bo onville
9 C linton M unic i pa l T. S . C i ty of C li nton C li nton
10 C WI of Mi sso ur i C W I, Inc . S te . Ge ne vie ve
11 E l D o ra do S p rings So li d W a ste T. S . W aste M anag e me nt o f M issouri, Inc . E l D ora doS p rings
12 E nviro nmenta l S anitati on Alli ed Wa ste M anag em e nt Inc . (L a idla w) Je fferso n C i ty
13 F red er icktown T. S . C i ty o f Fred eri cktown Fred eri ck town
14 G illi am T. S . C W I, Inc . Ja ckson
15 J .T. Brown Ent. P ro ce ssing Fa c ili ty S utton & S ons Recyc li ng & Tra ns fe r Ha nnib al
16 Ja ckson So li d W a ste T. S . L em o ns Waste Sys te m s, Inc . D e xte r
17 Je ffe rson C o unty T. S . E nvironmenta l Industrie s / Waste M gm t. Maryland Hei ghts
18 K rae m er Hauling T. S . K rae m er Hauling T. S . K imm swi ck
19 La id la w Waste S yste ms No rth T. S . A llie d Wa ste Industrie s , Inc Bri dg eton
20 Lo ngvie w o f Ka nsa s C ity T. S . U S A W as te K a nsa s C i ty
21 M .S ., Inc . T. S . A lli ed Waste Industri es Osag e B ea ch
22 M era m ec T. S . M eram e c H auli ng A rno ld
23 M id we st D ispo sal and Recyc ling Inc .Transfe r S tati on
M i dwe s t D isp osal & Re cycling, Inc . R ock P or t
24 M isso uri D i sp osa l, Inc., T. S . A m er ican D isp. S e rvices o f M issouri, Inc . Re ed s S p rings
25 Ne osho T. S . C i ty of Ne osho Jo plin
26 No rris & S on Inc . T. S . No rri s & S on T. S . S t. Jo se ph
27 P em i sco t C o unty T. S . P em iscot C ounty C a ruthersville
28 P e rry C o unty T. S . P erry C ounty P e rryville
29 P helps C o unty T. S . P he lp s C ounty La ndfi ll Bo ard Rolla
30 Relia ble D i sp o sa l, Inc . M r. and M rs. B ob b y a nd B e tty Osm e r P a ci fic
31 S cotla nd C o unty T. S . Scotla nd C o unty C o m m issi on M e m phis
32 S onny's S olid Waste Se rvices Inc .T.S . S onny's S olid Waste S ervice T.S . S ike ston
33 S pr ingfi eld C ity Re fuse T. S . Wa ste Ma na ge m ent of M O, Inc . S p ring fie ld
34 S p ring fie ld Re la y Sys te ms T. S . B ro wni ng-F err is Industri es S p ring fie ld
35 S t. F rancoi s C o . T. S . S t. F rancoi s C o . T. S . P a rk Hills
36 S t. Lo uis S olid W as te P ro ce ssi ngFa c ili ty
W aste M anag e me nt o f M issouri, Inc . S t. L ouis
37 S t. Rob e rt T. S . C ity of S t. Rob ert S t. Rob er t
38 S to ckton La ke T. S . S to ckton La ke T. S . Sto ckton
39 S unray S ervi ce s Inc. Transfe r &R ecycling C ente r
Sunray S e rvice s, Inc . Jo plin
40 Ta ney C o unty T. S . Ta ney C o unty C o m m ission K irbyville
41 Ta te 's Tra nsfe r Sys te m s, Inc . Am er ican D ispo sal Se rvices Re ed s S pring
42 Te te r T. S . Tete r S LF & Hauling R efuse, Inc . M acon
43 U ni ve rs ity C ity Re fuse T. S . C ity o f Unive rs ity C i ty Unive rs ity C i ty
44 W as te M gm t. of S t. Lo uis Recyc ling &Transfe r Fa c ili ty
P e zold H auli ng Fo ris te ll
45 W a ste Mg mt. o f M O, Inc.- S o uth C i tyTransfe r Fa c ili ty
A llie d Wa ste Industrie s , Inc W estches te r
46 W a ste Mg m t. o f the Ozarks Re cyc li ng& T. S .
Waste M a na ge m ent o f the Ozarks Le b anon
47 We st P lai ns So li d W a ste T. S . C i ty of W e st P lai ns W e s t P lai ns
-44-
Solid Waste Management Program Staff
Jim Bell, Chief Ed Galbraith, ChiefJohn Balkenbush, Chief
November 1, 1999
Jim Hull, DirectorMarlene Kirchner, Program Executive Assistant
Dinah Eddy, Program Receptionist
Glenda CrymesKaty D�AgostinoBetty Finders
Connie GrellnerDennis Hansen
Rob HargisDebbie Kruckemeyer
Richard MansurBeth MarsalaDavid Stock
Phil TremblayKim TschirgiBruce Tylke
Richard AllenJanice BextenLaurie Bobbitt
Jody ClarkAlicia Davenport
Tom DeHavenDan Fester
Stuart HarlanGrady MartinKirk MitchellMike Potter
Michele BoussadJohn CramerFrank Dolan
Carlton FlowersKarl Finke
Charlene FitchBetty FrisbeeDavid JohnsonKevin JohnsonCeline Koier
Shirley OehringTom RoscettiRuss Seedyk
Scott WaltripSteve Wyatt
Brad Zimmerman
Planning & Grants Engineering Enforcement
Missouri Department of Natural ResourcesDivision of Environmental QualitySolid Waste Management Program
1738 East Elm StreetJefferson City, MO 651011(800) 361-4827 or 1(573) 751-5401
email: [email protected]: http://www.dnr.state.mo.us/deq/swmp/homeswmp.htm
PUB002072
*PUB00207*Printed on Recycled Paper