The URL can be used to link to this page

EPA INFO ON WASTE TRANSFER STATIONS�> 1 I j 7- i I AVaSte I�,Transfer, .?Stations: = \ linvolve� Citizens 'Make the Difference° \ I 1J (7,1 I �g '-CEPA United States Solid \n/aste EP4530-K-01-003 Environmental Protection and Emergency January 2001 Agency Response(5306W) rrwepa govlosw You've just learned that a solid waste trans- fer station developer is proposing to build a facility in your community. Like many citi- zens, you may have concerns, including uncertainties about potential safety and health impacts. You may even wonder what a waste transfer station is. In simple terms, a transfer station is a facility where solid waste is unloaded from smaller trucks and reloaded into larger vehicles for transport to a final disposal site. Waste transfer stations make solid waste collection more effi- cient and reduce overall transportation costs, air emissions, energy use, truck traffic, and road wear and tear. This saves you and your community money and lowers the cost of your solid waste management services. The selection of a site for any waste -related facility can be a sensitive issue, particularly for those living nearby. In principle, most people realize that such facilities are needed and will be needed in the future. In some cases, however, concern arises about a specific location for a waste transfer station and whether the facility will be properly managed. You and your neighbors can help influence decisions on transfer stations. This booklet provides key information you will need to develop an opinion about a proposed or modified transfer station. It also provides ways or ideas on how to get involved to enhance the value of the waste transfer station. Located, designed, and operated to ensure the public health, safety, and welfare of the com- munity and environment. Located so as to minimize incompatibility with the character of the surrounding area. Located where traffic patterns to or from the facility minimize the impact on existing traffic flows. Consistent with state, local or tribal regulations and solid waste management plans. A waste transfer station is a light industrial -type facility where trash collection trucks discharge their loads so trash can be compacted and then reloaded into larger vehicles (e.g., trucks, trains and barges) for shipment to a final disposal site, typically a landfill or waste -to -energy facility. Transfer station operators usually move waste off the site in a matter of minutes or hours. "Transfer stations serve both rural and urban communities. In densely populated areas, they are generally fully enclosed. Waste transfer stations handle the trash that you set out for collection. At many transfer stations, workers screen incoming wastes on the receiving floor or in an earthen pit, recovering materials from the waste stream that can be recycled and sepa- rating out any inappropriate wastes (e.g., tires, large appliances, automobile batteries) that are not allowed in a disposal facility. Communities need transfer stations to move their waste effi- ciently from the point of collection to distant, regional landfills or waste -to -energy plants. By consolidating solid waste collec- tion and disposal points, transfer stations help communities reduce the cost of hauling waste to these remote disposal sites. Waste transfer stations may be the most cost-effective when they are located near a collection area. The use of transfer stations lowers collec- tion costs, as crews spend less time traveling to and from distant disposal sites and more time collecting waste. This reduces costs for labor, fuel and collection vehicle maintenance. Why are transfer stations growing in popularity around the United States? Besides reduced transportation costs, here are a few of the benefits. The waste transfer station, • Reduces overall community truck traffic by consolidating smaller loads into larger vehicles. • Offers more flexibility in waste handling and disposal options. Decision -makers can select among different disposal options and secure the lowest disposal fees or choose a desired method of disposal (e.g., landfilling, waste -to -energy). • Reduces air pollution, fuel consumption, and road wear by consolidating trash into fewer vehicles. • Allows for screening of waste for special handling. At many transfer stations, workers screen incoming wastes on con- crete floors or conveyor belts to separate out readily recycla- ble materials or any inappropriate wastes (e.g., tires, automobile batteries) that are not allowed in a landfill or a waste -to -energy facility. • Reduces traffic at the disposal facility. "fhe tact that fewer vehicles go to the landfill or waste -to -energy facility reduces congestion and operating costs and increases safety. • Offers citizens facilities for convenient drop-otf of waste and recyclables. Some transfer stations have a designated area, often called a convenience center, where residents drop off waste or recyclables in collection containers. Traffic, noise, and odor may exist around waste transfer sta- tions. Other problems that can result from an improperly designed or operated facility, include: • Rodents and birds. • Liner. • Air emissions. Thoughtful design choices and well-managed operations can and do address potential negative impacts. This section will describe typical concerns and offer suggestions that you can take to your transfer station developer to help resolve your con- cerns. A more detailed discussion of ways to reduce the impacts of waste transfer stations is provided in EPA's Waste Transfer Stations: A Manual for Decision -Making, Draft EPA530-D-01-005, February 2001. Traffic Transfer stations reduce overall traffic by consolidating smaller loads into larger vehicles. The transfer station, however, will generate additional amounts of traffic in its immediate area. This traffic can contribute to increased road congestion, air emissions, noise, and wear on roads. For this reason, waste transfer stations are often locat- ed in industrial areas that have ready access to major road- ways. Travel routes and resulting traffic impacts typically receive significant attention during transfer station siting and design. Some important design and operating features that shnuld be used indnde- • Selecting sites that have direct access to truck routes, high- ways and rail or barge terminals. • Providing adequate space within the facility site so that cus- tomers waiting to use the transfer station do not interrupt traffic on public roads or impact nearby residences or busi- nesses. • Designating haul routes to and from the transfer station that avoid congested areas, residential areas, business districts, schools, hospitals and other sensitive areas. • Designing safe intersections with public roads. Noise Heavy truck traffic and the operation of heavy-duty facility equipment (e.g., conveyors and front-end loaders) are the pri- mary sources of noise from a transfer station. Design and oper- ating practices that help reduce noise include: • Confining noisy activities within buildings or other enclo- sures as much as possible. • Using landscaping, sound barriers, and earth berms to ahsnrh exterior noise. • Arranging the site so that traffic flows are not adjacent to properties that are sensitive to noise. • Providing setback distances, called buffer zones, to separate noisy activities from adjacent land uses. • Conducting activities that generate the most amount of noise during the day. Odor Garbage, particularly food waste and grass, has a high potential for odor. Proper facility design can significantly reduce odor problems. Carefully positioning the building and its doorways with respect to neighbors is a good first step. At the transfer building itself, exhaust fans with air filters and rooftop exhaust vents can further reduce off-site odor impacts. Some of the operating procedures that can help reduce odors include • "First -in, first -out" waste handling practices that keep waste on site only for short periods of time. • Removing all waste from the tipping floor or pit by the end of each operating day so that these surfaces can be swept clean and washed dawn_ • "Good housekeeping" measures, including regular cleaning and disinfecting of surfaces and equipment that come into contort with waste. • Water misting and/or deodorizing systems. Rodents and Birds Rodents and birds can be a nuisance and a potential health concern at waste transfer stations, but few basic design and oper- ational elements can control them. For instance, good housekeep- ing practices are a simple and effective means of minimizing their presence. These practices include removing all waste deliv- ered to the facility by the end of each day, and cleaning the receiving Floor daily (small, rural facilities may require several days to accumulate a full container of waste for transport). Receiving waste only within an enclosed structure and otherwise preventing litter can reduce the presence of birds. If problems persist in the vicinity, baiting and trapping can control rodents. WKeri a public hearing was held to announce the siting of a proposed waste transfer station in Auburn, New Hampshire, the town's citizens wanted to make sure their concerns would be addressed. Residents raised a number of issues about potential odor, noise, and truck traffic from the transfer station, which would consolidate waste from Manchester, New Hampshire, and surrounding communities, including Auburn. In addition, town officials voiced concerns about storm -water runoff from the transfer station. A private firm specializing in transfer stations and other waste management services listened to the issues raised at the hearing. The company showed its willingness to address these concerns by proposing changes to the transfer station's design and operat- ing plans. Modifications included: • Reorienting the transfer station building so warning alarms from trucks backing up would be directed away from residential areas. • Closing the transfer station doors to reduce odor whenever trucks are not delivering waste. • Providing a trash drop-off area apart from commercial vehicles and extending operat- ing hours to make site use more convenient for residents. • Setting up a gated fence around the site to maximize security and safety Town officials also hired a consultant to address additional citizen concerns. The com- pany worked with the consultant to develop methods for safely managing storm -water runoff from the transfer station. The revised design included new drainage structures and roadway modifications. As a final condition for receiving a transfer station permit, the company developed an operating manual that employees will be required to follow. Town officials reviewed the operating manual and after additional modifications, the town approved the transfer station. Litter In the course of facility operations, it is likely that stray pieces of waste may become litter in and around the waste transfer station. Measures that can help reduce litter include: • Positioning the main transfer building so that predominant winds are less likely to blow through the building and carry litter off-Rite. • Installing perimeter landscaping and fencing to reduce wind speeds at the transfer station site and to trap any litter. • Ensuring that tarps on open top trucks are secure. • Providing skirting around loading chutes. • Removing litter frequently to reduce the opportunity for it to travel offkite. • Patrolling nearby access roads to control litter from truck traffic. Air Emissions Air emissions at transfer stations can come from unloading dry, dusty waste delivered to the transfer station, exhaust from trucks, loaders and other equipment, and driving over unpaved surfaces. The following can reduce air emissions: • Requiring trucks delivering and picking up waste at the facil- ity to reduce unnecessary engine idling. • Working with fleet operators to reduce engine emissions (e.g., engine improvements or use of cleaner fuels). • Spraying dusty wastes with water as they are unloaded. • Ensuring that street sweeping operations use enough water to avoid kicking up dust. • Paving all surfaces where trucks operate. Every solid waste management facility is required to obtain cer- tain government permits. Permit requirements may be estab- lished by state, local, or tribal governments. Regulations, which serve as the basis for permits, vary from jurisdiction to,jurisdic- tion. Typical types of permits that a transfer station may be required to obtain include: • Solid waste facility permits—usually issued by state, local, or tribal agencies, which can govern siting, design, and operations. • Site development permits—usually issued by local or tribal agencies, which include zoning requirements, building per- mits, utility connections. • Environmental siting approvals—which are addressed by various levels of government and can pertain to wetlands, flood plains, culturally significant sites, or other protected areae. For a state -by -state checklist of major transfer station regula- tory issues see EPA's document, Waste Transfer Stations: A Manual for Decision -Making, Drait EPA530-D-01-005, February 2001, Appendix A. Communicate • Talk with authorities that plan, permit, and regulate waste transfer stations at the state level. (See the list of state solid waste contacts at the end of this guide). • Seek to understand the role of the various agencies. Learn about the types of decisions they have authority to make and the activities they can influence or control. • 'Palk to the waste transfer station developer and find out about his plans. The developer may be either a private company or government agency. Make sure the developer is aware of your concerns as early as possible so he can take steps to address them. Find out the name and phone 8 number of the developer's contact person whom you can call for infor- mation, to check on progress, and to share your concerns. • Check the site against the rules of your state or locality. Ask your state or trib- al government representative for copies of the regulations or where you can find them. • Get on mailing lists of the developer, local agencies (e.g., zoning, planning, solid waste), and state agencies. Participate • Attend public information meetings, hearings, and decision meetings to express your interests. • Request a visit to the developer's completed and operating waste transfer station.¢. • Work with state and/or local oversight agencies to see how you can assist in monitoring the waste transfer station's performance. Negotiate • Your state, tribal, or local government agencies will deter- mine if the proposed waste transfer station meets current regulations. However, you and your neighbors may want to work with the transfer station developer to negotiate a sepa- rate agreement documenting commitments that you expect the developer to keep. This agreement can include both per- formance measures to ensure the community is not unduly impacted as well as possible benefits the developer will pro- vide to offset the facility's impacts. Benefits can range from commitments to employ local residents, construction of day care centers, parks or other facilities that enhance the com- munity to actual payment of a fee to enable the community to provide other neighborhood improvements. • Local decision officials hear and address com- It's important to get mportant elements of an effective public partici- involved early to share your I pation process may include the following: concerns with the waste • Open sharing of relevant information. transfer station developer Advance notice of any proposed public or pri- and government regulators vate solid waste transfer stations. and discuss what the devel- Advance notice of opportunities for public oper can do for you and your involvement in the approval process. community. • Local decision officials hear and address com- • What is the process for munity social, economic, and health concerns How can communities in advance of site selection and permit filing. open up tate lines of • Open sharing of relevant information. communication? how they intend to address community con - Contact your local • Access to facility planning and/or permitting government. documents. Find answers to the following • Reasonable time to review documents and, if questions: warranted, the assistance of independent tech- The Planning Process nical experts. • A facilitator for public meetings who is experi- Where can you obtain a enced or trained in working with communities copy of the locality's solid and addressing controversial issues. waste plan? Availability of interpreters for public meetings • What is the process for and multilingual fact sheets, public notices and approving or amending the other outreach materials. solid waste plan? Determine Feedback from state/tribal/local officials on if it has been followed. how they intend to address community con - cerns. Who is in charge of waste management planning and siting new facilities? • What is the process for establishing a new facility or modify- ing an existing one? • What area/communities will this facility serve? • Who is the appropriate contact at the local level for project - specific information? • Has an application for a new or modified facility been sub- mitted to the local government, state, or tribe? If so, ask for a copy or where you can view it. • Are the facilities publicly or privately owned? to Applicable Regulations • What regulations/standards apply to waste transfer station siting, design, operation? Who enforces them? • Find out if there is a solid waste planning committee and, if so, when it meets. • Do the zoning ordinances specify where waste transfer sta- tions are allowed and the process for special exceptions to the existing zoning plan? Opportunities for Public Participation • What opportunities are there for public input? • Is there a central repository for documents for public review? • When is the zoning hearing and what are the procedures for participation? Contact your local elected official. Find answers to the following questions: • What information is available on the project? • What is the schedule for building the facility? • What is the size of the facility? • What are the proposed tonnages that the facility will handle, and what communities will they be coming from? • How much traffic will the facility generate? • When is the public meeting scheduled? Contact your state solid waste or tribal environmental agency. Find answers to the following questions: • What administrative require- ments exist, including public hearings for waste transfer stations? M • What is the process for requesting a public hearing? • What are the regulations that apply to transfer stations'! Do they address your concerns. If not, why not? • What is the permitting and regulatory process? Does regula- tory authority rest with the state agency, a local agency or a combination of the two? If located on a reservation, does authority rest with the tribal council or another tribal envi- ronmental entity? • Where can the public review the state application for a waste transfer station? How do I get involved? Form or join a community advisory panel. A community advisory panel (CAP) should reflect local diversi- ty and include residents, businesses, and industry. CAPS can provide insight and external input and may oversee administra- tion of host benefits or amenities agreed upon as part of siting discussions. For instance, a CAP might be formed to administer funds allocated for job training programs. to formulate your position on the proposed waste transfer station, review the information you have collected. Identify operating and design measures that will protect the public interest. Write down your concerns and thoughts in a concise, logical, and constructive manner. Attempt to understand other perspectives and acknowledge them while meeting your goals. Select your best spokesperson to present your position at the public meeting or hearing. Attend public meetings or hearings. Find answers to the following questions: • What benefits would the waste transfer station provide? • How will the waste transfer station affect the community and the envirnnmant? • How will the community be affected by truck traffic? • What types of litter, noise, and vector controls will the facility have? l7 • Will all waste be removed or containerized at the end of the day? • How will storm water and wash water runoff be managed? • How will the community be economically impacted? • What type of odor control will the facility have? • How will the waste transfer station save you money? • What potential hazards may be expected and how will they he addressed? • Does the community get any special benefits? Secure follow-up on your concerns from the local regulatory authority. Ask questions such as the following: • How will the local regulatory authority monitor resolution of your concerns? • When will you be able to meet with project manage- ment? • Who will provide long- term oversight of facility operations? • What provisions are being made so that the public can review the facility's operating history and per- mit compliance after regu- lar operations begin? • Can the community be involved in site inspec- tions and reviews? • Will the authority help schedule a visit to a similar facility? I What kinds of community benefits might be negotiable? Based on the experience of communities around the country, there are many neighborhood benefits that can be negotiated if you communicate and meet with the waste transfer station developer. The range of community benefits depends on several factors, including availability of alternate sites, population densi- ty, land use of surrounding areas, and the economics of the pro- posed facility. Benefits that communities have asked for include: • Landscaping, lighting, and local park areas. • Limitations on waste generation sources (e.g., off reservation, out of county, out of state). • Funding of public road/infrastructure improvements. • Restrictions on truck traffic, including designated routing. • Guaranteed preference to the community's residents for employment. • Commitment to regularly pick up litter and sweep streets in and around the waste transfer statinn • Participation in site inspections and operation reviews. • A hotline with the name and phone number of someone that will act on and respond to complaints. • Restrictions on operating hours. • Commitment to cleaning up the tipping floor at day's end. • Free or reduced -cost use of the facility for the community's residents and businesses. • Improvements to community schools, recreation programs, fire department, etc. • Free recyclables collection and/or processing. • Guarantees for housing values. • A fee paid to the local government for every ton of waste received at the facility. You can also negotiate to require that community representa- tives have access to the facility during operations to monitor 14 Thanks to the Santa Fe, New Mexico, Solid Waste Management Division's door-to- door informational campaign and the involvement of concerned citizens, the solid waste transfer station was designed in a way aesthetically pleasing to the residents. City officials responded to a number of citizen concerns regarding the design and proposed operation of the transfer station, including a request for the transfer station to conform to the stucco -and -tile architectural style prevalent in the Santa Fe area. To inform residents about the proposed waste transfer station, which opened in 1997, city officials conducted public hearings, met with neighborhood associations, and went door-to-door distributing newsletters with proposed details on the transfer station's design and how the decision-making process would be implemented. During the public involvement process, residents expressed concerns regarding traffic impacts, stray litter, odor and dust, and the visual effect of the transfer station. The city responded with a number of changes that included: • Building and upgrading roads to ensure large transfer trucks would travel north of the neighborhood, away from major streets. • Having crews daily pick up litter that might blow or fall onto neighborhood streets. • Washing down the transfer station twice each week and removing transfer station waste at the end of each day. • A powerful ventilation system to limit odors. • Incorporating the design of the transfer station to be in the Santa Fe architectural style. It is important to note that the citizens most affected by the transfer station had lived for some time near the city's closed landfill. Over the years, city officials consistently responded to citizen concerns about illegal dumping and stray litter from the landfill, resulting in a positive, trusting relationship with the community This relationship likely facil- itated the public involvement process. performance. Safety concerns and potential for interference with daily operations must be addressed if this provision is included. Information Availahle From EPA The following publications are available through the RCRA Hotline. To order a document, call 800 424- 9346 (or 800 553- 7672 for the hearing-impaired). In Washington, DC, the number 15 is 703 412-9810 or TDD 703- 412-3323. The RCRA Hotline is open from Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., EST. • Waste'lransfer Stations: A Manual for Decision -Making (EPA530-D-01-005) (Draft, February 2001.) • Social Aspects of Siting RCRA Hazardous Waste Facilities (EPA530-K-00-005.) • Decision -Maker's Guide To Solid Waste Management (EPA530-R-95-023) • Sites for Our Solid Waste: A Guidebook for Effective Public Involvement (EPA530-SW-90-019) An initial siting choice for a waste transfer station in Leon County, Florida, failed to gain the approval of citizens and local business owners. In response, the county board held a series of public meetings and workshops for almost a year, to evaluate approxi- mately 15 potential alternative sites for the transfer station. Attended by hundreds of peo- ple, this public process resulted in a final site selection, after which the county board appointed a site development review committee whose mission was to develop operat- ing and design criteria that would meet the needs of businesses and residents in this sub- urban area of West Tallahassee. The committee comprised a neighborhood association representative, a local business representative, a university professor, a private consultant, and transportation, public works, and solid waste officials from city and county government. The committee requested transportation and noise studies to help it develop recommendations for reducing the transfer station's environmental impacts. The studies persuaded the county's solid waste department to change the transfer station from a top -load to a compactor -type design that would reduce noise, building height, and overall costs, plus provide for cleaner operations. The modified design also made funds available to improve the sound absorption of the transfer station's interior walls. The review committee also developed operating criteria addressing other potential hazards and nuisances to the community One requirement included having an industrial hygienist monitor the safety of the transfer station annually To compensate the community for hosting the transfer station, the committee approved a "host fee" of 50 cents per ton of waste. The community will use revenue from this host fee, expected to generate $75,000 in the transfer station's first year of operation, to pay for neighborhood improvements such as local sewer repairs. Leon County's transfer station has yet to be built, however. Despite extensive public involvement, a group of adjacent property owners is challenging the final site selection, even though they participated in the decision-making process. 16 Additional Information from EPA • The Model Plan for Public Participation, EPA National Environmental Justice Advisory Council. Contact EPA Office of Environmental Justice (http://es.epa.gov/oeca/main/el/ nejacpub.html). • Constructive Engagement Resource Guide: Practical Advice for Dialogue Among Facilities, Workers, Communities, and Regulators (EPA745-B-99-008) June 1999. Contact EPA's National Service Center for Environmental Publications at 1-800-490-9198 or visit the Web at www.epa.gov/ stakeholders /siteguide. htm. Other Selected Sources of Information • Solid Waste Transfer in Illinois: A Citizen's Handbook on Planning, Siting and Technology. Contact Dupage County Solid Waste Department, Wheaton Illinois. Telephone: 630 682-6755. • National Environmental Justice Advisory Council Regulatory Strategy for Siting and Operating Waste Transfer Stations (report #500-R-00-001). Contact Kent Benjamin at EPA at 202 260-2822 or visit the web at: http://es.epa.gov/oeca/main/ei/neiacpub.html. Selected Internet Resources • EPA's Office of Solid Waste (www.epa.gov/msw) • EPA's Office of Environmental Justice (http://es.epa.gov/oeca/ main /ei/index.html) • EPA's Office of Civil Rights (http://www.epa.gov/civilrights) State Solid Waste Contacts Alabama Alabama Department of Environmental Management, Land Division, Solid Waste Branch, P.O. Box 301463, Montgomery, AL 36130-1463. Phone: 334/271-7730. Fax: 334/279-3050 Alaska Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Environmental Health Division, Solid Waste Program, 410 17 Willoughby Avenue, Juneau, AK 99801-1795, Phone: 907/465- 5350. Fax: 907/465-5164 Arizona Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, Waste Programs Division. Solid Waste Section. 3033 North Central Avenue. Phoenix. AZ 85012. Phone: 602/207-4208, Fax: 602/207-2383 Arkansas Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology, Solid Waste Division, P.O. Box 8913. Little Rock. AR 72219-8913. Phone: 501/682-0600. Fax: 501/682-0611 California California Integrated Waste Management Board, 8800 Cal Center Drive. Sacramento. CA, 95826, Phone: 916/255-2182, Fax: 916/255-2227 Colorado Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division, 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South, Denver, CO 80222-1530, Phone: 303/692-3300. Fax: 303/759-5355 Connecticut Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Waste Management, 79 Elm Street, 4th Floor, Hartford, CT 06106-5127. Phone: 860/424-3021, Fax: 860/424-4060 Delaware Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Air and Waste Management Division, Hazardous and Solid Waste Management, 89 Kings Highway, Dover, DE 19901, Phone: 302/739-4764. Fax: 302/739-5060 District of Columbia DC Department of Public Works, Solid Waste Administration, 2750 South Capitol Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20032, Phone: 202/645-7044. Fax: 202/645-6040 Florida Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Waste Management, Bureau of Solid & Hazardous Waste, Solid Waste Management Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400. Phone: 850/488-0300. Fax: 850/414-0414 IN Georgia Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division, Land Protection Branch. Solid Waste Management, 4244 International Parkway, Suite 104, Atlanta, GA 30354. Phone: 404/362-2537. Fax: 404/362-2654 Hawaii Hawaii Department of Health, Environmental Management Division, Office of Solid Waste Management, 919 Ala Moana, Room 300, Honolulu, HI 96814, Phone: 808/586-4250, Fax: 808/586-4370 Idaho Idaho Division of Environmental Quality, Solid Waste Program, 410 North Hilton Street. Boise. ID 83706, Phone: 208/373-0502, Fax: 208/373-n417 Illinois Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land, Solid Waste Management Section, P.O. Box 19276, Springfield, IL 62794-9276, Phone: 217/785-9407. Fax: 217/557-4231 Indiana Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Office of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, P.O. Box 6015, Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015, Phone: 317/232-3210, Fax: 317/232-3403 Iowa Iowa Department of Natural Resources, Land Quality Bureau, Solid Waste Section, 900 East Grand Avenue, Henry A. Wallace Bldg., Des Moines, IA 50319-0034, Phone: 515/281-4968, Fax: 515/281- 8895 Kansas Kansas Department of Health and Environment, Division of Environment, Bureau of Waste Management, Forbes Field, Iff Building 283, Topeka, KS 66620, Phone: 785/296-1612, Fax: 785/296-1592 Kentucky Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection, Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Branch, Frankfort Office Park, 14 Reilly Road, Frankfort, KY 40601 Phone: 502/564-6716, Fax- 5n2/564-4049 Louisiana Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Office of Solid and Hazardous Waste. Solid Waste Division. P.O. Box 82178. Baton Rouge, LA 70884-2178, Phone: 225/765-0249, Fax: 225/765-0299 Maine Maine Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Remediation and Waste Management, Division of Solid Waste Facilities Regulation, 17 State House Station, Augusta, ME 04333-0017. Phone:2 07/287-2651. Fax: 207/287-7826 Maryland Maryland Department of the Environment, Waste Management Administration, Solid Waste Program, 2500 Broening Highway, Baltimore, MD 21224. Phone: 410/631-3304, Fax: 410/631-3321 Massachusetts. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Waste Prevention. Solid Waste Division. One Winter Street. Boston, MA 02108, Phone: 617/292-5953. Fax: 617/292-5778 Michigan Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Waste Management Division, Solid Waste Program, P.O. Box 30241, Lansing, MI 48909, Phone: 517/335-9523, Fax: 517/373-4797 Minnesota Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Policy and Planning Division, 520 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155-4194, Phone: 651/297-8502. Fax: 651/297-8676 Mississippi Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, Office of Pollution Control, Solid Waste Management Branch, P.O. Box 20 10385, Jackson, MS 38289, Phone: 601/961-5171, Fax: 601/354- 6612 Missouri Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Division of Environmental Quality, Solid Waste Management Program, P.O. Box 176, Jefferson City, MO 65102, Phone: 573/751-5401, Fax: 573/526-3902 Montana Montana Department of Environmental Quality, Permitting and Compliance Division, P.O. Box 200901, Helena, MT 59620-0901, Phone: 406/444-5270. Fax: 406/444-1374 Nebraska Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality, Waste Management Division, 1200 N Street, Suite 400, Lincoln, NE 68509-8922, Phone: 402/471-4210. Fax: 402/471-2909 Nevada Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Waste Management, Solid Waste Branch, 333 West Nye Lane, Capitol Complex, Carson City, NV 89710, Phone: 702/687-4670, Fax: 702/885-0868 New Hampshire New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, Waste Management Division, 6 Hazen Drive, Concord, NH 03301- 6509. Phone: 603/271-2905. Fax: 603/271-2456 New jersey New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste, P.O. Box 414, Trenton, NJ 08625, Phone: 609/984-6880. Fax: 609/984-6874 New Mexico New Mexico Environment Department, Environmental Protection Division, Solid Waste Bureau. 1190 St. Francis Dr.. P.O. Box 26110, Santa Fe, NM 87503, Phone: 505/827-2855, Fax: 505/827-2902 New York New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Solid & Hazardous Materials, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, NY 12233-7250. Phone: 518/457-6934. Fax: 518/457-0629 21 North Carolina North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Waste Management, Solid Waste Section, P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, NC 27611-7687, Phone: 919/733-0692, Fax: 919/733-4810 North Dakota North Dakota Department of Health, Division of Waste Management, P.O. Box 5520, Bismarck, ND 58506-5520, Phone: 701/328-5166. Fax: 701/328-5200 Ohio Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Solid and Infectious Waste Management P.O. Box 163669, Columbus, OH 43216-3669. Phone: 614/728-5333, Fax: 614/728-5315 Oklahoma Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality, Waste Management Division, P.O. Box 1677, Oklahoma City, OK 73102. Phone: 405/702-5100. Fax: 405/702-5101 Oregon Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Waste Management and Cleanup Division Solid Waste Planning & Program Development Section, 811 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Portland, OR 97204, Phone: 503/229-5072, Fax: 503/229-6977 Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Land Recycling and Waste Management, Division of Municipal and Residual Waste, P.O. Box 8471,Harrisburg, PA 17105-8471. Phone: 717/787-2388, Fax: 717/787-1904 Rhnde Island Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, Division of Waste Management, 235 Promenade Street, Providence, RI 02908. Phone: 401/222-4700. Fax: 401/222-3813 South Carolina South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Bureau of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Division of Solid Waste Management, 2600 Bull Street Columbia. SC 29201, Phone: 803/896-4007, Fax: 803/896-4001 ,? South Dakota South Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Division of Environmental Services, Waste Management Program, 523 East Capitol, Foss Bldg., Pierre, SD 57501-3181. Phone: 605/773-3153. Fax: 605/773-4068 Tennessee Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management, Solid Waste Management Unit, 5th Floor, L & C Tower, 401 Church Street, Nashville, TN 37243-1535, Phone: 615/532-0780, Fax 615/532-0896 Texas TX Natural Resource Conservation Commission. Permits Division, P.O. Box 13087, Austin, TX 78711-3087, Phone: 512/239-6787. Fax: 512/239-2007 Utah Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste. Solid Waste Section. P.O. Box 144880. Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4880, Phone: 801/538-6170, Fax: 801/538-6715 Vermont Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, Waste Management Division, Solid Waste Management, 103 South Main Street, Waterbury, VT 05671-0404, Phone: 802/241-3444, Fax: 802/241-3296 Virginia Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Waste Division, P.O. Box 10009. Richmond. VA 23240-0009. Phone: 804/698- 4221. Fax: 804/698-4234 Washington Washington State Department of Ecology, Waste Management Programs, Solid Waste and Financial Services Program, P.O. Box 47600, Olympia, WA 98504-7600, Phone: 360/407-6103, Fax: 360/407-6102. West Virginia West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Waste Management, Solid Waste Management Section, 1356 21 Hansford Street, Charleston, WV 25301-1401, Phone: 304/558- 5929. Fax: 304/558-0256 Wisconsin Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Air and Waste Division, Bureau of Waste Management, P.O. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707. Phone: 608/266-1327. Fax: 608/267-2768 Wyoming Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, Solid and Hazardous Waste Division, 122 West 25th Street, Cheyenne, WY 82002. Phone: 307/777-7752. Fax: 307/777-5973 American Samoa Environmental Quality Commission, American Samoan Government, Department of Public Works, Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799. Phone: 684/633-4141. Fax: 684/633-5801 Guam Guam Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Land Division, P.O. Box 22439, GMF Barrigada, Guam 96921, Phone: 671/475-1658, Fax: 671/477-9402 Northern Mariana Islands Division of Environmental Quality, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, 3rd Floor, Morgen's Bldg., San Jose, P.O. Box 1304, Saipan, MP 96950, Phone: 670/234-6114, Fax: 670/234-1003 Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board, Office of the Governor, Land Pollution Area. P.O. Box 11488. Santurce. PR 00910. Phone: 787/763-4448, Fax: 787/766-0150 Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources, Government of the Virgin Islands, Division of Environmental Protection, Building 111, Apartment 114, Christiansted, St. Croix, VI 00820, Phone: 809/773-0565. Fax: 809/773-9310 24 + k. ♦ s aP EPA Waste Transfer Stations: Environmental Protection Agency A Manual for Decision -Making X I 2W x f vets i> ) 2rla�id.risk� I 2W he Office of Solid Waste (OSW) would like to acknowledge and thank the members of the Solid Waste Association of North America Focus Group and the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council Waste Transfer Station Working Group for reviewing and providing comments on this draft document. We would also like to thank Keith Gordon of Weaver Boos & Gordon, Inc., for providing a technical review and donating several of the photographs included in this document. Acknowledgements i Acknowledgments......................................................i Introduction...........................................................1 What Are Waste Transfer Stations? .................................................. 1 Why Are Waste Transfer Stations Needed? ........................................... 2 Why Use Waste Transfer Stations? .................................................. 3 Is a Transfer Station Right for Your Community? ....................................... 4 Planning and Siting a Transfer Station ........................................ 7 Types of Waste Accepted.........................................................7 How Will the Transfer Station Be Used? ......................................... Unacceptable Wastes............................................................7 Site Design Plan.............................................................21 Public Versus Commercial Use ..................................................... 8 Determining Transfer Station Size and Capacity ....................................... 8 Number and Sizing of Transfer Stations ......................................... 10 Future Expansion............................................................11 Transfer Station Operations ...... :................................................ Site Selection..................................................................11 Operations and Maintenance Plans ............................................. Environmental Justice Considerations ........................................... 11 The Siting Process and Public Involvement SitingCriteria...................................................................14 Exclusionary Siting Criteria .................................................... 14 Technical Siting Criteria....................................................... 15 Developing Community -Specific Criteria ........................................ 17 Applying the Committee's Criteria ............................................. 18 Host Community Agreements ................................................. 18 Transfer Station Design and Operation ...................................... 21 Transfer Station Design..........................................................21 How Will the Transfer Station Be Used? ......................................... 21 Site Design Plan.............................................................21 Main Transfer Area Design .................................................... 22 Types of Vehicles That Use a Transfer Station .................................... 23 Transfer Technology.........................................................25 Transfer Station Operations ...... :................................................ 27 Operations and Maintenance Plans ............................................. 27 Facility Operating Hours......................................................32 Interacting With the Public .................................................... 33 Waste Screening............................................................33 Emergency Situations........................................................34 Recordkeeping..............................................................35 Environmental Issues.............................................................37 Traffic.....................................................................38 Noise.....................................................................39 Odors.....................................................................40 Contents iii AirEmissions...............................................................41 Storm Water Quality.........................................................41 Vectors....................................................................43 Litter......................................................................43 SafetyIssues...................................................................44 Exposure to Potentially Hazardous Equipment .................................... 45 Personal Protective Equipment ................................................ 45 Exposure to Extreme Temperatures............................................45 Traffic.....................................................................45 Falls.......................................................................46 Noise.....................................................................47 AirQuality.................................................................47 Hazardous Wastes and Materials .............................................. 48 Ergonomics.................................................................48 Facility Oversight......................................................49 Applicable Regulations...........................................................49 Federal Regulations..........................................................49 State Regulations............................................................49 Local Regulations............................................................49 Common Regulatory Compliance Methods ......................................... 50 Compliance Inspections......................................................50 Reporting..................................................................50 Resources...........................................................51 Glossary of Terms and Acronyms..........................................53 Appendix............................................................A-1 iv Contents Un his manual defines what a transfer station is and how it relates to municipal solid waste management in the context of a community's total waste management plan. The manual identifies issues and factors to consid- er when deciding to build a transfer station, planning and designing it, selecting a site, and involving the community. In many communities, citizens have voiced concerns about solid waste transfer stations that are poorly sited, designed, or operated. In addition, some citizens might feel that transfer stations are disproportionately concentrated in or near their communities. Yet transfer sta- tions play an important role in a community's waste management system. In 1993, the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) was formed to "provide independent advice, consultation, and recommendations to EPA on matters relat- ed to environmental justice." The Waste and Facility Siting Subcommittee, one of NEJAC's six subcommittees, received numerous com- ments from citizens of several major metropol- itan areas concerning the negative impacts of waste transfer stations and their dispropor- tionate siting in low-income communities and communities of color. The Subcommittee, with support from EPA, formed the Waste Transfer Station Working Group in 1998 to investigate these comments. The Working Group arranged two fact-finding sessions in New York City and Washington, DC, during November 1998 and February 1999 respective- ly. These sessions were each two-day events consisting of a day of tours of area waste transfer stations and a second day of public meetings. Based upon these two fact-finding sessions, the Working Group in March 2000 published the draft report, A Regulatory Strategy for Siting and Operating Waste Transfer Stations. This report made several recommen- dations to EPA concerning proper and equi- table siting and operation of transfer stations. In response in to this report, EPA has devel- oped this manual and its companion publica- tion Waste Transfer Stations: Involved Citizens Make the Difference (EPA530-K-01-003). The intent of this manual is to promote the use of best practices in transfer station siting, design, and operation to maximize facilities' effectiveness and efficiency, while minimizing their impact on the community. It is designed to assist facility owners and operators; state, local, and tribal environmental managers; and the public evaluate and choose protective practices for siting, designing, and operation; of municipal solid waste transfer stations. The manual is divided into the following chapters: w Planning and Siting a Transfer Station w Transfer Station Design and Operations w Facility Oversight What Are Waste Transfer Stations? Waste transfer stations play an important role in a community's total waste management system, serving as the link between a commu- Aerial view of a totally enclosed transfer station. Introduction 1 5 12JrP�c,� nity's solid waste collection program and a final waste disposal facility. While facility ownership, sizes, and services offered vary significantly among transfer stations, they all serve the same basic purpose—consolidafing- waste=from-multiple collection vehicles`into' larger, high=volume=transfer-vehicles=for-more economicaLshipment-to distant=disposaLsites.. In its simplest form, a transfer station is a facility with a designated receiving area where waste collection vehicles discharge their loads. The waste is often compacted, then loaded into larger vehicles (usually transfer trailers, but intermodal containers, railcars, and barges are also used) for long-haul shipment to a final disposal site—typically a landfill, waste - to -energy plant, or a composting facility. No long-terrrt=storage of_waste occurs -ata station; waste-is-quickly-consolidated'and� loaded into_a larger_vehicle and -moved off site;—usuallyyin a_matter_of_hour" For purposes of this manual, facilities serv- ing only as citizen drop-off stations or com- munity convenience centers are not considered waste transfer stations. Only a facility that receives some portion of its waste directly from collection vehicles, then consoli- dates and reloads the waste onto larger vehi- cles for delivery to a final disposal facility, is considered a transfer station. A convenience center, on the other hand, is a designated area where residents manually discard waste and recyclables into dumpsters or collection con- tainers. These containers are periodically removed or emptied, and the waste is trans- ported to the appropriate disposal site (or pos- sibly to a transfer station first). Convenience centers are not suitable for use as transfer sta- tions because they cannot readily handle the large volume of waste that is discharged by a self -unloading collection truck. While these sites are not considered transfer stations with- in the context of this manual, it is important to note that heavily used convenience centers can face similar concerns as transfer stations (e.g., litter, road access, vehicle queuing, storm water run on and run off). Consequently, it may be appropriate to consider implementing some of the concepts and practices advocated in this manual at these sites. Many communi- 2 Introduction ties have installed full-service operations that provide public waste and recyclables drop-off accommodations on the same site as their transfer stations. Sou -and recycling also -play -an integral-_role_in a community -'dotal -waste management.system-fThese two activities can significantly reduce the weight and volume of waste materials requiring disposal, which reduces transportation, landfill, and incinera- tor costs. Source reduction consists of reduc- ing waste at the source by changing product design, manufacturing processes, and pur- chasing and sales practices to reduce the quantity or toxicity of materials before they reach the waste stream. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) policy promotes source reduction as the waste management technique of choice. Recycling—the collection, processing, and manufacture of new products—likewise diverts materials from the landfill or incinera- tor. These recyclable materials are prepared for shipment to markets in a special facility called a MRF;=which=stands-for=materials-recovery. facility: A MRF is simply a special type of MtQir transfer=station=that=separates processes'and consolidates recyclable -materials -for -shipment to_one=or-more:recovery facilities rather°than-e landfill=or=other-disposal-site Consequently, the concepts and practices in this manual can be applied to MRFs as well. Aggressive community source reduction and recycling programs can substantially reduce the amount of waste destined for long haul transfer and disposal. If these reductions are significant enough, a community may find that fewer or smaller transfer stations can meet its needs. Why Are Waste Transfer Stations Needed? The nationwide trend in solid waste disposal has been toward construction of larger, more remote, regional landfills. Economic consid- erations, heavily influenced by regulatory and social forces, are compelling factors leading to this result. The passage of federal criteria in 1991 established new design requirements for municipal solid waste land- fills. These new standards include design, operating, and monitoring requirements that significantly add to construction, operating, closure, and post -closure monitoring costs. As older landfills near urban centers reach capacity and begin closing, cities must decide whether to construct new landfills or to seek other disposal options. Many com- munities find the cost of upgrading existing facilities or constructing new landfills to be prohibitively high, and opt to close existing facilities. For these communities, transferring waste to a large regional landfill is an appealing alternative. In addition to regulatory requirements, public opposition frequently makes siting new landfills near population centers difficult. The current atmosphere is such that gaining public and political approval for constructing new disposal capacity near population centers is challenging. Also, adequate land is often not �aP available near densely populated or urban mo1C areas. These sosfal;_political and: geographical „ jirlt$ factors_ have_further.stiiriutated the:rise' con_ stnactiono€large; reoote; rogiooal landfill Economic considerations, especially economies of scale, further promote develop- ment of large regional facilities. To offset the high cost of constructing and maintaining a modern landfill, facility owners construct large facilities that attract high volumes of waste from a greater geographic area. By maintaining a high volume of incoming waste, landfill owners can keep the per -ton tipping fees low, which subsequently attracts more business. Rural and urban communities alike are finding that the most economically viable solution to their waste disposal needs is ship- ping their waste to these facilities. In these cir- cumstances, a transfer station serves as the critical consolidation link in making cost-effec- tive shipments to these distant facilities. Why Use Waste Transfer Stations? The primary reason for using a transfer station is to reduce the cost of transporting waste to disposal facilities. Consolidating smaller loads from collection vehicles into larger transfer vehicles reduces hauling costs by enabling col - Figure 1. Sample Comparison of Hauling Costs With and Without a Transfer Station .. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Round-trip Distance from Waste Source to Disposal, miles The following assumptions were used to create this sample comparison: Cost to build, own, and operate transfer station—dollars per ton $10 Average payload of collection truck hauling directly to landfill—tons 7 Average payload of transfer truck hauling from transfer station to landfill—tons 21 Average trucking cost (direct or transfer hauling)—dollars per mile $3 The comparison shows a break-even distance of about 35 miles (round-trip). In other words, for this example, using a transfer station is cost-effective when the round-trip distance exceeds 35 miles. When the round-trip distance is less than 35 miles, direct haul is more cost-effective. Although the same economic principles apply, break-even distances will vary in different situations based on the site-specific input data. lection crews to spend less time traveling to and from distant disposal sites and more time collecting waste. This also reduces fuel con- sumption and collection vehicle maintenance costs, plus produces less overall traffic, air emissions, and road wear. In addition, a transfer station also provides: • An opportunity to screen waste prior to dis- posal. Introduction 3 • Flexibility in selecting waste disposal options. • An opportunity to serve as a convenience center for public use. At many transfer stations, workers screen incoming wastes on conveyor systems, tipping 5cttfpft�i floors, or in receiving pits. Waste screening has e two components: separating recyclables from W GSA the waste stream and identifying any wastes that might be inappropriate for disposal (e.g., hazardous wastes or materials, white goods, whole tires, auto batteries, or infectious waste). Identifying and removing recyclables reduces the weight and volume of waste sent for final disposal and, depending on local recycling markets, might generate revenue. Screening for inappropriate wastes is more efficient at the transfer station than the landfill. Waste transfer stations also offer more flexi- bility in terms of disposal options. Decision - makers have the opportunity to select the most cost-effective and/or environmentally Calculating Transfer Station Break -Even Points To calculate the break-even point for a specific facility, first determine the following values: Transfer Station Cost (cost to build, own, and operate transfer station, in dollars per ton) • Direct Haul Payload (average payload of collection truck hauling directly to landfill, in tons) • Transfer Haul Payload (average payload of transfer truck hauling from transfer station to landfill, in tons) • Trucking Cost (average cost of direct or transfer hauling, in dollars per mile) Once these values are known, use the following formulas to calculate cost at different distances: 11 1 Cost of Direct Haul (without the use of a waste transfer station) Distance (miles) multiplied by Trucking Cost (dollars per mile) divided by Direct Haul Payload (tons) : Cost of Transfer Haul Transfer Station Cost (dollars per ton) plus Distance (miles) multiplied by Trucking Cost (dollars per mile) divided by Transfer Haul Payload (tons) 4 Introduction protective disposal sites, even if they are more distant. They can consider multiple disposal facilities, secure competitive disposal fees, and choose a desired method of disposal (e.g., landfilling or incineration). Finally, transfer stations often include con- venience centers open to public use. These cen- ters enable individual citizens to deliver waste directly to the transfer station facility for ulti- mate disposal. Some convenience centers offer programs to manage yard waste, bulky items, household hazardous waste, and recyclables. These multipurpose convenience centers are assets to the community because they assist in achieving recycling goals, increase the public's knowledge of proper materials management, and divert materials that would otherwise bur- den existing disposal capacity. Is a Transfer Station Right for Your Community? Deciding whether a transfer station is appro- priate for an individual community is based on determining if the benefits outweigh the costs. Decision -makers need to weigh the plan- ning, siting, designing, and operating costs against the savings the transfer station might generate from reduced hauling costs. To assist in making this determination, public and pri- vate decision -makers often employ third -party solid waste experts. These experts are familiar with both the technical and regulatory issues that must be addressed in developing a suc- cessful waste transfer station. It may be help- ful to retain qualified consulting or engineering firms specializing in solid waste engineering. It is also important to note that in some areas, the regulatory agency might require that the transfer station plans be certi- fied by a professional engineer. Again, this engineer should be an experienced solid waste professional. Complex projects might also require the assistance of architects, geotechni- cal engineers, lawyers, and other specialists. Although cost-effectiveness will vary, transfer stations generally become economi- cally viable when the hauling distance to the disposal facility is greater than 15 to 20 miles. Figure 1 demonstrates a representative "cost versus miles' relationship between direct hauling waste to disposal facilities in collec- tion vehicles versus consolidation, transfer, and hauling in larger vehicles. Using the assumptions listed below Figure 1, we see that the average cost per ton to move the waste from the collection vehicle onto the transfer vehicle is $10 before the hauling vehi- cle leaves the transfer station. This is the cost per ton to build, operate, and maintain the station. Due to its economy of scale, however, the transfer trailer can move waste on a much lower "per mile' basis because it can carry the waste of several individual collection vehicles. Using the assumptions listed, the cost per ton per mile (ton -mile) using a collection vehi- cle is $0.43 ($3/mile truck operating cost divid- ed by 7 tons per average load). In this example, the transfer hauling vehicle's cost per ton -mile is much lower, at $0.14 ($3 divided by 21 tons per average load). Figure 1 shows how this cost per ton -mile advantage for the trans- fer hauling vehicle soon overcomes the initial cost of developing and operating the transfer station. In this case, based on the indicated assumptions, cost savings will start to be real- ized when the round-trip hauling distance exceeds 35 miles (17.5 miles one way). Because the cost to own, operate, and maintain collec- tion vehicles, transfer stations, and transfer hauling vehicles will vary depending on local parameters, the break-even point indicated on Figure 1 will vary. The formulas used in gener- ating Figure 1 are provided below to allow for site-specific calculations. Introduction 5 ffrMa=nMfelrN't_at,I o_n variety of issues must be taken into account during the planning and siting stages of transfer sta- tion development. This section discusses the types of waste trans- fer stations typically accept, factors affecting a transfer station's size and capacity, and issues regarding facility siting, including process issues and public involvement. While the planning and siting phases of facility develop- ment might involve a significant investment of resources, this initial investment is crucial to ensuring an appropriate project outcome sen- sitive to the host community. Types of Waste Accepted In addition to processing mixed municipal solid waste (MSW), some transfer stations offer programs that manage specific materials separately to divert waste from disposal and to achieve recycling objectives. These materi- als could include construction and demolition debris, yard waste, household hazardous waste, or recyclables. The types of materials processed often vary depending on where the facility is located (urban, suburban, rural) and who owns and operates the transfer station (public entity or private industry). Types of waste that transfer stations com- monly handle are described in the adjacent box. If a community offers programs that man- age parts of the waste stream separately, it might reduce expenses by locating the materi- al management programs at the transfer sta- tion. Savings might result by: • Using dual -collection vehicles for refuse and source -separated waste streams and delivering all waste to the transfer station in one vehicle. • Continuing to use separate collections for refuse and source -separated waste streams, but having all processing facilities located at one site, thus minimizing the cost of multiple utility connections, traffic control systems, office space, and administration. This approach also eliminates the cost and complexity of multiple siting and permit- ting efforts. Unacceptable Wastes Certain wastes might be unacceptable at a transfer station for a variety of reasons, including: • They are prohibited by state or federal reg- ulations (e.g., PCBs, lead acid batteries, radioactive materials). =Wastes Commonly Handled at Transfer Stations, -: The following types of waste are commonly handled at transfer stations. Specific definitions of these wastes vary locally Municipal solid waste (MSW) is generated by households, businesses, institutions, and industry. MSW typically contains a wide variety of materials including discarded containers, packaging, food wastes, and paper products. MSW includes a mixture of putrescible (easily degradable) and nonputresci- ble (inert) materials. Three types of MSW are commonly diverted and han- dled separately: Yard waste (green waste) commonly includes leaves, grass clippings, ,. tree trimmings, and brush. Yard waste is often diverted so that it may be composted or mulched instead of going for disposal. Household hazardous waste (HHW) includes hazardous materials generated by households, such as cleaning products; pesticides; herbi- cides;used automotive products such as motor oil, brake fluid, and ' antifreeze; and paint. Recyclables include discarded materials that can be reprocessed for manufacture into new products. Common recyclables include paper, newsprint, ferrous metals, plastic, glass containers, aluminum cans, motor oil, and tires. is .Construction and demolition (C&D) debris results from demolition or,,.. construction of buildings, roads, and other structures. It typically consists of concrete, brick, wood, masonry, roofing materials, sheetrock, plaster, metals, and tree stumps. Sometimes C&D debris is managed separately from MSW; other times it is mixed with MSW. Planning and Siting a Transfer Station 7 • They are difficult or costly to process (e.g., tires). • They might pose a health or fire hazard. • They might be prohibited at the disposal facility to which the transfer station delivers. • They might be prohibited (within a mixed waste load destined for disposal) because local regulations require they be recycled. • They might be so large that they could damage trucks or equipment during waste loading operations. The following types of wastes are typically not accepted at transfer stations: large bulky objects such as tree stumps, mattresses, or fur- niture; infectious medical waste; hazardous waste; explosives; radioactive materials; fuel tanks (even if empty); appliances; dead ani- mals; asbestos; liquids and sludges; and dust - prone materials. This is a general list; some transfer stations might be set up to process these wastes, while others might have a longer list of unacceptable materials. While these and other unacceptable wastes represent a small fraction of the solid waste stream, properly managing them can require significant effort by the transfer station operator and the local solid waste management authority. The sec- tion on waste screening in the Transfer Station Design and Operation chapter further discuss- es how to properly manage and reduce the frequency of unacceptable waste at a transfer station. Public Versus Commercial Use Some transfer stations provide public access to the facility rather than restricting access only to waste collection vehicles. The types of cus- tomers accommodated vary depending on where the facility is located and who owns and operates the transfer station. Publicly operated transfer stations are more likely to be open to public use. Private transfer stations might not be open to the public because resi- dents deliver relatively small amounts of waste with each visit, require more direction for safe and efficient use of the transfer sta- tion, and generally pay relatively small fees 8 Planning and Siting a Transfer Station for using the transfer station. The general pub- lic usually is allowed to use a transfer station for any of several reasons: waste collection is not universally provided in the area; some wastes, such as bulky items or remodeling debris, are not collected; or public access is part of a strategy to prevent illegal dumping by providing a convenient, cost-effective place for people to deposit waste. Public unloading areas and traffic patterns are usually kept sep- arate from commercial vehicles for safety and efficiency. Determining Transfer Station Size and Capacity The physical-size-of=a-planned-transfeissta tion is_typically_determined-based on_the followin_ g ,factcrs:r • The=definition-of=the-service=area Sometimes this is relatively simple, such as "all waste generated by Anytown, USA," or "all waste collected by Acme Hauling Company." Other times, the service area is more difficult to define because of varying public and private roles in solid waste man- agement and the changing availability of existing disposal facilities. • The;amount-of_waste-generated--withirr-the, service_area;, including projected changes such as population growth and recycling programs. • T-he-ttypesof vehicles_deli-vering-waste (such as car or pickup truck versus a specially designed waste -hauling truck used by a waste collection company). • The=typesofmateri`alsto be=ttaiisferred> (e.g., compacted versus loose MSW, yard waste, C&D), including seasonal variations. • Daily and hourly arrival patterns of cus- tomers delivering waste. Hourly arrivals tend_to-cluster-inthe-middle_of the:dayj with typical peaks just before and after lunchtime. Peak-hourly=arrivalstend-tomt dictate_a-facility's=design-more=than=average daily_arriyals., The availability of transfer trailers, inter- modal containers, barges, or railcars, and how fast these can be loaded. • Expected increases in tonnage delivered during the life of the facility. For example, in a region with annual population growth of 3 to 4 percent, a facility anticipating a 20 - year operating life would typically be designed for about twice the capacity that it uses in its first year of operation. • The relationship to other existing and pro- posed solid waste management facilities such as landfills, recycling facilities, and waste -to -energy facilities. The same factors are used to determine the size of the following transfer station features: • Amount of off-street vehicle queuing (wait- ing) space. At peak times, vehicles must often wait to check in at a facility's "gate- house" or "scale house." It is important that the queue (line) not block public streets or impede vehicular or pedestrian traffic. • Number and size of unloading stalls, and corresponding number of transfer trailer loading positions. • Short-term waste processing and storage areas (for holding waste until it can be reloaded into transfer vehicles). Present and projected daily, weekly, and annu- al waste volumes (including seasonal varia- tions) are important in planning facility size to accommodate waste deliveries. The-maximum rate at which waste is delivered is a crucial consideration -as well. In general, it is best to build a facility to accommodate present and projected maximum volumes and peak flows, with a preplanned footprint for facility expan- sion. A useful exercise is calculating how -much, tipping floorspace_a facility -=would -require to. store a_full_day_'s_waste-iri-case of -extreme. emergency. One approach to estimating the required tipping floor space is to begin with a base area of 4,000 square feet and add to it 20 square feet for each ton of waste received in a day (assun-ng the waste will be temporarily piled 6 feet high on the tipping floor).' For example, if the facility receives 100 tons of waste per day, a tipping floor space of 6,000 square feet would be required (i.e., 4,000 ft' + (100 TPD x 20 ft'/ton) = 6,000 ft) "Chapter 4: Collection and Transfer" in EPA's Decision Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management also provides a series of formulas for helping deter- mine transfer station capacity These formulas are presented in the box below. Formulas for Determining Transfer Station Capacity Stations with Surge Pits Based on rate at which wastes can be unloaded from collection vehicles: C=PCx(L/W)x(60xHW/,TC)xF,, Based on rate at which transfer trailers are loaded: C = (Pt x N x 60 x Ht) / (Tt + B) Direct Dump Stations. C = No x Pt x F x 60 x HW / [(Pt/Pc) x (W/Ln) x Tcl + B - Hopper Compaction Stations C=(NnxPtxFx60xHW)/(Pt/PcxTc)+B-- Push Pit Compaction Stations ' C = (Np x Pt x F x 60 x HW) / [(Pt/Pc) x (W/Lp) x Tcl + Bc+ B Where C Station capacity (tons/day) # PC Collection vehicle payloads (tons) L Total length of dumping space (feet) t W Width of each dumping space (feet):= HW Hours per day that waste is delivered TC Time to unload each collection vehicle (minutes) F Peaking factor (ratio of number of collection vehicles received during an average 30 -minute period to the number received during a peak 30 -minute period) - - Pt Transfer trailer payload (tons) .. N Number of transfer trailers loading simultaneously ' Ht Hours per day used to load trailers (empty trailers must be available) B Time to remove and replace each loaded trailer (minutes) Tt Time to load each transfer trailer (minutes) No Number of hoppers w„ ` Ln Length of each hopper °' LLength of each push pit (feet) Zp Number of push pits a Bc Total cycle time for clearing each push pit and compacting waste into , trailer r , Source: Decision -Makers Guide to Solid Waste Management, Secon Edition (EPA530-R-95-023), p. 4:23. 1 Solid Waste Association of North America. 2001. Transfer Systems Management Training Course. SWANA. Washington, DC. Planning and Siting a Transfer Station 9 Queuing in Urban Areas In extreme situations where adequate queuing space cannot be provided on the transfer station site, an additional offsite area can be provided as a holding area for waiting trucks. Transfer station staff can dispatch the wait- ing trucks via radio when the station is ready to receive them. Number and Sizing of Transfer Stations Design capacity is determined by the maxi- mum distance from which waste can be eco- nomically delivered to the transfer station. The area that can efficiently reach the waste trans- fer station determines the volume of waste that must be managed, which is the facility's initial design capacity. Beyond a certain dis- tance, another transfer station might be neces- sary, or it might become just as cost-effective to direct haul to the disposal facility. Transfer stations serving rural or tribal areas tend to be small. They are optimally located within a reasonable driving time from the serv- ice area's largest concentration of homes and businesses. For example, a rural transfer station could be located near one of the service area's larger towns and sized to take waste from all waste generators within about 30 miles. As an example, two 50 -ton -per -day transfer stations might each serve six small communities. Altemately, fewer transfer stations could be used, necessitating longer average travel dis- tances. For example, one 100 -ton -per -day trans- fer station could be used to serve the same 12 small communities, but it would be located far- ther from the outlying communities. Addressing Site Size Limitations When site size is not adequate to accom- modate ideal designs and practices, additional engeng=inee- ing ed sign featu er s will be needed to mitigate the facility's potential nega- tive impacts. For example, sound barriers might need to be incorporated into the site plan to reduce noise. Another approach is to select multiple, smaller capacity sites if a single parcel of land large enough to accommodate an ideal facility does not exist. These separate sitesif could'be-used tofiold trucksaw_aiting delivery,. or to storetransfer trailers. In urban or subur- ban areas, the same situations exist. A midsize city (popula- tion 500,000), for example, might decide that two 800 - ton -per -day transfer stations would best serve its community. This same city could alternately decide that a single 1,600 - ton -per -day transfer station is its best 10 Planning and Siting a Transfer Station option, even when the longer driving dis- tances are considered. When deciding which approach is best for a community, issues to consider include the impacts the transfer sta- tion(s) will have on the surrounding area, sit- ing complications, and the cost to build and operate the transfer station(s). Each approach offers advantages and disadvantages that must be reconciled with local needs. The biggest advantage of constructing large transfer stations is the economies of scale that can significantly reduce capital and operational costs. Centralizing waste transfer operations allows communities to reduce equipment, con- struction, waste handling, and transportation costs. The siting of a single facility may often prove easier than siting multiple facilities. Large facilities are also conducive to barge or rail operations that can further decrease traffic - related impacts on the community. Along relat- ed lines, however, a major drawback to building a single large facility is locating a tract of land that adequately meets facility require- ments. Large. facilities=also_tend=to eoncentratea impacts=to=a=sirtgle=areaTwhich.can=create=the perception -of inequity; especially when one neighborhood is shouldering the burden for the entire city. A single facility can result in longer travel times, which leads to increased down time for the collection crew and increased wear and tear on collection vehicles. Another consideration is that a single facility cannot divert waste to a backup facility if a need arises. -The=single=facility—must--have-addi- tional<equipment4mcase=of _equipmentfailurer or. other>emergencies. In other situations, multiple smaller sites might better address a community's waste management needs. Decentralizing waste transfer operations spreads lesser impacts over a wider area, which helps address equity issues. Although it is generally more expen- sive to build and operate several small trans- fer stations rather than one large station with the same total capacity, savings from reduced travel times might offset these capital costs and result in lower overall system costs. Multiple facilities also are better able to serve as backups for one another in case of sched- uled or emergency shutdowns of facilities. The major disadvantage to building multiple facili- ties is that the difficulties encountered in siting a single facility can become multiplied. Future Expansion Transfer stations are frequently designed to accommodate future expansion. Often, this is accomplished by siting the facility on a larger parcel of land than would otherwise be neces- sary and preplanning the site and buildings so expansion can occur without negatively affect- ing other functions on the site or the sur- rounding community. Although expansion of effective capacity can sometimes be accom- plished simply by expanding the hours of operation, this approach is not always effec- tive because the transfer station must accom- modate the collection schedules of vehicles delivering waste to the facility. In addition, increased operating hours might not be com- patible with the surrounding community. Site Selection Environmental justice Considerations During the site selection process, steps should be taken to ensure that siting decisions are not imposing a disproportionate burden upon low-income or minority communities. Overb` u dem g a community with negative �3',�� impact facilities can create health"enviioin- $ mental; and quality of -living concerrtsMt can also have a negative economic impact by low- ering property values and hindering commu- nity revitalization plans. These are just a few of the reasons environmental justice concerns need to be addressed when selecting a site for a waste transfer station. The Siting Process and Public Involvement A siting process that includes continuous pub- lic participation is integral to developing a transfer station. The=public-m`usf-be--elegiti-'*� mate -partner -in -the facility.siting piocess for integrate community_needs_and-concernsand- -to-influence the'-decision=making=prccess?r Identifying a suitable site for a waste transfer Addressing public concerns is also essential to station can be a challenging process. Site suit- building integrity and instituting good com- g g ability depends on numerous technical, envi- munications with the community. Establishing ronmental, economic, social, and political credibility and trust with the public is as criteria. When selecting a site, a balance needs to be achieved among the multiple criteria that might have competing objectives. For example, a site large enough to accommodate all required functions and possibly future expansion, might not be centrally located in the area where waste is generated. Likewise, in densely developed urban areas, ideal sites that include effective natural buffers simply might not be available. Less than ideal sites may still present the best option due to trans- portation, environmental, and economic con- siderations. Yet another set of issues that must be addressed relates to public concern or opposition, particularly from people living or working near the proposed site. The relative weight given to each criteria used in selecting a suitable site will vary by the community's needs and concerns. Whether the site is in an urban, suburban, or rural setting will also play a role in final site selection. Maximizing Public Committee Participation w Public committees are often convened to assist with developing public , policy. To maximize participation, the process should: Give committee members a chance to be actively involved. Allow the committee to remove the selected facilitator if concerns about objectivity exist. {, Encourage members to discuss relevant concerns and to raise questions or objections freely. Criticisms or challenges should be directed toward the issues; the facilitator should swiftly mitigate personal criticisms. • Agree on a means to resolve disagreements before they arise. ' • Allow members to discuss the results of each meeting with their con- stituents. c • Provide technical experts to educate participants. • Distribute literature about upcoming issues before meetings. - -_ ;-_ I Planning and Siting a Transfer Station 11 Informing the Community F. When initiating a siting process, education must be extended beyond the siting committee and include a communitywide outreach initia- tive. Components of this type of public outreach typically include: Special public meetings. Interviews with local newspapers for feature stories. Interviews with media editorial boards. . Interviews with broadcast media. News conferences, press releases, and press kits. Paid advertising. • Internet sites. v • .:Informational literature. • Direct mail with project updates. • City council/county commission presentations. v • Presentations to civic, environmental, religious, and professional groups. • Presentations to neighborhood groups. Community education programs and workshops Reading files located in public libraries or community centers that docu- ment the process. Beyond communitywide outreach, initiate specific and targeted contact with key members of potential host communities, and identify community - specific conditions that need to be considered. Individuals might become proponents of the proposed facility if contacted directly for input, rather, than opposing it based on misleading secondhand information. important as addressing environmental, social, and economic concerns about the solid waste facility' A companion document to this manu- al, Waste Transfer Stations: Involved Citizens Make the Difference (EPA530-K-01-003), pro- vides key information citizens require to be effectively involved in the siting and develop- ment process. Two other EPA documents, Sites for Our Solid Waste: A Guidebook for Effective Public Involvement (EPA 530 -SW -90-019) and RCRA Public Participation Manual (EPA530-R- 96-007), provide further information and examples of how to integrate public participa- tion into the waste management facility siting and development process. Following are some general guidelines for developing and imple- menting a siting process that is open to and integrates meaningful public input. For publicly developed transfer stations, -a- --by public_officials_in-the:site, S1b,1' selection-process-is-establishmg-a_siting_com-[p, ,,,O, mittee. The committee's main responsibility includes developing criteria to identify and evaluate potential sites. The committee should consist of key individuals who represent vari- ous stakeholder interests. These stakeholders might include: • Community and neighborhood groups. • Industry and business representatives. • Civic and public interest groups. • Environmental organizations. • Local- and state -elected officials. • Public officials, such as public works employees and solid waste professionals. • Academic institutions. Committee members should be selected to ensure broadgeographicalrepresentafionr from across=the-arc, =to-beserved-by the-trans- feustationlin addition, committee representa- tion should seek gender balance and racial diversity. Volunteer participation should also be solicited. The committee's meeting times and dates must be planned and scheduled to facilitate attendance by all committee members and other members of the public. Therefore, meet- ing schedules should avoid conflicts with other major community, cultural, or religious events. To encourage active public participa- tion, meetings- should =be:prominently-adver-� tised_in-the-media-in-a-timely--manner_andFbe held -in -facilities -accessible to, the disabled -and located=on-ppublic-transportation eoiites. Frequently, a facilitator is hired or appointed to keep the meetings focused, to minimize the 2 McMaster Institute of Environment and Health, "Psychological Impacts of the Landfill Siting Process in Two Southern Ontario Communities." 12 Planning and Siting a Transfer Station Building Reuse: Weighing the Consequences Adapting an existing building for reuse as a waste transfer station is usually done as a capital cost savings measure. Building reuse saves on new site construction and can avoid the permitting process if the existing site already has a permit allow- ing the waste transfer activity. Building reuse can have some ben- efits, including conserving construction materials required for new structures and facilities; reducing waste from the demolition of existing buildings; recycling unused property for which no other uses were found; and redeveloping contaminated property (brownfields redevelopment). But the negative aspects frequent- ly outweigh the positives. Pitfalls and problems associated with adaptation or retrofitting of buildings for waste transfer stations include: Transfer buildings have unique requirements rarely found in structures designed for other uses. These-include-theneed- forvertical c of arances-suffic-ient to`accommodate-theAippinp height=of-commerciaFcollection`vehicles New facilities are , usually designed with at least 25 -to -30 -feet of vertical clear- ance from the tipping floor to the lowest overhead element` Busy transfer stations require adequate onsite space for vehi- cle parking and queuing, something reused buildings often ' lack. In fact, one of the most common problems with building reuse is inadequate queuing space, which leads to vehicles blocking neighborhood streets. Queuing trucks on city streets creates health and safety issues, and can be very disruptive for the surrounding neighborhood. Transfer stations need relatively large, open � floor areas suitable for maneuvering large vehi- `F cles. Interior building columns and walls might not accommodate the kind safe traffic movements that are needed,, which could pose a hazard and reduce traffic efficiency. Enclosed transfer structures also require large, very tall access doors. Doors 24 -feet high are not unusual in new transfer buildings. The design must assume that a collection truck will inadvertently exit the transfer station building with its tipping bed extended. Heavy-duty, skid -resistant floors are a necessi- ty in transfer stations. Sloped floors with posi- tive drainage are also important. Some buildings are not designed with floors that meet these essential criteria, and replacing the floors can be costly aA v Older structures, particularly older warehouse type struc- tures, trut tures, often fail to meet current structural design codes. In particular, modern seismic and fire code requirements have changed considerably in recent years. Retrofitting older struc- tures might prove more costly than demolishing and replacing the structure. Transfer station structures can experience substantial vibra- tions from heavy equipment used to compact and load waste into the transfer vehicles. Concrete and steel floors, pil- lars, and other building reinforcements must be designed to accommodate these high levels of vibration. Older buildings not designed for this heavy use often can not meet these requirements. " Most transfer stations require some amount of grade separa- tion so waste can be loaded into open -topped vehicles to simplify the waste loading process. Since customer and trans- fer vehicles both need to access the structure, but at different levels, finding a building that offers this configuration might' prove difficult. Installing additional levels or tunnels can be costly or impractical in some areas (i.e., shallow ground water, or bedrock). Waste transfer stations include more than just the tipping area. While an existing building might be very adaptive to waste transfer, the overall building site needs to accommo- date the supporting activities and requirements including traf- fic queuing, buffer zones, scale facility operations, etc. Transfer station structures require tall access doors to accomodate collection vehicles. Planning and Siting a Transfer Station 13 Community Involvement in Privately Developed Facilities n the past, privately developed facilities have not generally develop sound avenues of communication. These programs (formed siting committees. When private facilities have been should educate the community about the need for the facility, sited, the public's first—and sometimes only—opportunity for the facility's design and operations, and provide an opportunity input has come when the permit application is put out for pub- - for community input. A public outreach program helps the _!., F lic comment. Most states do not require private developers to developer understand community concerns and address them seek public involvement in the site selection or facility design early in the siting and design phases while changes are still readi- and operation decisions. Private companies, however, should ly incorporated. Adopting, with appropriate modifications, the consider establishing siting committees and developing public "' public involvement process outlined above is one approach to outreach programs to establish credibility, build public trust, and addressing community concerns. potential for certain individuals or interest groups to dominate the process, and to encourage active participation by all stake- holders throughout the process. During the siting committee's first meeting, individual duties, group responsibilities, and process issues need to be addressed. Expectations and limitations of the committee need to be clearly communicated and might be summarized in mission statements. Rules for discourse, and a schedule and procedures for final decision-making, should be deter- mined and agreed upon. Technical experts should be involved early in the process to respond to general questions and to resolve common misconceptions about waste transfer. After establishing general procedures, com- mittee members should be informed of all details to further ensure equal participation and a means of influencing the decision-mak- ing process. Committee members should understand why a transfer station is needed and the facility's role within the solid waste management system. In addition, committee members must be taught the numerous tech- nical, environmental, and economic aspects associated with siting, designing, and operat- ing a transfer station. This ensures that the sit- ing criteria the committee develops will result in identifying potential sites feasible from engineering and operational perspectives, as well as acceptable to the public. Educational materials for the siting com- mittee should provide useful, objective infor- mation. Mistrust of technical information might develop among the committee mem- bers and should be anticipated. The credibility 14 Planning and Siting a Transfer Station of the technical information might be enhanced by encouraging the committee to assist in selecting consultants and technical experts, by encouraging committee members to perform their own research, by using a third party to review technical studies, and by relying on experts who reside within the com- munity to provide technical information. Information should be relayed in various for- mats and should consider language barriers, literacy levels, and preferred types of commu- nications. For example, committee education might include presentations by technical experts and tours of existing transfer stations in addition to written materials. Siting Criteria Once the committee completes the education phase, criteria should be developed for identifying and evaluating potential sites. All siting criteria must be developed before iden- tifying potential transfer station sites. This approach ensures siting decisions are based on objective criteria. Three categories or sets of criteria applied during various stages of the siting process are exclusionary, technical, and community -specific criteria. It is important to note that no site may meet all the criteria, in which case, each criterion's relative weight and importance must be considered. Exclusionary Siting Criteria Siting a waste transfer station, or any type of facility, in areas with preclusive siting criteria is often prohibited by federal, state, or local laws or regulations, or requires facilities to incorpo- rate special engineering design and construc- tion techniques. Even when siting in excluded zones is allowed, the added engineering designs or strong public opposition can signifi- cantly increase construction costs. In general, it is best to avoid siting in these areas. Exclusion- ary criteria might include areas such as: • Wetlands and floodplains. • Endangered and protected flora and fauna habitats. • Protected sites of historical, archeological, or cultural significance. • Prime agricultural land. • Parks and preserves. Some examples of federal laws defining these areas include the Endangered Species Act; the Migratory Bird Conservation Act, the Coastal Zone Management Act; the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act; the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act. Technical Siting Criteria The second category of criteria to develop includes technical parameters that help define the best potential facility sites. These criteria provide guidance on specific engineering, operation, and transportation conditions that should be considered to ensure that potential sites are feasible from technical, environmen- tal, and economic perspectives. These criteria address the following issues: • Central location to collection routes: To maximize waste collection efficiency, trans- fer stations should be located centrally to waste collection routes. As a rule of thumb in urban and suburban areas, transfer stations should be no more than 10 miles away from the end of all collection routes. Beyond that distance, collection routes might need to be altered to enable refuse to be collected and deposited at the transfer station within one operating shift. • Access to major transportation routes: The transfer station should have direct and con- venient access to truck routes, major arteri- als, and highways (or rail or barge access, if appropriate). For large metropolitan ..Addressing. Cluster Zoning . Ssting waste transfer stations exclusively in areas zoned for industrial use can lead to a condition known as "cluster zoning." Especially restrictive zoning frequently forces transfer stations into a few areas. In general, siting transfer stations in industrial zones eliminates permitting agencies' discretion to deny such use because technically, the transfer station is permitted "as a matter of right." These types of zoning actions also prevent an impacted community from influencing the zoning decision. Such intensive clustering of industrial facilities may have negative impacts on neighboring residents, such as increased traffic, noise, odors, and litter. Communities need to address clustering and zoning issues at the local level through comprehen- sive planning that considers the aggregate effects of clustering certain activ- ities and the equity in sharing community burdens. To avoid clustering when r: _ siting a new waste transfer station, establish a community stakeholder or advisory panel to participate in the siting process. This advisory panel should consist of representatives from all potentially affected communities; ` state, local, and/or tribal regulatory agencies; public and private waste trade groups; local community development organizations; and any other con- cerned community, environmental, or environmental justice organizations. To prevent disproportionate facility siting: Zoning must not be presumed to prevent significant impacts on poor and minority communities. The potential for clustering should be examined. • Other close or adjacent land uses should be examined to determine compatibility. - �s • Other close or adjacent land uses should be examined to analyze cumulative impacts. areas, direct access to rail lines or barges will significantly reduce the number of large transfer trailers leaving the station and traveling area roads. It is prefer- able to avoid rout- ing traffic through residential areas because traffic generated by transfer stations contributes to con- gestion; increased risk to pedestrians; increased air emis- sions, noise, and -Requiring Minimum Distance- Between istance Between Transfer Stations Communities with a waste transfer station clustering problem might consider requiring a minimum distance between facilities as one possible solution. Designating a minimum dis- tance between waste transfer stations, or other. industrial facilities, will limit clustering by forcing the siting of new facilities away from existing operations. The end effect can be a more equi- table dispersion of facilities and their negative impacts. A community will need to determine what minimum distance is reasonable. Planning and Siting a Transfer Station 15 ,I 1 ,,k'rA V -)P kv s k+ J�Ks �yal,prs wear on roads; and might contribute to lit- ter problems. • Site size requirements: The area required for specific transfer stations varies signifi- cantly, depending on the volume of waste to be transferred, rates at which waste will be delivered, the functions to be carried out at the site, and the types of customers the facility is intended to serve.-tioeatiirga site of -sufficient -size is critical to -operating effi- ciencies_and-minimizing-impaets=ori-the surrounding -community: Engineering input can establistf preliminary_ -size criteria -based, on--a--conceptual—design., Sufficient space for onsite roadways, queuing, and parking: Transfer stations typically have onsite roadways to move vehicles around various parts of the trans- fer site. Waste collection.trucks can be up=to 40:-feetlorig:!Transfer-trail6—r -that--mover waste -to -of -disposal facility -are -typically -50 e to -70 feet -long: These vehicles need wide roadways with gradual slopes and curves to maneuver efficiently and safely. Also, the site will need space for parking transfer vehicles and to allow incoming and outgo- ing traffic to form lines without backing up onto public roads. • Truck-and=traffic-compatibility3Transfer stations often receive surges of traffic when collection vehicles have finished their Many transfer stations are multi-level facilities that allow vehicle access at several levels. 16 Planning and Siting a Transfer Station routes. Transfer station traffic varies locally, but tends to peak twice a day. The_firs? peak=is=often- —near -the=middle=cf=the=day or qshift; and-the-second_at_the-end-of-the days P ,or-shiftaTherefore,-the besYsites for transfer S stations -are located -away -from -areas that have-midday_tsaffic�s-and%o_r—school' bus=and=pedestrian=traffic'. Ability for expansion: When selecting a site, consider the potential for subsequent increase in the daily tonnage of waste the facility will be required to manage, or added processing capabilities for recycling and diversion. It is frequently less expen- sive to expand an existing transfer station than to develop a new site due to the ability to use existing operations staff, utility con- nections, traffic control systems, office space, and buildings. Space for recycling, composting, and pub- lic education: A transfer station could be sited in areas also conducive to recycling or composting activities. Many transfer sta- tions are designed to enable residents and businesses to drop off recyclables and yard waste in addition to trash. Some transfer stations incorporate education centers or interpretive trails focusing on waste pre- vention. These types of facilities offer increased utility to the community. Buffer space: To -mitigate- mpacton the] surrounding confit y -a transfer -station should belocated in anarea-that prc v - ides separation from -sensitive adjoining land n uses such as residences Buffers can be nat- ural or constructed and can take many forms, including open spaces, fences, sound walls, trees, berms, and landscaping. Gently sloping topography: Transfer sta- tions often are multilevel buildings that need to have vehicle access at several lev- els. Completely flat sites need ramps or bridges constructed to allow vehicle access to upper levels (or areas excavated to allow access to lower levels). Sites with moderate- ly sloping terrain can use topography to their advantage, allowing access to the upper levels from the higher parts of the natural terrain and access to lower levels from the lower parts. Sites with steep slopes might require extra costs associated with earthmoving and retaining walls. Access to utilities: Transfer stations gener- ally require electricity to operate equip- ment, such as balers and compactors; lighting; water for facility cleaning, rest - rooms, and drinking; and sanitary sewer systems for waste -water disposal. Some smaller transfer stations use wells for water supply, and some, especially in more rural settings, use septic systems or truck their waste water for offsite treatment. • Zoning Designations and Requirements: Zoning ordinances frequently classify trans- fer stations as industrial uses, which limits their siting to areas zoned for industry usu- ally in conjunction with a special use per- mit. Exclusive use of predetermined land use criteria, how- ever, might result in locating transfer stations in areas already overbur- dened with indus- tries or clustering of these types of facilities in areas adjacent to poor and minority com- munities. If local zoning ordinances are so restrictive that they disallow facility siting out- side pre -estab- lished industrial zones, substantial engineering and architectural design must be incorporated into the facility to mini- mize impacts on the surrounding community. Developing Community -Specific Criteria The third category of criteria to consider are impacts-that_the_facilitv.will_have_on-the sur- rounding community. These criteria are typi- cally less technical in nature and incorporate local, social, and cultural factors. Examples of these criteria include: • Environ-- ntal-Justice-considerations (e.g., clustering, cumulative impacts). • Impact on airs quality. • Impact on the local -infrastructure. • Adjacenhland-uses;, including other envi- ronmental stressors that might already exist. • Proximity to schools, churches, recreation sites, and residences. Using GIS to Narrow the Search Ageographic information system (GIS) is a com- puter system capable of assembling, storing, manipulating, and displaying geographically refer- enced information (data identified according to location). After the data are entered, each positive Wetland Resource Map Tampa Bay Florida Marine and Estuarine Deepwater Habtats Deepwater Lakes and Rivers *, Estuarine Marshes and Aquatic Beds Tidal Hats Estuarine Forested Wetlands PAustrine Forested Wetlands f Inland Marshes and Agiatic Beds ❑. PaLstrine Scrub/Shot, ❑ open Water '— Major Roads �I iaTt�nt'F®i1�L"s�� attribute or exclusionary criteria for siting transfer, stations can be layered on top of municipal maps, as well as each other, to narrow down potential site locations. The maps show these variables in relationship to infrastructure and housing patterns. - rt k' Planning and Siting a Transfer Station 17 • Prevailing -winds • NumberofTesidences impacted. • Presence of natural -buffers., • Impacts on existing -businesses. • Expansion capability. • Buffer zones -and screening- measures. • �Trafffc-cornpatibil ty. • Impact on historic or cultural features. • Impact -on -,neighborhood character. To maintain objectivity in the facility siting process, the community -specific criteria should be prioritized before potential sites are known. After potential sites are identified, the committee will apply these criteria to evaluate each potential site's suitability as a waste transfer station. These issues also factor into permitting decisions concerning private facili- ties and should not be ignored by the permit- ting agency or transfer station developer. Applying the Committee's Criteria After all three categories of siting criteria are agreed upon, it is time for the committee to apply the criteria and narrow down all possi- ble sites. Keep in mind, however, that despite the best efforts, every site has some shortcom- ings that will need to be addressed. First, the exclusionary criteria can be plot- ted on maps, which helps the committee visu- alize where the facility cannot be sited due to local, state, and federal regulations. Once unsuitable areas are eliminated, the commit- tee's technical criteria and community -specific criteria are applied to all remaining options. Information for each potential site should be developed so the committee can rank the sites. Based on the committee's ranking, the top two to four sites should undergo more rigorous analysis to determine technical feasibility and compliance with the environmental and com- munity objectives. 18 Planning and Siting a Transfer Station Host -Community -Agreements Siting any type of solid waste management facility has often been met with strong commu- nity opposition. Whether the facility is publicly or privately owned, many residents may not be confident that the siting, permitting, and over- sight process will be sufficiently rigorous to address their concerns and protect them from future impacts. When this type of opposition arises, it is often advantageous for the develop- er to enter into a separate agreement with the surrounding community, laying out all issues of concern and the developer's action plan in response. These---host-community-agreementgj. are-most_frequently_used-when-private-compa- nies-are-developing-a-facility,-but-public-agen- cies-might.also;find_them-useful in -satisfying community concems7These agreements typi- cally specify—&esign=requirements,toperating restricfions�?oversigght provisions; and other se_rvices_and-benefits-that-the immediate-com- munity-will=receive'rProvisions might include the following: • Steps to reduce -negative -environmental ,,impacts -in -the -immediate -area, such as committing to the use of low emission or alternative fueled vehicles, or retrofitting vehicles with particulate filters. • Limitations on waste generation sources. • Roadside_cleanup-of-litt_eron access routes. • Restr-ictions-on facility-opeTating-hours:. • Restrictions=on-vehicle-traffic-roiites. • Financial -support -for regulatory agencies to assist with facilityoveisight� • Independent -third -party -inspection -of facilities, or the use of video=rimonitoring • Assistance with -recycling and-waste=diver- sion objectives: • A fee—paid to the local government for every ton of waste received at the facility. • Free=or=reduced=cost=use;of the facility for the community's residents and businesses. • Gitaranteed=preference-to the community's residents for employment • Fu'nding-forroad-oivtilify-improvements. • Provisions-foc-an envieonriientakeducafionr center. • Financiatsupport-for other community based activities. These agreements can also require that commu- nity representatives have access to the facility during operating hours to monitor perform- ance. Safety concerns must be addressed if this provision is included. Community representa- fives usually welcome an ongoing communica- tion process between facility operators and an established citizen's committee to encourage proactive response to evolving issues. The pro- visions or amenities in a host community agreement generally are in addition to what state and local standards or regulations require, and thus should not be thought of as substi- tutes for adequate facility design and opera- tion. The same is true for state, tribal or local government compliance enforcement. The gov- ernment agency responsible for transfer station compliance also should make a commitment to the community concerning its role in actively and effectively enforcing all requirements. Planning and Siting a Transfer Station 19 his section discusses the many fac- tors that affect a transfer station design. The general design issues discussed in this section can typi- cally be applied at a variety of facil- ity sites and over a wide range of facility sizes. Specific design decisions and their costs, how- ever, can only be finalized once a specific site is selected. After determining who will use the facility and how, a site design plan can be developed. A facility's design must accommo- date its customers' vehicles and the technolo- gy used to consolidate and transfer waste, provide for employee and public safety, and address environmental concerns related to safeguarding health and being a good neigh- bor to the surrounding community. Transfer Station Design How -Will the-Tra_nsfer-Station Be -Used? The most important factors to consider when designing a transfer station are: • Will the transfer station receive -waste. fromi_ the-genera6public orl mitaccess_to collec- tion vehicles?Af access will not be limited, how will citizen traffic be separated from commercial traffic to ensure safe and effi- cient unloading? • What types_of waste will the transfer sta- tion accept? • What additional functions=will be carried out at the transfer station (i.e., material recovery _programs, -.vehicle maintenance)? • What type of --transfer technology will be used? • How will waste be shipped? Truck, rail, or barge? • What volume: of=material will the transfer station manage? • <How -much -waste will the facility be designed to receive during -peak -flows? How willclirnate-and-weather affect-facilityi operations? Two other factors to consider when develop- ing a transfer station's design include: How -will environmental-impacts-to-the-sur�. rounding—area—be—minimized? (Ways to min- imize environmental impacts on the community are discussed in the Environmental Issues section beginning on page 33.) How will -employ ee_healthand safety -be. ensured?(The Safety Issues section begin- ning on page 40 discusses several design features, technologies, and operational practices to help protect the health and safety protection of facility employees.) Site Design Plan Once a site is identified for the transfer sta- tion, planners, architects, and engineers use the factors described above to develop a site plan for the proposed facility? A site plan shows the layout of the transfer station site's major features, including access points, road- ways, buildings, parking lots, utilities, surface - water drainage features, fences, adjacent land uses, and landscaping. Figure 2 shows a simplified'ezample'of a site design plan of a fully enclosed transfer sta- tion. This=facility=ha"s a=design-capacity—of=500* tonsper_day-and=occupies-a--25sacre-site-.KIt serves both the general public and waste col- lection vehicles and has a citizen drop-off area for recyclables. Site design plans_typically show the following featured 2 Sometimes a "conceptual site plan' is developed before a site is identified. This can be helpful in identifying and assessing the size and suitability of candidate sites. -reeak,l,s ac 54C P1,4 Transfer Station Design and Operation 21 Figure 2 Transfer Station Site Plan (500 TPD) ROAD a zs iM1 1RANSfEA iRPILER PPRNINC AREA, TRAIT TRAILER wnNIFE' . INc AaEn IA LGYLE" DFSIGItAFULLY FNCLDSLD) iED MINC WR fuiuRE PNLSIW (/ PL vEE INPNE 0 QRECYCLING AREA L+' RESmDDNS N9DUNY 0 SCALE 0 oureou.D scut • Road=entran-a cesnd exits. Including accel-� eration /_deceleration -lanes -on -public -streets„ and access-points-fo`r-waste-arfiving and. departing:from'the-transfer_station. Some facilities have separate=access_for-visitors and =employees so these vehicles do not have to compete with lines of vehicles using the facility. • Traffic flow routes on site. Often, separates routes-areestablished-for_public--use-and-fob heavy-truck-use3Designers work to elimi nate-sharp-turns intersections; and=steep: ramps. • Queuing areas. Queues-can-develop:at they inbound -scales, the -tipping area;, and the outbound scales. Queuing space should be clearly_identified,, and queues-shottld_n_ oto extend-acrossintersecfions> • The scale house. Incoming and outgoing loads are weighed and fees are collected. 22 Transfer Station Design and Operation • Prim_ary_functions-at-the-transfer station building. Including tipping floor, tunnels, ramps, etc. • Buildigg—DIncluding entrances and exits for vehicles and people. • Parking-aieasEmployees, visitors, and transfer vehicles. • -Publicconveniences. Such as -separate tip. ,eping areas -for the general public - recycling dropoff areas, a public education center, and restrooms. • Space for future -expansion of the main transfer building. Often, this area is shown as a dotted line adjacent to the initial build- ing location. • Buffer -areas. Open space, landscaping, trees, berms, and walls that reduce impacts on the community. •-Holding_area. For inspecting _incomings lo'ad"s and holding-inappropriate=waste loads or materials for removal. Main Transfer Area Design IV 4110 iii waste -screening -or -sorting; When not loaded =n� 7 directly, waste deposited onto the floor or into Se a pit is stored temporarily, then loaded into a y�/yS transfer trailer, intermodal container, railcar, or barge. Most modem transfer stations have enclosed buildings. Some older and smaller facilities are partly enclosed (e.g., a building with three sides) or only covered (e.g., a build- ing with a roof but no sides). Small rural facili- ties might be entirely open but surrounded by fences that limit access and contain litter. Figure 3 shows the main transfer building for the site plan depicted in Figure 2. It -shows a 40-000-square-foot=building-with a pit, sepal rate =tipping_ areas_for;publir_`ersus-largel tru_cks:on-either-side_of_the=pi t,=and=a=a preload cc rhpactor t_o_compact,thezwa_ste before it i"s'. loaded -into transfer -trailers. J Because the main transfer building is typi- cally quite tall to accommodate several levels of traffic, it can often be seen easily from off- site locations. Therefore, the main -transfer building -should -be -designed -to -blend -into ori enhance the -surrounding neighborhood.,t, Types -of Vehicles That Use a Transfer Station Traffic is frequently a transfer station's most significant community impact. Because the pri- mary purpose of transfer stations is to provide more efficient movement of wastes, it is impor- tant to consider the following types of cus- tomers and vehicles that commonly use them. • Residents -hauling _their own wastes in cars- and arsand pickup trucks. Residents regularly served by a waste collection service typically visit the transfer station less frequently than residents in unincorporated and rural areas not served by waste collection companies (or who elect not to subscribe to an available service). Residents typically deliver only a few pounds to a ton of waste per visit. • Businessesandindustry-haulingAlreirt own wastes in trucks. -Many small busi- nesses such as remodeling contractors, roofers, and landscapers haul their own wastes to transfer stations. The vehicle type used and the waste amount delivered by businesses varies considerably. • Figure 3 Main Transfer Building Floor Plan LYERCENCY SWAM IOP -LOAD au0: UMNTER IRMIER LONER UMI) OR TPANSIQi a - IF itN LOAMG SIAIL i nl�PNGM�S) C"ERCUL KSIDENIIAL O TIPPNG RDOR TPP D RWR RDILDING 0 i i i i Public -or private -waste haulingoperations_o, with packer -trucks. Packer trucks, which compact waste during the collection process, are commonly used on collection routes serving homes and businesses. Packer trucks typically visit many waste generators along their routes and unload when full, generally once or twice per day. Convenient access to a transfer station helps keep packer trucks on their collection routes. Packer trucks typically deliver--5-to-l! 10 tons=of-waste=per visit.!.' t • Public or private waste hauling operations_ with -rolloff" trucks: Large rolloff containers are typically placed at businesses and industry and collected when they are full. A rolloff box is a large metal bin, often open at the top, that can be loaded onto a truck and hauled away to dispose of the waste. Rolloff boxes also are commonly used at transfer stations to receive yard waste, recy- clables, and solid waste from the general public. A typical, large rolloff box measures 8 feet tall, 7 feet wide, and 22 feet long. Unlike packer trucks that operate on an extended route before traveling to the transfer station, rolloff trucks typically trav- el to one place, pick up a roll -off container, travel to and unload at the transfer station, and return the empty rolloff container to the place of origin. Because rolloff trucks handle many loads per day, convenient access to a transfer station is very important to their operations. Rolloff -trucks typically P delier-2-to--8 tons -pee -visit Transfer_vehicles-hauling _waste. from -the transfer station. Transfer trailers (similar to large interstate tractor -trailers) commonly haul consolidated waste from transfer sta- tions to disposal facilities. Trains or barges are also used to haul waste from some large urban transfer stations (see text box). Transfer trailers typically haul 15-to25-tons per trip, while trains and barges typically haul thousands of tons. Some stations Transfer Station Design and Operation 23 Rural Transfer Station Design Since small transfer stations in rural or tribal settings receive considerably lower volumes of waste and customer vehicles than large urban or suburban facilities, many of the design crite- ria outlined previously will simply not apply. Cost frequently is a major consideration for small rural transfer stations, limiting what can be done. Consequently, rural transfer stations are often uncovered or partially covered facilities. Partially covered sites- might ites-might be enclosed on three sides with the vehicle entrance side open, or simply have a roof with no walls. A common design uses a single open -top trailer situated beneath a raised customer tipping area. The raised customer tipping area allows customers to back up to the trailer or drop boxes and directly unload their waste into the rolloff trailer. A hopper is not usually used. When constructing a raised tipping area, taking advantage of natural grades within the site can reduce construction costs. If favorable grades do not exist, a simple earthen retaining wall and access ramp can be constructed to create the multilevel layout desired. Some type of safety restraint should be incorporated on the tip- ping area to guard against falls. Using a removable constraint, such as a rope, chain, gate, or posts, allows tipping vehicles to unload waste unimpeded and facilitates site cleaning. Driving surfaces ideally are paved to minimize dust generation, but all-weather gravel surfacing is a cost-effective alternative to asphalt pavement. Another alternative is hosing down dirt areas dur- ing operating hours. The use of drop boxes requires a concrete or asphalt pad. Ideally, the facility is surrounded by a fence and gated. The gate should ? be locked during nonoperating hours to keep out Partially covered rural facility. large vectors, tres- passers, and illegal dumpers. Fences also are helpful in containing wind- blown litter. It is not uncommon for remote sites to lack water, sewer, or electrical service. Another design approach utilizes a completely contained modular system, such as the system pictured below. These , types of systems are prefabricated and can be quickly assem-, bled in the field. The waste collection bins are completely sealed and are animal and people -proof. Waste is deposited into the " sealed bin by one of two methods. A small sliding door on the front panel can be opened by hand allowing small waste loads to be deposited, while the entire front panel can he raised to allow collection vehicles to unload. Raising the front panel can- -.,. not be done by hand and requires a power source. For isolated sites lacking electrical power, vehicle drivers can use a power, }; takeoff or a hydraulic connection from their collection vehicles to lift the front panel. To unload the system, the transfer vehicle' pulls along side the container which is tipped up, dumping the waste into the waiting vehicle (see the photograph below). Again, if power is not available on site to tip the container, hydraulic power from the transfer vehicle itself can be used. This feature makes such arrangements ideal for unmanned or remote transfer stations. If desired, or required by state, tribal, or local regulations, leachate collection tanks also can be installed onsite. s wi 441 An example of a modular, self-contained waste transfer sys- tem. Source: Haul -All Equipment Systems. 1999. Reprinted by permission of Haul -All Equipment Systems. transfer materials by using intermodal sys- tems, which combine short distance truck transport with longer distance rail or barge transport. The following design issues should be consid- ered for the various vehicle types: • Packer trucks and rolloff trucks require a tall "clear height" inside buildings so they do not hit overhead lights, beams, or door- 24 Transfer Station Design and Operation ways when extende&J�hen-these vehicles uriioad?ifiey—typically require -25 to30feet r —_ . of venc�_ al`cleara c Large transfer stations can more readily accommodate this require- ment. Small and medium-sized transfer sta- tions can provide this clearance, but doing so tends to make these buildings unusually tall for their size, particularly if they are multilevel facilities. • Packer trucks androlloff trucks need'sp'ace�4 on -the tipping floorrto pulkforward-as,the load is deposited if they are unloading on a flat floor (rather than into a pit). • Packerand-rolloff fruekssequirelarge areas to -turn, backup; and-maneuver-into-ther .. unloading =area' Residential -loads, particularly those pulling trailers, require additional time and space to back up into the unloading area. In the interest of safety and site efficiency, many transfer stations have a separate access road and receiving area for residential deliveries so that they do not tie up unloading space reserved for trucks. Residents typically unload_ materials=by-hand; which,takes additional -time - Curves and intersections along roads on or near the transfer station site need -large turning radii so%%the rear wheels of trucks do not run over curbs or off the road when making moderate or sharp turns. • Slopes on ramps should be limited to less than 8 percent, particularly for fully loaded transfer trailers. • In-colder--elimates-measures=and-.equip- ment for seasonal or severe weather should be incorporated. Road sanders and snow- plows for ice and snow removal are some examples. Rail and Barge Transport A collection vehicle dumps its load onto the tipping floor. I.Tra nsfer_TechnoIog y, The method used to handle waste at the trans- fer station from the time it is unloaded by col- lection vehicles until it leaves the site is central to any transfer station's design. In the simplest cases, waste from collection vehicles is unloaded directly into the transfer container or vehicle. As this eliminates opportunities to inspect or sort the material, other floor tipping methods are more common. This section describes the basic methods of handling waste at transfer stations, explains which methods are most appropriate for small and large transfer stations, and addresses the Rail Transport is suitable for high-volume transfer stations, par- ticularly those that need to haul waste long distances. Using railcars for transport offers some advantages over long hauling via truck. Railcars have a very large capacity and offer an economi- cal mode of long-haul transport. Rail transport also eliminates highway out -haul traffic and allows out -haul vehicles to avoid highway traffic delays. Similar to trucks, rail transport uses a range of waste transfer containers and loading methods. Rail operations typically use direct top loading of noncompacted waste, loading of precompacted waste into intermodal containers, or placement of bales in conventional boxcars. When intermodal containers ' have to travel public highways between the rail terminals and either the transfer station or the disposal site, the container load :. must stay within the highway weight limit. In some cases this may mean using several smaller containers per railcar rather than just one or two large containers. A single train can take more than two hundred truck trips off the highway and in many situations" can move the waste at a lower cost_ per ton mile, with greater , ,.. fuel efficiency and lower overall air emissions. Rail transport is dependent upon the availability of adequate numbers of rail cars and containers and the ability of the railroad system to pickup and move the waste in a timely manner. Long delays before departure or along the route can result in odor problems. Barges carrying sealed intermodal containers are even more efficient than train transport. A single barge can replace 350 �-z truck trips. Barge transport is best suited for very large waste transfer operations because of the high capital cost of loading and unloading terminals and transport containers and marine vessels. Siting of marine terminals may also be more difficult '- than siting a conventional waste transfer station. v Transfer Station Design and Operation 25 Figure 4 Basic Transfer Station Technologies Waste can be unloaded directly into the "open top" of the trailer, but is most often unloaded on the tipping floor to allow for materials recovery and waste inspection before being pushed into the trailer. Large trailers, usually 100 cubic yards or more, are necessary to get a good payload because the waste is not compacted. This is a simple technology that does not rely on sophisticated equipment (e.g., compactor or baler). Its flexibility makes it the preferred option for low-volume operations. A. OPEN TOP TRANSFER TMLERS 0xacrouRP wR�uuO nPANGRWn tRnReFerTnnaEn B. SURGE PIT The surge pit is not a loading technology, but an intermediate step normally used q�P with open -top or precompactor systems. The pit can store peak waste flow, thus TPPWG FA arEn TOP mu�R reducing the number of transfer trailers needed. A tracked loader or bulldozer is used to compact the waste before loading, increasing payload. Because waste is often unloaded directly into the surge pit, this technology might deter materials recovery and waste screening efforts. Stationary compactors use a hydraulic ram to compact waste into the transfer C. COMPACTOR SYSTEM trailer. Because the trailer must be designed to resist the compactive force, it is �C usually made of reinforced steel. The heavy trailer and the weight of the onboard tPnnanoOR RN unloading ram reduce the payload available for waste. This technology is declining TRNi9rEnTUM1En in popularity p, PRECOMPACTORSYSTEM Precompactor systems use a hydraulic ram inside a cylinder to create a dense cow.rnu "log" of waste. The log is pushed into a trailer that uses "walking floor" technolo- gy to unload or relies on a tipper at the landfill to unload by gravity Most precom- n �P p pOR pactor installations have two units in case one unit requires repair. The capital cost FPECGPACrOR is relatively high at more than $250,000 per unit, but the superior payload can offset these initial costs. Balers are units that compress waste into dense, self-contained bales. Wire straps may be used to hold the bales intact. They are usually moved by forklifts and transported by flatbed trailers. The baler units can also be used for recyclables such as paper and metal. Payloads are very high, but so are capital costs. Most bal- ing stations have at least two units in case one is down, and they cost more than $500,000 apiece. This high-technology option is normally used only in high-volume operations, and special equipment or accommodations might be required at the landfill (or balefill). F. lisli oil Oil hvIli'eliIIm"illl..N.i. E. "' navm0 noon rownPr nArem rnrm In this alternative, waste is tipped at a transfer station, then loaded into intermodal containers. These containers typically have moisture- and odor -control features and are designed to fit on both flatbed trailers and railroad flatcars. The contain- ers may be loaded directly onto railcars or transferred by truck to a train terminal. The sealed containers can be stored on site for more than 24 hours until enough containers are filled to permit economic transport to the landfill. At the landfill, these containers are usually unloaded by tippers. This option allows for reduction of total truck traffic on local roads and can make distant disposal sites economi- cally viable. Source: DuPage County. 1998. Solid Waste Transfer in Illinois: ACitizen's Handbook on Planning, Siting and Technology. Reprinted by permission of DuPage County. 26 Transfer Station Design and Operation advantages and disadvantages of each method. Figure 4 shows simple diagrams of the various transfer methods described in this manual. Options ffor u��loading wast -from collec- tion or residential vehicles at the transfer station include: • Diirectly_unloading-material=into-the-top-ofd a container ontransfer trailer parked below the unloading vehicle, or -onto a tippingl floor- at-the-same-level-as4he'unloadingy Table 1 summa- rizes the advantages and disadvantages of the various transfer technologies. Some transfer stations use a combination of tech- nologies to mitigate some of the disadvan- tages of a particular design. For example, vehicle -(Figure 4-A). large transfer stations • Unloading ,into_a surge pit located below_the y might have a top- level of the -unloading -vehicle (Figure 4-B). loading system as a backup in case the pre- ar••�-"'--_ - load compactor breaks down or in case of an electric power outage. It also illustrates that Waste can be moved and piled for short-term many interrelated factors need to be consid- storage on the tipping floor or in a pitySbort_Nl. ered when deciding on the appropriate tech - term storage allows_ waste-to-be-received at the nology for a transfer station. The major factors transfer sfation—afa higher cafe=than £leae ver] include design capacity, distance to the dis- the facility crm easings transfer-station`s-abili-- posal site, cost, reliability, safety, and method tyto handle'peak waste delivery-periods--;� of unloading at the disposal site. A trailer tipper emptying a transfer trailer at a waste disposal facility Options for reloading waste into a transfer container or vehicle include: • Reloading directly from a tipping`floor oc pit -into -top load -containers or transfer trailers -parked -below the tipping floor or pit (Figures 4-A and 4-B). • Reloading into a compactor-thatpacks theme waste into -the-end-of-a container or -transfer), trailer (Figure 4-C). • Reloading into _a preload—compactor that compacts -a truckload of material and -then ejects -the compacted -" log into the -end of -a container -or fransfer trailer (Figure 4-D). • Reloading into a baler, which=makes bales. that can-then-be=forkliked=onto-a-flatbeds truck(Figure4-E). Options for unloading waste at the disposal facility from transfer containers or vehicles include push -out blades, walking floors, and trailer tippers. With push -out blades and walking floors, the trailers unload themselves. A trailer tipper lifts one end of the trailer (or rotates the entire trailer) so that the load falls out due to gravity. Baled waste can be manip- ulated at the landfill using forklifts. Transfer -Station Operations This section describes transfer station opera- tions issues and suggests operational practices intended to minimize the facility's impact on its host community. Issues covered include: • Operations and maintenance plans. • Facility operating hours. • Interacting with the public. • Waste screening. • Emergency situations. • Recordkeeping. Operations and -Maintenance plans.4 Although a transfer station's basic function as a waste consolidation and transfer facility is straightforward, operatingasiicc`essful"station] involves-properly_executingmany_ diff&-rent,,x tasks. --Some tasks are routine and easily understood, while others occur infrequently and might be difficult to conduct properly without step-by-step directions. To help ensure proper operations, transfer stations should have written operations and mainte- nance plans. These plans are often required by Transfer Station Design and Operation 27 H Table 1 Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Transfer Technologies Waste Storage Alternatives Technology Advantages Direct dump into transfer vehicle or storage container Tipping floor waste storage Simple arrangement; little potential for equipment breakdown. Low capital cost. Disadvantages Transfer station cannot accept waste unless a trailer is positioned to receive waste. (Short- age of empty trailers shuts down facility.) Application Most suitable for small transfer stations in rural and tribal settings with a relatively short haul distance to the waste disposal site. No short-term storage (surge capacity) to accom- Potentially less housekeeping: no tipping floor, modate peak inflow periods. Unless many unload- Frequently used in conjunction with pit, or compaction equipment to clean and ing stalls are provided, long customer queuing bins for source -separated recyclables. maintain. can be expected during peak inflow periods. Much smaller building footprint possible, but advantage might be decreased by need for large yard space for queuing. Simple arrangement; little potential for equipment breakdown. Generally less expensive and provides more operational flexibility than pits. Storage provides "disconnect' between waste receipts and waste loading. (Shortage of empty trailers does not shut down facility.) Allows for easy screening and removal of unacceptable wastes. Relatively low payloads in trailers Fall hazard. Limited ability to screen and remove unacceptable wastes. No opportunity for waste diversion or materials recovery. Generally not suitable for receiving loads from large roll -offs or large packer trucks. Trailers can be damaged by direct dumping of heavy materials. Garbage on tipping floor can be messy and slippery (fall hazard). Potential for accidents between customers and transfer station mobile equipment (e.g., wheel loader) that moves/stacks waste (safety issue). Requires roll-out space for trucks to pull forward when discharging their loads. Equipment is needed to reload the waste into the transfer trailer. Suitable for small and large transfer stations; can manage nearly all waste types. Allows for the breaking up of bulky items and the compacting of waste to increase density for more economical shipping. Surge pit Storage provides "disconnect" between waste receipts and waste loading. (Shortage of empty trailers does not shut down facility.) Allows for the breaking up of bulky items and the compacting of waste to increase density for more economical shipping. No roll-out space required for unloading vehicles; waste falls from back of truck into pit. Eliminates potential for collision between transfer station equipment and customers. Requires additional fire control equipment (e.g., fire hoses, water cannon) to control fires in waste piles on tipping floor Expensive to construct. Most suitable for large transfer stations with high peak flows. Fall hazard for people and vehicles. Hazards to equipment operator working in pit when waste is being unloaded by customers. Can be difficult to remove unacceptable waste found in the pit. Extra building level (three stories instead of two) might increase overall height of building above grade, increasing building profile. Equipment is needed to reload the waste into the transfer trailer. Requires additional fire control equipment (e.g., fire hoses, water cannon) to control fires in waste piles in surge pit. Transfer Container and Vehicle Loading Alternatives Technology Advantages Disadvantages ,. , ,Application .# „ Top -loading trailers Simple, gravity -loaded method. and containers Might be supplemented with compaction by using equipment that reaches into the top of the trailer to tamp down and level the load. Suitable for a wide range of waste types, including construction debris and bulky materials. F Generally involves imperfect, permeable Suitable for small and large transfer closure (screen or tarp) on top of trailer. Odors stations. and litter can escape, and precipitation can make the load heavier. Trailers can be damaged when dense or sharp materials fall into an empty trailer. Sound of waste falling into trailers can be noisy. w 0 Transfer Container and Vehicle Loading Alternatives (cont.) Technology Advantages Compaction into A trailer or container can be completely trailer and closed to prevent rainwater entry and odor container and liquid from escaping. Compaction usually achieves high densities. Preload compaction Allows use of lightweight trailer or container into rear -loading to increase effective payload. trailer or container Trailer or container can be completely closed to prevent rainwater entry and odor and liquid from escaping. Payload can be measured as it is compacted, with ability to optimize each payload. Disadvantages A heavy trailer or container decreases effective payload. (Trailer must be structurally reinforced to withstand the pressure of the compactor.) Capital cost of trailer fleet is greater. Tail end of trailer or container (near compactor) tends to become overloaded. Front end of trailer tends to be light. Rear axle loading tends to limit effective payload. Hydraulic power equipment for compactor can be noisy. High capital costs (but can be offset by reduced transportation costs). Relatively complex equipment; when it breaks down, can shut down transfer station after short-term storage capacity is full. Redundancy (i.e., two compactor units) increases costs. Totally dependent on availability of electrical power. Large motor sizes generally preclude the use of a standby electrical generator to handle power outage. Less suitable for certain types of waste (oversize materials, concrete, wire, cable). Hydraulic power equipment for compactor can be noisy. A heavy electrical power consumption system. Application Not commonly used for new transfer stations. Most suitable for high-volume transfer stations, particularly those that need to haul waste long distances. Container alternative ideally suited for intermodal transfer to rail system. Baling Allows for efficient transportation due to High capital cost. Suitable for large transfer stations, density of waste and ability to use light- particularly those that need to haul weight trailers. Relatively complex equipment; when it breaks waste long distances. Required for down, it can shut down transfer station after delivering waste to a balefill. Trailer can be completely closed to prevent short-term storage capacity is full. rainwater entry, and odor and liquid from escaping. Hydraulic power equipment for baler can be noisy. Compatible with balefills, which can landfill a large amount of waste in a small space; might Special equipment needed at landfill. be best in difficult (extreme weather or windy) environments. Baler can also be used to prepare recyclables for transport and sale. Transfer Container and Vehicle Unloading Alternatives i w, Technology s Advantages Disadvantages e, r Application t Push -out blade Allows for unloading anywhere (not just at a Some trailer capacity (both volume and Most suitable for short -distance, transfer trailer landfill with a trailer tipper). weight) used for the push -out blade, which low-volume hauling. reduces effective waste payload. Material can become stuck behind push -out blade. Blade can bind during extension or retraction. Walking floor Allows for unloading anywhere (not just at a More prone to leak liquids from the bottom Suitable for a range of volumes and transfer trailer landfill with a trailer tipper). of the trailer. distances. More prone to damage from dense or sharp objects that fall into an empty trailer. Trailer tipper for Allows use of lightweight trailers to High reliability or redundancy required—no Most suitable for long-distance, high - transfers trailers maximize payloads. way to unload trailers at the landfill if the volume hauls. Most suitable for hauls and trailer- tipper fails. to large landfills (small to medium mounted Ideal for rail -based container intermodal landfills not likely to have a tipper). containers system. Tippers can be unstable if placed over waste at landfill. Open -top railcar Extremely rapid, large -volume unloading. Fixed unloading point requires reloading and Most suitable for a fixed -disposal tippers some other form of transport from unloading method such as at a solid waste point to final destination. incinerator. Solid waste baler compacts waste into dense, self-contained bales. 32 state, tribal, or local regulations. They should be written specifically for a particular facility and include the following elements: • Facihty_operating schedule, including days of the week, hours each day, and holidays. • Staffing--plan—that—lists duties by job title, minimum staffing levels, and typical work schedules. • Description of acceptableand unacceptable. wastes, -and -Procedures for diverting s restricted=waste before -and after unloading • Operating -methods foedchcomponent-ofd, the -facility, including waste -screening meth- ods, truck -weighing procedures, tipping floor operations, transfer vehicle loading, onsite and offsite litter cleanup, and waste- water collection system operations. • Description of_maintenance=procedures-for each -component; indud ng_the=building-. mobite=equipment; utilities,--and-landscap3. dng: • Employee training --w • Safety-rules-and-regulatioris • Recordkeepf ggprocedure:.: • Contingency-plans=inrthe event of transfer vehicle or equipment failure, or if the'dis?` pcsal=site is_unavailab Transfer Station Design and Operation • Emergency procedures. Facility Operating Hours A transfer station's operating hours must accommodate the collection schedules of vehi- cles delivering waste to the facility Operating hours need to consider the local setting of the transfer station, including neighboring land uses, as well as the operating hours of the dis- posal facility receiving waste from the transfer station. Operating hours vary considerably depending on individual circumstances. Many large facilities located in urban indus- trial zones operate 24 hours, 7 days per week. Urban, suburban, and rural transfer stations of various sizes commonly open early in the morning (6 a.m. to 7 a.m.) and close in the late afternoon (4 p.m. to 5 p.m.). In many cases, the last trailer must be loaded with sufficient time to reach the disposal site before it closes (typically 4 p.m to 6 p.m.). Transfer stations that serve both the general public and waste hauling companies typically operate 6 or 7 days per week. Facilities that are not open to the public typically operate 5 or 6 days per week because many waste haul- ing companies do not operate on Sundays and have limited operations on Saturdays. Many smaller and rural facilities operate only on cer- tain days of the week and have limited hours. The hours described above represent when the transfer station is open to receive waste from customers. Operations often extend beyond the "open for customers' hours, however, as workers load waste into transfer vehicles, clean the facility, and perform equip- ment maintenance. Depending on the nature of the operation, transfer trucks leaving the site can sometimes operate on a schedule somewhat independent of the rest of the oper- ations. For example, some operations maintain an inventory of empty transfer containers and vehicles and loaded containers and vehicles at the transfer station site. Loaded containers and vehicles can be hauled off site according to the best schedule considering traffic on area roadways, neighborhood impacts of truck traf- fic, and the hours the disposal facility receives waste from the transfer station. State, tribal, or local regulations might limit the overnight storage of waste in the transfer station or even in transfer trailers. Interacting With the Public Every transfer station has neighbors, whether they are industrial, commercial, residential, or merely vacant land. The term "neighbor' should be broadly interpreted, as some of those impacted might not be immediately adjacent to the transfer station. For example, vehicles traveling to and from a transfer sta- tion could significantly affect a residential neighborhood a mile away if those vehicles travel on residential streets. An important part of successful transfer station operations is engaging in constructive dialogue with the surrounding community. The appropriate level of interaction between transfer station personnel or representatives and their neighbors varies depending on many factors. A transfer station in the middle of a warehouse district with direct access to expressways might find that joining the local business association and routinely picking up offsite litter are adequate community activi- ties. While a transfer station located adjacent to homes and restaurants might find that monthly meetings with neighbors, landscap- ing improvements, commitments to employ local workers, an odor reporting hotline, and daily cleanup of litter are more appropriate. When developing a community -outreach plan`; transfer station operators shouldcon is d- er the following: • Develop a clear explanation -of -the -need -for the transfer station and the benefits it will provide to the immediate community and surrounding area. • Develop a- -clear process-for-addressing_com-,Z --- -- munity concerns that is communicated to the neighborhood even before the facility becomes operational. • Designate one person as the official -contactor for, neighborhood-questions.and-concerns Ideally, this person would regularly work at the transfer station and be available to respond quickly to questions and concerns. The person should also be good at listening carefully to community concerns before responding. Advertising an e-mail address or Web site is another way to provide infor- mation and allow community input. OO rganize-periodic-facility-tours; Neighbors unfamiliar with the transfer station's opera- tions are more likely to have misconcep- tions or misunderstand the facility's role. Establish-positive-relationships=by working w th commumty-ba--sed-organizations; improvement districts, civic=associations, business associations, youth employment bureaus, and other organizations. Interaction with the community should focus on positive issues, not just occasions when a neighbor is upset about odor, litter, or traffic. • Offer support services sucEas newspaper drives, household -hazardous waste-(HHW) drop�off days,-and-spring-c-leaning_disposal at_the-faciility' Waste Screening As described in the section on Unacceptable Wastes in the Planning and Siting a Transfer Station chapter, some types of wastes are not appropriate for handling at a transfer station. These unacceptable wastes might be difficult to handle, dangerous, prohibited at the disposal facility where the waste is sent, or subject to a recycling mandate.' Transfer station operators should screen for unacceptable materials before, during, and after customers unload, and should tell customers where they can dis- pose of wastes inappropriate for that transfer station. If their wastes are refused at a transfer sta- tion, some customers might illegally dispose of unacceptable materials or might try to hide these materials in a future delivery. When cus- tomers arrive with unacceptable materials, operators could give them a preprinted fact 3 For example, some states, tribes, or cities prohibit the disposal of yard wastes in landfills. Thus, grass clippings would be prohibited in a mixed waste load. bowv,s es 5,v,6 Transfer Station Design and Operation 33 sheet -that describes the issue-and-suggestsa alternative management methods -In addition, community programs dedicated to reducing the use of products that generate dangerous wastes can decrease unacceptable waste deliv- eries to transfer stations. At the transfer station, screening_for _unac, cep -table wastes—could start at thescale-house s (where customers first check in upon arrival at the facility). Employee training on identifying and managing suspect materials is the corner- stone in any waste -screening program. Operators could interview -customers about types of waste they have and from where the Fact Sheets About Unacceptable Waste Consider developing simple fact sheets to inform customers why certain wastes are not accepted at the transfer station and where they can dispose of the unacceptable wastes. A typical fact sheet could include: • A picture or graphic of unacceptable waste. • A definition of what the unacceptable waste is and a brief description of why it is not accepted at the transfer station. • The dangers, drawbacks, or penalties for improper disposal of unacceptable waste. • Safe consumer alternatives. Where the waste can be appropriately ' managed, including driving directions, hours of facility operation, and contact informa- tion. Telephone numbers and Web sites of appropriate regulatory agencies that can provide more information. waste was collected. Adist-of-common-w unacceptable-items3 could -be -posted,, and operators could ask if any of the items are present in the load. Vi sin a I- inspecfions: can also help identify unacceptable wastes. Some facilities pro- vide overhead cam=e eras,'or walkways to facilitate a view of the top of uncovered loads (or loads that can easily be uncov- ered at the scale house). Walking= aro-und,the-truck-to-t examine-its:contents and checking for smoke -or -suspicious -1 odors-mightbe appropriate. Sensors; fondetecting-radioac tive-materials=can be used at the scale house or at a point along the incoming truck route to the tipping area. Some unacceptable wastes might not become apparent until the unloading process. Operators should observe waste unloading and examine suspected unacceptable wastes. Waste unloaded onto the floor or into a pit is easier to monitor than waste unloaded direct- 34 Transfer Station Design and Operation ly into a transfer container or vehicle. Ideally, unacceptable wastes would be noticed before the delivery vehicle has left the site. Regardless of screening efforts, transfer sta- tion operators should expect that some unac- ceptable wastes will be discovered after the responsible party is gone. Transfer -stations should -set-aside an area-for-safetemporary; storage.of_unacceptable-wastes=until-appropri- ate_disposal_is.feasible, and develop a step-by- step plan to follow. In some cases, the party that deposited the waste can be contacted to retrieve it. In other cases, the transfer station operator must properly manage the waste. Proper material management depends on the type of waste discovered. For example, man- agement of hazardous wastes requires compli- ance with federal regulations issued under authority of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (40 CFR Parts 260 to 299) or the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (40 CFR Part 700 to 799), whereas recyclable materials screened from the waste stream can be collected and processed with similar materials. Emergency Situations Most days at a transfer station involve routine operations. Transfer station operators should prepare for emergencies, however, and include emergency procedures in their written operations plans. State regulatory agencies often require submission of a Plan of Operations and a Contingency Plan for review and approval. At minimum, the following emergency events should be anticipated: Power failure. The plan should address how to record customer information, collect fees, and load transfer trailers during a power outage. Many larger transfer stations have backup power generators so at least some operations can continue during a power failure. Unavailability of transfer vehicles. The plan should address what to do if poor weather, road closures, or strikes prevent empty transfer vehicles from arriving at the transfer station. The plan should also address when the transfer station should stop accepting waste deliveries if the waste cannot be hauled out in a timely manner. • Unavailability of scales. The plan should describe reccordkeeping and'feeass- essmentS in -the event-thatscales-are inoperab e. At facilities with both inbound and outbound scales, one scale can temporarily serve both purposes. Fire. Fire response and containment-proce � dures-should-address-fires-found=in-incom ing-loads,'temporary storage_at-the-transfer station, compaction -equipment transfer vehicles, -and. other-locafions: Typically, fire procedures focus on protecting human health and calling professional fire depart- ments. Ceiling sprinkler systems by them- selves might not be completely effective in preventing small fires from spreading. -Duey to -the high-ceilingsxommon-in_transfer-sta-.3. tionsy a fire -could spread substantially before it -gets- hoof enoughafthe- -ceilin g-levelr to activate-sprinkler-systemszConsequently, facilities should have fire hoses or other fire fighting equipment in the area, in addition to ceiling mounted sprinklers. A water can- non on a washer truck can also be used to contain small fires until the fire department arrives. • Spill containment. Spills can occur from waste materials or from vehicles delivering waste. For example, hydraulic compaction system hoses on garbage trucks can break. Spill containment plans stiould-ad-dress- spill idenfificatiion, locaflon of spills,-► deployment of -absorbent -materials; ander cleanup -procedures.-Forrlarge spills, the plan should also address preventing the spill from entering storm drains or sewers. • Discovery -of -hazardousmatetials-.y Hazardous materials plans should include methods to identify -and -isolate hazardous materials, temporary storage locations and methods, and emergency phone numbers. • Injuries toemployees or customers. The plan should include firs-tYaid-procedures, A transfer station scale house. emergency and routes to nearby hospitals. Robbery. -Some scale houses handle cash and include security provisions to deter robbery. Emergency plans should include a list of� emergency -contacts, including daytime and evening phone numbers for facility manage- ment, facility staff, emergency response teams, frequent customers, and regulatory agencies. Recordkeeping Detailed operating records enable both facility managers and regulatory overseers to ensure that the transfer station is operating efficiently and in accordance with its permit require- ments. Medium and large transfer stations typically record the following information as part of their routine operations: • Incoming loads: date, time, company, driv- er name, truck number (i.e., company fleet number), weight (loaded), weight (empty),' origin of load, fee charged. • Outgoing loads (typically transfer trucks): date, time, company, driver name, truck number (i.e., company fleet number), weight (loaded), weight (empty), type of 4 For repeat customers, the empty truck (tare) weight is often kept on file so trucks do not need to weigh out during each visit. Transfer Station Design and Operation 35 Urban Transfer Station Design and Operations AII transfer stations must address issues such as noise, odors, dust, vectors, traffic, and litter. Urban transfer stations, how- ever, frequently lack the key component that suburban and rural facilities use to mitigate these problems: space. Where a subur-. ban or rural facility can simply use large buffer zones between operations and receptor populations, urban sites are frequently ' unable to do so due to severe site size limitations. Urban transfer stations must employ a combination of planning, design, and operating practices to help minimize impacts upon the surround- ing community. Listed below are several engineering designs, technologies, and operating practices that an urban transfer sta- tion should consider employing to mitigate facility impacts upon the neighboring community. Noise Structural and Site Layout Approaches • Totally enclose all waste -handling operations to contain noise. • ,Use concrete walls and structures, which absorb sound bet- ter than metal structures. • Install double -glazed windows which contain noise better than single -glazed windows. - .. • Install shielding or barriers, such as trees, berms, or walls, around the facility to block and absorb noise. Size of the shielding, distance to receptors, and shielding materials all " determine effectiveness. Walls can be made from concrete, stone, brick, wood, plastic, metal, or earth. Vegetate berms with grasses, shrubs, or trees to further mitigate noise and increase aesthetics. Barriers should be continuous, with no breaks, and long enough to protect the intended receptors. • Wing walls, usually constructed of concrete, on transfer build- ings can also block noise from trucks entering and exiting the building and noise from interior operations. • Insulate transfer building walls with sound -absorbing materials. • Locate administrative buildings between sources of noise and community. Orient transfer building openings (i.e., doors) away from receptors. Operational Practices • Keep doors closed during operating hours, except when vehicles are entering or exiting. _ • Use the lowest allowable setting on vehicle backup alarms, or use visual warning devices if state and local regulations allow. • Establish operating hours that avoid early morning or late- night operations. • Set facility noise level limits (e.g., 55 decibels at the site boundary) and adhere to them. ' Odors • Remove all waste at the end of each operating day. Do not allow any waste to remain on site overnight. • „Frequently clean/wash down the tipping floor, or surge pit. 36 Transfer Station Design and Operation Install misting systems with deodorants to mask or neutralize odors. Be prepared to make seasonal adjustments as needed to control odors. Install ventilation systems with air filters or scrubbers. Plant vegetative barriers, such as trees, to absorb and dis- perse odors. Use odor vestibules on truck entrances and exits. Odor vestibules are 2 -door systems in which the outer door closes before inner door opens to -prevent odors from escaping. Install plastic curtains on entrances and exits to contain odors when doors are opened to allow vehicles to enter or exit. Use biofilters — which pass malodorous air through organic matter, such as wood chips, mulch, or'soil - to capture odor molecules. Bacteria in biofilters consume and neutralize odor' molecules. „ Set up a community "odor complaint" phone line, and respond to community complaints. Dust Dust from Vehicles • Pave all roads on site, or lay gravel as a less expensive option. • Clean facility roads frequently.with street -sweeping equip- ment. � 4 , ment. • Wash waste collection vehicles before they leave the transfer station to remove dust -generating dirt and debris. Dust from Waste Handling Operations ' • Align building openings to minimize exposure to prevailing ,. winds. • Install plastic curtains over building openings. Keep station doors closed during operating hours, except when trucks are entering or exiting. Install misting systems over tipping areas to "knock down" dust particles. Misting system operations should be adjusted seasonally or as the dryness of the waste dictates. Vectors (e.g., rats, mice, cockroaches, and other insects) Hire a professional licensed pest control company with . expertise and experience in controlling specific vector popu- lations. - Seal or screen openings that allow rodents and insects to enter the building, such as door and window frames, vents, and masonry cracks. Also check for and repair chewed insu- lation at points where utility structures,'such as wires aM pipes, enter the transfer building. • .,Treat insect breading areas and eliminate as many of these " breading areas as possible. Implement practices that do not create new breeding areas. • Implement practices that reduce the likeliness of attracting vectors (e.g., remove all waste at the end of the operating , (continued next page) (continued from previous page) day, wash tipping areas daily, pick up litter and other debris daily). Some municipalities require transfer stations to pay neighbors' extermination/pest control costs if it can be proven that the facility is the source of the problem. Consider this policy even if it is not required by law. Traffic • Create acceleration, deceleration, or turning lanes at site entrances and exits as needed to maintain steady traffic flows around facility This may require widening roads. , . • Fund road improvements and upgrades around the facility to reduce congestion and prevent damage from additional truck traffic. • Work with the community to designate inbound and out- bound truck traffic routes and ensure that drivers follow these routes. I il _K1 ' material (e.g., waste, compostables, recy- clables), destination of load. • Facility operating log: noting any unusual events during the operating day. • Complaint log: noting the date, time, com- plaining party, nature of the complaint, and followup activity to address the complaint. • Accidents or releases: details any accidents or waste releases into the environment. • Testing results: such as tests for suspected unacceptable waste. • Environmental test results: such as surface water discharges, sewer discharges, air emissions, ground -water, or noise tests. • Maintenance records: for mobile and fixed equipment. • Employee health and safety reports. • Employee training and operator certifica- tion documentation. Some transfer station operators, particularly at smaller facilities, find it necessary to record only some of the above items. In order to avoid the cost of installing and operating a scale, some small and medium-size transfer stations substitute estimated load volume (as measured in cubic yards) instead of weighing loads (in tons). When loads cannot be easily N v_:> _ Do not allow incoming trucks to queue on public streets. If inadequate space is available on site to accommodate waiting trucks, use a remote site as a waiting area for the trucks. Use radios to dispatch trucks from the waiting area to the transfer station. - - Where possible, schedule incoming traffic so that it does not =`r coincide with local rush hours. Litter; „c - ,,_ • Require all incoming and outgoing loads to be covered. • Ensure that all incoming and outgoing trucks are leak -proof to avoid leachate spills on public streets u Implement daily litter inspections and pickup at the facility and on surrounding streets. Install a perimeter fence to prevent windblown litter from leaving the site. viewed (such as with packer trucks), cubic yards are generally based on the vehicle's capacity. Loads in cars and pickup trucks are typically charged a minimal flat fee. Environmental Issues Developing transfer stations that minimize environmental impacts involves careful plan- ning, designing, and operation. This section focuses on neighborhood quality or public nuisance issues and offers "good neighbor practices' to improve the public's perception of the transfer station. Design and operational issues regarding traffic, noise, odors, air emis- sions, water quality, vectors, and litter are dis- cussed below. Proper facility siting, design, and operation can address and mitigate these potential impacts on the surrounding natural environment and the community. Careful attention to these issues begins with the initial planning and siting of a facility and should continue with regular monitoring after operations begin. Transfer station design must account for environmental issues regardless of surrounding land use and zoning. Stations sited in industrial or manufacturing zones are subject to the same environmental concerns and issues as stations located in more populat- ed zones. Minimizing the potentially negative aspects associated with these facilities requires thoughtful design choices. Identifying and Transfer Station Design and Operation 37 Depositing incoming waste on a tipping floor facilitates waste screening. 38 addressing these important issues can be a sig- nificant part of the overall cost to develop the waste transfer station. Traffic Traffic causes the most significant offsite envi- ronmental impacts associated with larger waste transfer stations. This is particularly true for stations in urban and suburban areas where traffic congestion is often already a sig- nificant problem for the local community. Although transportation routes serving rural stations typically receive less traffic, these routes might still be affected by limitations on gross vehicle weight or individual axle weights for certain roads or bridges. By consolidating shipments to the disposal site, a waste transfer system will have net pos- itive impacts in terms of reducing community- wide truck traffic, air emissions, noise, and highway wear. Some of these negative impacts, however, might be concentrated in the immediate vicinity of the transfer station as a result of increased local traffic generated by a transfer station, even though overall impacts are reduced. Evaluating travel routes and the resulting traffic impacts should receive significant atten- tion during facility siting and design to mini- mize the traffic's offsite environmental impacts. Furthermore, dependable access and smooth traffic flow are essential for good cus- Transfer Station Design and Operation tomer service and the operating efficiency of the facility. It is common, particularly in urban and suburban areas, for tribes and other local jurisdictions to require significant offsite improvements to mitigate traffic impacts or to assess traffic impact fees to off- set improvements needed for traffic upgrades. Typically, transfer stations can indirectly control when traffic arrives at the facility by adjusting operating hours. Relatively few transfer stations are able to schedule inbound traffic because collection vehicles need to unload when they are full so collection crews can resume their routes or end their working day. Also, many transfer stations are not oper- ated by the same company delivering waste to the facility, so control over specific timing is difficult. Some transfer stations have the abili- ty to schedule transfer vehicle traffic, however. These stations often schedule trips to avoid rush-hour traffic on area routes. Any queuing should occur on the transfer station site so as not to inhibit the traffic flow on public streets. Queuing on streets creates public safety concerns, blocks traffic and access to adjacent properties, and in some cases, causes damage to streets not designed for heavy vehicles. Exhaust from idling truck engines queuing on public streets can also cre- ate air quality and health concerns. (See the Air Emissions section on page 37 for discus- sion of air emission issues.) If space on the site is insufficient, alternatives should be consid- ered. These could include providing a sepa- rate tipping area for certain types of customers (such as self -haulers, who generate a lot of traffic, but not much waste) or establishing a remote holding lot for inbound vehicles to use before joining the onsite queue. Regulatory agencies sometimes can address and control queuing problems through the permitting process. Permitting agencies can incorporate provisions that require transfer stations to pro- vide adequate queuing space on site or off site or that prohibit queuing on public streets. As a result of community input, the opera- tor might designate traffic routes to the facili- ty. A simple "right tum only' at the exit can relieve some traffic conflicts. If offsite routes are designated, clear authority for enforce- ment needs to be established (e.g., by local police or by the station operator refusing access to violators). Some specific design and operation features that might be necessary to reduce the environ- mental impacts of station traffic are described below: • Designating haul routes to and from the transfer station that avoid congested areas, residential areas, and other sensitive areas. • Adding offsite directional signs, pavement markings, and intersection signals. • Providing acceleration and deceleration lanes that allow vehicles to enter and leave the flow of offsite traffic smoothly, reducing congestion and the likelihood of accidents. • Using right turns to enter and leave the sta- tion site and minimizing left turns to reduce congestion and the likelihood of accidents off site. • Providing adequate onsite queuing space so lines of customers and transfer vehicles waiting to enter the facility do not interfere with offsite traffic. • Installing and using compaction equipment to maximize the amount of waste hauled in each transfer trailer, thus reducing the num- ber of loads leaving the site. • Establishing operating hours, including restrictions, that encourage facility use dur- ing nonpeak traffic times on area roads. • Schedule commercial waste deliveries to avoid rush-hour traffic. • Providing or requiring the provision of resi- dential waste collection service to reduce the number of people hauling their own wastes to the transfer station. Although the transfer station will handle the same amount of waste, more of it will arrive as combined collection vehicle loads, reducing the number of loads brought in by cars and pickup trucks. (One residential collection vehicle can haul as much as 15 to 30 cars and pickup trucks.) Noise Transfer stations can be a significant source of noise, which might be a nuisance to neigh- bors., Heavy truck traffic and the operation of heavy-duty facility equipment are the primary sources of noise from a transfer station. Offsite traffic noise in the station's vicinity will be perceived as noise from the station itself. Equipment noise includes engines, backup alarms (beep- ers), hydraulic power units, and equipment buckets and blades banging and scraping on concrete and steel surfaces. The unload- ing of waste or recy- clables (particularly glass) onto a tipping floor, pit, steel drop box, or trailer can also create substantial noise, depending on the type of waste, fall distance, and surface. Stations that use sta- tionary solid waste .;Noise Abatement: Leon County, Florida ^ s part of its site selection process for a waste transfer station, Leon County,:[ Florida, commissioned a study to evaluate and noise address concerns. Parcels adjacent to the ` site include residential, commercial, and light industrial. To the west is undeveloped residen- tial land. The study used a 5 -step procedure to -- determine the impact that noise from the transfer station would have on the adjoining community. It also assessed the effectiveness -, and feasibility of abatement. The study resulted in nine recommendations relating to building; orientation, truck routing, operating hours, berm and wall construction, and vegetative ' plantings to buffer noise (Leon County FL; , s„ February, 2000). compactors or engine -driven tamping equip- ment have additional sources of mechanical equipment noise with which to contend. Good facility design and operations can help reduce noise emanating from the station. This includes: Maximizing the utility of perimeter site buffers, particularly along site boundaries with sensitive adjoining properties. Increasing the distance between the noise source and the receiver, or providing natu- ral or man-made barriers are the most effec- tive ways of reducing noise when the sound generation level cannot be reduced. 5 Although repeated exposure to high noise levels can lead to hearing impairment, noise levels associated with impairment are typically a concern only to employees; neighborhood impacts are typically a nuisance issue, not a health issue. Transfer Station Design and Operation 39 Orienting buildings so the site topography and the structure's walls buffer adjacent noise -sensitive properties from direct expo- sure to noise sources. Providing sound -absorbent materials on building walls and ceilings. Shutting off idling equipment and queuing trucks. Surge pit separating public and commercial vehicles. Water sprays along the walls of the pit are used to suppress dust. 40 • Avoiding traffic flows adjacent to noise - sensitive property. • Arranging the facility layout to eliminate steep uphill grades for waste -hauling trucks, as driving uphill can significantly increase noise levels. • Facing building openings such as entrances away from noise -sensitive adjoining prop- erty. • Considering alternatives for beeping back- up alarms, such as strobe lights and prox- imity detectors (if state and local regulations allow). • Confining noisy activities within specified buildings or other enclosures. In particular, enclose hydraulic power units associated with compactors and rams in areas with acoustic silencing materials. Quieter equip - Transfer Station Design and Operation ment options can also be selected during design. Properly maintaining mufflers and engine enclosures on mobile equipment operating within the transfer station. Also insist that operators of commercial hauling vehicles keep their equipment, including the muffler systems, in good repair. Keeping as many doors closed during sta- tion operating hours as practical. • Conducting activities that generate the loudest noise during selected hours, such as the morning or afternoon commute hours, when adjoining properties are unoccupied or when offsite background noise is at its highest. Odors MSW, food waste, and certain yard wastes such as grass have a high potential for odor generation. Odors might increase during warm or wet weather. Thus, transfer stations handling these wastes need to address odor management based on current and projected adjacent land uses. Odors can be managed with proper facility design and operating pro- cedures, including: • As with noise mitigation, increasing the dis- tance between the odor source and the receiver effectively reduces the impact of odors. • Evaluating the prevailing wind direction to determine building orientation and setback to adjacent properties. • Carefully orienting the building and its doorways with respect to odor -sensitive neighboring property and closing as many doors as practical during operating hours. • Designing floors for easy cleanup, includ- ing a concrete surface with a positive slope to drainage systems. Eliminating crevices, corners, and flat surfaces, which are hard to keep clean and where waste residue can accumulate. • Sealing concrete and other semiporous sur- faces to prevent absorption of odor -produc- ing residues. Minimizing onsite waste storage, both in the facility and in the loaded trailers, by immediately loading odorous or potentially odorous wastes into transfer trailers and quickly transferring them to the disposal site. • Incorporating odor neutralizing systems. • Removing all waste from the tipping floor or pit at the end of each operating day, then cleaning those areas to remove remaining residues. • Using enclosed trailers whenever possible when loaded trailers must sit on site tem- porarily before transfer. • Practicing "first -in, first -out" waste han- dling practices so wastes are not allowed to sit on site for long periods of time. • Collecting and removing partially full con- tainers at rural stations where accumulation of full loads could take several days. • Keeping building catch basins, floor drains and drainage systems clean so odor -causing residues do not build up. • Treating drainage systems periodically with odor -neutralizing and bacteria -inhibiting solutions. • Diverting odorous waste loads to facilities with less sensitive surroundings during adverse weather conditions. • Refusing to accept certain highly odorous wastes. • Practicing other "good housekeeping" measures, including regularly cleaning and disinfecting containers, equipment, and other surfaces that come into contact with waste. Air Emissions Air emissions at transfer stations result from dusty wastes delivered to the transfer station, exhaust (particularly diesel) from mobile equipment such as trucks and loaders, driving on unpaved or dusty surfaces, and cleanup operations such as street sweeping. As with odor control, proper design and operating procedures help minimize air emissions, including: • Paving all traffic carrying surfaces. • Keeping paved surfaces and tipping floors clean, and ensuring any street sweeping operations use sufficient water to avoid stir- ring up dust. • Restricting vehicles from using residential streets. • Selecting alternative fuel or low -emission equipment or retrofitting facility equipment with oxidation catalysts and particulate traps. • Working with truck fleet operators to reduce exhaust emissions through the retro- fit of emission control devices, use of clean- er fuels, and use of alternative fuel vehicles (e.g., compressed natural gas) • Installing misting systems to suppress dust inside the building or using a hose to spray dusty wastes as they are unloaded and moved to the receiving vehicles. (In rural areas, small stations might not have a readi- ly available water supply, or might have to rely on a portable water supply for house- keeping needs.) • Maintaining engines in proper operating condition by performing routine tune-ups. • Considering the purchase of newer genera- tion, low -emission diesel engines. • Minimizing idling of equipment by turning off engines when not in use. Truck stop electrification technology can be installed at designated queuing areas to provide truck cabs with comforts such as climate con- trolled air, electricity, and phone lines while engines are shut off. • Cleaning truck bodies and tires to reduce tracking of dirt onto streets. Maintaining building air filtering systems so that they perform effectively. Storm Water Quality Rainfall and wash -down water flows from roofs, roads, parking lots, and landscaped Transfer Station Design and Operation 41 Water Quality at Rural Transfer Stations At stations in rural areas where water might not be available for sanitary uses, portable toilets might provide a solution. But even at these sta- tions, there is likely some amount of potentially contaminated runoff that needs to be managed as sewage. In rural areas and other areas not served by a piped sanitary sewer system, it is common to connect building drains to underground holding tanks. The tanks are pumped as needed, and the leachate is trucked to a sewage treatment plant or other approved process- ing facility. areas at a transfer station, eventually reaching natural or constructed storm water drainage systems. Runoff might also percolate into the ground -water system. Keeping surface water free of runoff contamination from waste, mud, and fuel and oil that drips from vehicles is important to maintaining the quality of both the surface and ground water systems. The quality and amount of runoff often is regulat- ed by state, tribal, or local water management authorities. Transfer station development typi- cally results in the addition of new impervious surfaces (i.e., paved surfaces) that increase the total quantity of runoff and can contribute to flooding potential. When runoff contacts waste, it is considered potentially contaminated and is known as "leachate." Transfer station design and opera- tion should ensure that contaminated water is collected separately, then properly managed on site or discharged to the sewer. Most transfer stations send some amount of waste water to sewer systems. In addition to leachate, waste water from daily cleaning of the waste han- dling areas and the facility's restrooms and support areas typically are discharged to the sewer. Local waste water treatment plants establish guidelines for pretreatment and analysis with which transfer stations must comply when discharging waste water into the sewer. To minimize impacts on sewer systems, transfer stations should consider: • Covering waste handling and storage areas that drain to the sanitary sewer system. This reduces the amount of rainfall con- tributing to the total volume of sewer flow. 42 Transfer Station Design and Operation Removing as much debris from the tipping floor as possible by mechanical means (e.g., scraping or sweeping) before hosing the floor down. Installing drain covers on floor drains. During normal operations, floor drains should be covered to prevent spilled liquid wastes from entering the sewer system. Covers can be opened or removed during floor cleaning. Installing low -flow toilets, showers, and faucets. • Providing appropriate pretreatment of water that comes into contact with waste (leachate). Pretreatment requirements vary depending on the capabilities of the receiv- ing sewer, but could include provisions allowing solids to settle out of the sewage, the use of oil/water separators, or the use of other treatment systems. Other design and operation measures to con- sider in managing surface water quality include: • Complying with all surface water manage- ment regulations applicable in the jurisdic- tion where the station is located. In jurisdictions with well-developed regula- tions, design and operation measures usual- ly include development of surface water detention facilities (ponds, tanks, or large holding pipes) that limit the runoff rate to the predeveloped rate. In addition, water quality requirements might involve desilt- ing facilities and applying various forms of biofiltration to remove contaminants. Some jurisdictions might require pH adjustment and other forms of pretreatment. • Locating stations outside local flood zones. • Minimizing impervious areas and maximiz- ing landscape and vegetative cover areas to reduce total runoff. Limiting outside parking of loaded contain- ers or alternatively using rain -tight, leak - tight containers. If loaded containers or transfer vehicles are parked or stored out- side, providing catch basins connected to the sanitary sewer system might be neces- sary. Maintaining all surface water management facilities in good operating condition. This includes periodic cleaning and removal of silt and debris from drainage structures and ponds, as well as removing collected oil from oil -water separators. Responding promptly to exterior spills to prevent waste materials from entering the surface water system. Cleaning up liquid spills such as oils, paints, and pesticides with absorbent material rather than hosing them into drains. Although transfer stations generally do not accept these liquids, they might find their way into the waste stream in small quantities. Using secondary containment around tem- porary storage areas for HHW, batteries, and suspect materials. Vectors Vectors are organisms that have the potential to transmit disease. Vectors of concern at transfer stations can include rodents, insects, and scavenging birds. Seagulls are particularly troublesome birds in coastal zones and certain inland areas. Much of the concern surround- ing vectors is associated with general nuisance factors, but this issue justifies diligent atten- tion. A few basic design elements and opera- tional practices can greatly reduce the presence of vectors, including: Eliminating or screening cracks or openings in and around building foundations, waste containers, and holding areas at enclosed - type stations. This reduces opportunities for entry by terrestrial vectors (especially rodents). • Installing bird -deterrent measures, such as suspended or hanging wires to keep birds out of structures, and eliminating horizon- tal surfaces where birds can congregate. • Removing all waste delivered to the facility by the end of each day. • Cleaning the tipping floor daily. • Routinely inspecting the facility for poten- tial vector habitat, and taking corrective action when needed. • Using commercial vector control specialists as necessary. Litter In the normal course of facility operations, stray pieces of waste are likely to become litter in and around the facility. In jurisdictions that do not have or do not enforce regulations to cover customer vehicles, the litter problem is often most prevalent on routes leading to the station. Dry, light materials such as plastic grocery bags can be blown from the backs or tops of vehicles, or from the tipping area to the facility's outside areas. Design and operation considerations that can reduce the litter problem include: • Conducting all waste handling and process- ing activities in enclosed areas, if possible. • Orienting the main transfer building with respect to the predominant wind direction so it is less likely to blow through the build- ing (or tunnel) and carry litter out. Generally the "blank" side of the building should face into the prevailing wind. Strictly enforcing the load covering or tarp- ing requirements will reduce litter from waste trucks. Some transfer station opera- tors have the authority to decline uncov- erect loads and have instituted surcharges to pro- vide incentives for customers to cover their loads. Providing wind- breaks to deflect wind away from waste handling areas. Locating doors in areas that are less likely to have potentially litter - producing materi- Vector Control 'Stations at Rural Transfer ln less densely populated areas, other vectors of concern could include bears, raccoons, and dogs, especially if waste is not tightly enclosed. The best way to keep large vectors out of the facility is to totally enclose the waste storage R area or to fence and gate the site. Bird -scare #' devices, such as recordings of predatory birds or plastic decoys, can help alleviate scavenging. Baited traps can be used to control rodents, and humane traps can capture larger mammals such as raccoons and weasels. Transfer Station Design and Operation 43 als stored near them, regardless of building orientation. At small rural stations, providing contain- ers with lifting lids that are normally closed. • Minimizing horizontal ledges where litter can accumulate. Facility Operating Plans Many states (as well as some tribes and local governments) require waste transfer stations to prepare and maintain facility operating plans. Often, these plans must be submitted with the permit application. The operating plan format and the specific information it must contain can vary greatly. Some states may also require operating plans prepared or certified by a licensed or certified professional engineer. Operating plans might require the following information: Facility -}specific information such as location and ownership. Some states 4, require maps and diagrams of the site and facility as well. Facility capacity and expected operating life. Description of the type of waste the facility will handle, including waste origination, composition, and weight or volume. A list or description of unacceptable wastes, including procedures for storing and handling these materials if they do arrive at the facility. " A description of daily operations, including waste handling techniques, vector controls, and hours of operation. Emergency or contingency plans and procedures. • Providing skirts (usually wide rubber belt- ing or strip brushes) that close the gap between the bottom of the chute and the top of the receiving container at stations that employ chutes and hoppers to contain waste as it is deposited in trailers and drop boxes. • Installing fencing and netting systems to keep blowing litter from escaping the sta- tion site. This is particularly necessary at small rural facilities that are likely open - sided or that lack an enclosing building. • Conducting routine litter patrols to collect trash on site, around the perimeter, on immediately adjacent properties, and on 44 Transfer Station Design and Operation approach roads and the hauling route(s). Litter patrols, especially at unattended sites, can also detect any illegal dumping that has occurred along the site perimeter. • Cleaning the tipping floor regularly and maintaining good housekeeping practices. This will minimize the amount of loose material that can be blown outside. Safety Issues Thoughtful facility design coupled with good operating practices help ensure transfer sta- tions are safe places. Transfer stations should be designed and operated for the safety of employees, customers, and even persons ille- gally trespassing when the facility is closed. Designers need to consider that people might trespass on facility grounds during operating hours or after the facility is closed for the night. Most state regulations require security and access control measures such as fences and gates that can be closed and locked after hours. Signs should be posted around the perimeter, with warnings about potential risks due to falls and contact with waste. Signs should be posted in multiple languages in jurisdictions with high percentages of non- English -speaking residents. Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations require facilities to provide safe working conditions for all employees. Although regulations spe- cific to waste transfer stations do not currently exist, general OSHA regulations apply as they would to any other constructed facility. State, tribal, and local workplace safety regulations, which can be more stringent than federal reg- ulations, also might apply. Some state, tribal, or local governments might require a facility's development permit to directly address employee and customer safety. State and tribal solid waste regulations, for instance, often require development of operating plans and contingency plans to address basic health and safety issues. Transfer station safety issues are the facility operator's responsibility. This section describes general safety con- cerns associated with solid waste transfer sta- tions. A facility must take steps to eliminate or reduce risk of injury from many sources, including: Exposure to Potentially Hazardous Equipment Transfer station employees work in close proximity to a variety of hazards, including equipment with moving parts, such as con- veyor belts, push blades, balers, and com- pactors. Facility operators should develop an employee equipment orientation program and establish safety programs to minimize the risk of injury from station equipment. Utilizing locks or tags that prevent equipment from operating until they are removed (lock- out/tagout systems), for example, effectively minimize hazards associated with transfer station equipment. Transfer stations operators must implement and strictly enforce rules requiring children and pets to remain in the vehicle at all times. Posting signs and apply- ing brightly colored paint or tape to hazards can alert customers to potential dangers. Personal Protective Equipment Transfer station employees coming in close contact with waste and heavy machinery should wear appropriate personal protective equipment. Common pieces of protective gear include hard hats, protective eye goggles, dust masks, steel tipped boots, and protective gloves. If working in close proximity to loud machinery, hearing protection should be used as well. Check state and local codes and regu- lations to see if any personal protective equip- ment standards exist. Ensure that all facility employees are using the appropriate equip- ment and are properly maintaining it. Exposure to Extreme Temperatures Facilities located in areas of extreme weather must account for potential impacts to employ- ees from prolonged exposure to heat or cold. Heat exhaustion and heat stroke are addressed with proper facility operations, including good ventilation inside buildings, access to water and shade, and periodic work breaks. Cold weather is addressed by proper clothing, pro- tection from wind and precipitation, and access to warming areas. Extreme tempera- tures typically should not pose problems for customers because their exposure times are much less than those of facility workers. Traffic Controlled, safe traffic flows in and around the facility are critical to ensuring employee and customer safety. Ideally, a transfer station is designed so traffic from large waste - collecting vehicles is kept separate from self -haulers, who typ- ically use cars and pickup trucks. Facility designers should consider: Directing traffic flow in a one-way loop through the main transfer building and around the entire site. Facilities with one-way traffic flow have build- ings (and some- times entire sites) with separate entrances and exits. The transfer trailers, in particu- lar, are difficult to maneuver and require gentle slopes and suffi- cient turning radii. Ideally, these trail - Well marked, color -coded traffic routes can help minimize contact between commercial and public vehicles. ers should not have to back up. • Arranging buildings and roads on the site to eliminate or minimize intersections, the need to back up vehicles, and sharp turns. • Providing space for vehicles to queue when the incoming traffic flow is greater than the facility's tipping area can accommodate. Sufficient queuing areas should be located Transfer Station Design and Operation 45 after the scale house and before the tipping area. This is in addition to and separate from any queuing area required before the scale house to prevent traffic from backing up onto public roads. • Providing easily understood and highly visible signs, pavement markings, and directions from transfer station staff to indi- cate proper traffic flow. Providing bright lighting, both artificial and natural, inside buildings. Using light- colored interior finishes that are easy to keep clean is also very helpful. When enter- ing a building on a bright day, drivers' eyes need time to adjust to the building's darker interior. This adjustment period can be dan- gerous. Good interior lighting and light- colored surfaces can reduce the contrast and shorten adjustment time. Providing an area for self -haulers to unload separately from large trucks. Typically, self - haulers must manually unload the back of a pickup truck, car, or trailer. This process takes longer than the automated dumping of commercial waste collection vehicles and potentially exposes the driver to other traf- fic. It is often a good idea to provide staff to assist the public with safe unloading prac- tices. • Requiring facility staff to wear bright or conspicuous clothing. Personnel working in the tipping area especially must wear high visibility clothing at all times. • Installing backup alarms on all moving facility equipment and training all vehicle operators in proper equipment operations safety. Backup alarms must be maintained in proper working condition at all times. Cameras and monitors can also be installed as an additional precaution. Falls Accidental falls are another concern for facili- ty employees and customers, especially in facilities with pits or direct dump designs where the drop at the edge of the tipping area might be 5 to 15 feet deep. Facilities with flat tipping areas offer greater safety in terms of 46 Transfer Station Design and Operation reducing the height of falls, but they present their own hazards. These include standing and walking on floor surfaces that could be slick from recent waste material and being close to station operating equipment that removes waste after each load is dumped. Depending on the station design (pit or flat floor), a number of safety measures should be considered to reduce the risk of falls. For direct gravity loading of containers by citizens, a moderate grade separation will reduce the fall distance. For example, some facilities place rolloff boxes 8 feet below grade to facilitate easy loading of waste into the container (so the top of the rolloff box is even with the surrounding ground). This approach, however, creates an 8 -foot fall hazard into an empty rolloff box. Alternatively, the rolloff box can be set about 5 feet below grade, with the sides extending about 3 feet above the floor. This height allows for relatively easy lifting over the box's edge, yet is high enough to reduce the chance of accidental falls. For pit -type operations, the pit depth can be tapered to accommodate commercial unloading at the deep end (typically 8 to 12 feet) and public unloading at the shallow end (3 to 6 feet). • Safety barriers, such as chains or ropes, can be placed around the pit edges at the end of the day or during cleaning periods to prevent falls. These barriers, however, should be removed during normal operat- ing hours as they are a trip hazard and can interfere with the unloading of waste. • Substantial wheel stops can be installed on the facility floor to prevent vehicles from backing into a pit or bin. Some curbs are removable to facilitate cleaning. • Locating wheel stops a good distance from the edge of the unloading zone ensures that self -haul customers will not find them- selves dangerously close to a ledge or the operating zone for station equipment. To prevent falls due to slipping, the floor should be cleaned regularly and designed with a skid -resistant surface. Designers need to provide sufficient slope in floors and pavements so that they drain readily and eliminate standing water. This is espe- cially crucial in cold climate areas where icing can cause an additional fall hazard. Because of transfer stations' large size and volume and the constant flow of vehicles, it is impractical to design and operate them as heated facilities. • Use of colored floor coatings (such as bright red or yellow) in special hazard zones (including the area immediately next to a pit) can give customers a strong visual cue. • Designing unloading stalls for self -haul customers with a generous width (at least 12 feet when possible) maximizes the sepa- ration between adjacent unloading opera- tions and reduces the likelihood of injury from activity in the next stall. For commer- cial customers, stall widths of at least 15 feet are needed to provide a similar safety cushion. This is particularly necessary where self -haul and commercial stalls are located side-by-side. • If backing movements are required, design the facility so vehicles back in from the dri- ver's side (i.e., left to right) to increase visi- bility. Noise Unloading areas can have high noise levels due to the station's operating equipment, the unloading operation and waste movement, and customer vehicles. Backup safety alarms and beepers required on most commercial vehicles and operating equipment also can be particularly loud. The noise level also might cause customers not to hear instructions or warnings or the noise from an unseen approaching hazard. Designers have limited options for dealing with the noise problem. The principal way to reduce the effects of high -decibel noise in enclosed tipping areas is to apply a sound - absorbing finish over some ceiling and wall surface areas. Typically, spray -on acoustical coatings are used. These finishes have a draw- back, however. They tend to collect dirt and grime and are hard to keep clean and bright. Using a rubber shoe on the bottom of waste - moving equipment buckets and blades and avoiding use of track -type equipment that produce high mechanical noise also limits noise. These approaches, however, can affect the transfer system's operational efficiency. Regardless of which approaches are employed, transfer station employees exposed to high levels of noise for prolonged periods of time should use earplugs or other protec- tive devices to guard against hearing damage. Air Quality Tipping areas often have localized air quality problems (dust and odor) that constitute a safety and health hazard. Dust in particular can be troublesome, especially where dusty, dry commercial loads (e.g., C&D wastes) are tipped. Prolonged exposure to air emissions from waste and motorized vehicles operating inside the building provides another potential health threat to facility employees. Facility air quality issues can be addressed through a number of design and operational practices. These include: Water-based dust suppression (misting or spray) systems used to "knock down' dust. Different types of systems are available. They typically involve a piping system with an array of nozzles aimed to deliver a fine spray to the area where dust is likely to be generated (e.g., over the surge pit). They typically are actuated by station staff "on demand" when dust is generated. Dust suppression systems can operate using water only or can have an injection system that mixes odor -neutralizing compounds (usually naturally occurring organic extracts) with the water. These dual pur- pose systems effectively control both dust and odors. Water-based dust suppression systems, however, can have adverse eco- nomic impacts. The additional moisture added to the waste increases the weight of outbound loads, potentially reducing truck capacity and increasing costs. Transfer Station Design and Operation 47 • Use of handheld hoses to wet down the waste where it is being moved or processed, typically in a pit. Designers need to consider using convenient reel -mount hoses for this purpose. • Ventilation systems can control air quality inside enclosed transfer buildings. While the high roofs and large floor areas com- mon in transfer stations put unique demands upon ventilation systems, it is still possible through engineering techniques to create the air velocities needed to entrain dust particles. One approach is to concen- trate system fans and air removal equip- ment above the dustiest and most odor -prone area to create a positive air flow from cleaner areas. Often, the air -handling equipment is designed with multiple speed fans and separate fan units that can be acti- vated during high dust or odor events. Filtering and scrubbing exhaust air from transfer stations is also possible. • If employees' direct exposure to harmful emissions from vehicles and waste at the facility is not sufficiently minimized, respi- ratory aids such as masks might be neces- sary. Hazardous Wastes and Materials While MSW is generally nonhazardous, some potentially hazardous materials such as pesti- cides, bleach, and solvents could be delivered to a transfer station. Facility operators should ensure that employees are properly trained to identify and handle such materials. Some sta- tions have a separate household hazardous waste (HHW) receiving and handling area. If the transfer station operates a program that manages HHW, the material is often collected by appointment only, during designated 48 Transfer Station Design and Operation hours, or during special single or multiple day events. All transfer stations need to be equipped to handle the occasional occurrence of hazardous waste, real or suspected, mixed with other wastes. Personal protective equipment such as goggles, gloves, body suits, and respirators should be on hand and easily accessible to employees. Because staff or customers might inadvertently come in contact with a haz- ardous substance, it is also good practice, and often required by code, to have special eye- wash and shower units in the operating areas. Typically, the transfer station's operating plan will outline detailed procedures to guide sta- tion personnel in identifying and managing these kinds of wastes. Many stations have a secure area with primary and secondary con- tainment barriers near the main tipping area where suspect wastes can be placed pending evaluation and analysis. Public education efforts can reduce the likelihood of hazardous materials showing up in solid waste. Ergonomics Improper body position, repetitive motion, and repeated or continuous exertion of force contribute to injuries. Both employers and employees should receive ergonomics training to reduce the likelihood of injury. Such train- ing provides guidance on minimizing repeti- tive motions and heavy lifting and using proper body positions to perform tasks. At this time there are no federal ergonomic stan- dards. A few states, however, do have such standards under their job safety and health programs. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration's Web site <www.osha- slc.gov/fso/osp/> includes a list of states with such programs and provides links to a number of these states' Web sites. � .. w* � Mfr m... y�w.�• u,. sP � & �, Ay"Xffl�VM _. 7611 a ist his section describes the types of regulations that generally apply to transfer stations and addresses typi- cal regulatory compliance methods. Applicable Regulations Transfer stations are affected by a variety of federal, state, tribal, and local regulations, including those related to noise, traffic impact mitigation, land use, workplace safety, taxes, employee right -to -know, and equal employ- ment opportunity that are applicable to any other business or public operation. Many jurisdictions also have regulations specifically applicable to transfer stations. These regula- tions typically emphasize the protection of public health and the environment. Federal Regulations No federal regulations exist that are specifical- ly applicable to transfer stations. EPA, howev- er, initiated a rulemaking process exclusively for marine waste transfer stations under authority of the Shore Protection Act in 1994. These rules would regulate vessels and marine transfer stations in the U.S. coastal waters. EPA is currently working with the U.S. Coast Guard on finalizing these rules. State Regulations State solid waste regulatory programs usually take primacy in transfer station permitting, although local zoning and land use require- ments apply as well. State regulations vary widely. Some have no regulations specific to transfer stations; others mention them as a minor part of regulations that generally apply to solid waste management; and others have regulations specifically addressing transfer station issues such as design standards, oper- ating standards, and the maximum amount of time that waste can be left on site. A few states also require transfer stations to have closure plans and to demonstrate financial assurance, b a yip .r1. while others require certification of key per- sonnel. Some states also require compliance with regional solid waste planning efforts or demonstrations of "need." Appendix A provides a state -by -state checklist of major transfer station regulatory issues. Appendix A shows that: • All but five states require waste transfer stations to have some type of permit, per- mit -by -rule, or state license to operate. • All 50 states have at least minimal operat- ing standards for waste transfer stations either through regulations, statutes, operat- ing plans, or construction permits. • Some states require analysis of transfer sta- tion impacts under general environmental review procedures. Local Regulations Local regulation of transfer stations can take many forms. Typical regulatory bodies include counties, cities, regional solid waste manage- a The New Mexico Fnvironinent Department hereby imus fig SOLID WASTE FACILITY PERMIT Facility Type: Transfer Station FacililylDNo: SWM -071307 and Recycling Facility Facility Name & Location: Owner's Name & Address: ACME Solid Waste ACME Solid Waste Authority Transfer & Recycling 180 Yosemite Lane Albuquerque, N<if Albuquerque, Nen Mexico 88001 Permit Expiration Date: November 2, 2015 This Ponolt Is iasuN Pu vnmvt to Section 74-940 oftive SoM Waste Ap end Is sunieet to the coraitions orthe Order of the Secretary, dam hkTIRmher.Z. 119 95 . Given this Jo mos iecrelaq of Environment Example of a state issued transfer station facility permit. Facility Oversight 49 ment authorities, health departments, and air pollution control authorities. Counties, cities, and regional authorities often are required to prepare comprehensive solid waste management plans describing long-range plans for waste prevention, recy- cling, collection, processing (including transfer stations), and disposal. Other local regulations likely to apply to transfer stations include zoning ordinances, noise ordinances, and traf- fic impact analysis. Public health departments are involved with transfer stations because of the potential health concerns if solid waste is improperly managed. In some states, the state environ- mental protection agency delegates authority to local health departments to oversee solid waste management facilities, including trans- fer stations. This typically includes overseeing general compliance with a facility's operating permit; regular cleaning of the tipping floor; limits on the amount of waste the facility can accept; and employment of adequate meas- ures to prevent vectors such as rats, birds, and flies from contacting waste. Local or regional air pollution control authorities often regulate odor, dust, and vehi- cle exhaust emissions at transfer stations. Air pollution control agencies might regulate chemicals used to control odor, exhaust from vents on the facility's roof or walls, and whether dusty loads can be delivered to the transfer station. The local sanitary district often establishes waste water standards and might be involved in storm water management and protection. Common Regulatory Compliance Methods Compliance Inspections Many transfer stations are inspected periodi- cally for compliance with the transfer station's operating permit and other applicable regula- 50 Facility Oversight tions. The entity responsible for performing inspections and the frequency and level of detail of inspections vary widely around the country. Some inspections are complaint driv- en, some occur on a regular frequency, and some occur on a random basis. A typical inspection involves a representative of the local health department or state or tribal solid waste regulatory program walking through the facility, looking for improper waste stor- age or handling methods and writing up a short notice of compliance or noncompliance. Other inspections for specific issues are also conducted. Special inspections might target workplace safety, proper storm -water runoff management, and compliance with applicable roadway weight limits for transport vehicles. Reporting Some transfer station operators are required to compile monthly, quarterly, or annual reports for submission to regulatory agencies and host communities. These reports typically include the following information: • Weight (tons) and loads (number of cus- tomers) received at the transfer station each month. This sometimes includes details such as day of the week, time of day, type of waste, name of hauler, and origin of waste. • Weight (tons) and loads (number of transfer truck shipments) shipped from the transfer station each month. This sometimes includes a breakdown by time shipped, type of waste, and the final destination of the waste. A description of any unusual events that took place at the transfer station, including accidents and discoveries of unacceptable waste. • A summary of complaints received and the actions taken to respond to the complaints. 4 S h r b c W P Leon County, Florida. Leon County Solid Waste Transfer Station: Noise Study Report. February 2000 (Draft). Lund, Herbert F. 1992. Solid Waste Handbook. McGraw-Hill Companies. National Environmental Justice Advisory Council. 2000. A Regulatory Strategy for Siting and Operating Waste Transfer Stations, (EPA500-R-00-001). Washington, DC. Solid Waste Association of North America. 2000. Certification Course Manual: Managing Transfer Station Systems. SWANA. Washington, DC. Tchobauoglous, George, Hilary Theisen, and Samuel A. Vigil. 1993. Integrated Solid Waste Management: Engineering Principles and Management Issues. McGraw-Hill Companies. U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. 2000. Waster Transfer Stations: Involved Citizens Make the Difference, (EPA530-K-01-003). Washington, DC. U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. 1995. Decision -Maker's Guide to Solid Waste Management, Second Edition (EPA 530-R-95-023). Washington, DC. DuPage County Solid Waste Department. 1998. Solid Waste Transfer in Illinois: A Citizen's Handbook on Planning, Siting and Technology. Weaver Boos & Gordon, Inc. (For information on ordering copies of the DuPage County publication entitled Solid Waste Transfer in Illinois: A Citizen's Handbook on Planning, Siting and Technology contact Kevin T. Dixon, Director, Solid Waste Department, DuPage County Center, 421 N. Country Farm Road, Wheaton, Illinois 60187, telephone(630)682-7373.) Resources 51 Glossary of Terms and /:�Me - nv�ms Baler: This technology compresses waste into high-density, self-contained units (bales) of either waste or recyclables. Baled waste is transported on flatbed trailers (as opposed to transfer trailers) and is most often sent to a "balefill" that has special equipment (e.g., forklifts). Buffer zone (also setback): The distance Host community benefits: A transfer station or landfill operator can offer specific benefits to the community selected for a proposed facility. The benefits are listed in a Host Community Agreement. Benefits can include cash, free tipping, highway improvements, and tax reductions. Household hazardous wastes (HHW): HHW between the transfer station or roadways and come from residences, are generally produced adjacent properties; often used for screening. Collection vehicle: Residential collection vehi- cles include front -loading and rear -loading garbage trucks, as well as special trucks with compartments used to pickup source -separat- ed recyclables. Commercial (businesses), insti- tutional (hospitals and schools), and industrial (plants) waste, as well as C&D waste, is often discarded in rolloff boxes, which are dropped at the facility and then collected on schedule. Construction and demolition debris (C&D): Includes broken concrete, wood waste, asphalt, rubble. This material can often be sep- arated for beneficial use. Convenience center (also citizen's dropoff or green box): Small transfer facilities used in low-volume or rural settings. These low -tech- nology options often use rolloff boxes with an inclined ramp for cars and pickups. Bins can be included for recyclables that are source - separated. Direct haul: The historic practice of sending collection vehicles (mostly garbage trucks) directly to the landfill without using transfer stations. When landfills were close to the waste sources, a residential collection vehicle customarily made two trips per day to the landfill. in small quantities, and consist of common household discards such as paints, solvents, herbicides, pesticides, and batteries. Loadout: The process of loading outbound transfer trailers with waste; or loading trucks with recyclables destined for the market. Municipal solid waste (MSW): Generally defined as discards routinely collected from homes, businesses, and institutions, and the nonhazardous discards from industries. Queuing distance: The space provided for incoming trucks to wait in line. Source -separated: Recyclables discarded and collected in containers separate from non -recy- clable waste. Bins or blue bags are used to separate residential recyclables; separate boxes or containers are used for commercial/indus- trial discards (e.g., corrugated cardboard pack- aging, wood pallets). Source -separated wastes usually are delivered to a material recovery facility. Surge pit: A pit usually made of concrete that receives waste from the tipping floor. Surge pits provide more space for temporary storage at peak times and allow for additional com- paction of waste before loadout. Glossary of Terms and Acronyms 53 Tipping fee: The unit price charged at the dis- posal site or transfer station to accept waste, usually expressed as dollars per ton or dollars per cubic yard. Tipping floor: The floor of the transfer station where waste is unloaded (tipped) for inspec- tion, sorting, and loading. Tons per day (TPD): The most common unit of measurement for waste generation, trans- fer, and disposal. Accurate TPD measure- ments require a scale; conversion from "cubic yards' without a scale involves estimated density factors. 54 Glossary of Terms and Acronyms Walking floor: A technology built in to light- weight transfer trailers and used to unload waste at the disposal site. Moving panels "walk" the waste out of the trailer bed. Waste diversion: The process of separating certain materials at the transfer station to avoid the cost of hauling and the tipping fee at the landfill. Waste screening: Inspecting incoming wastes to preclude transport of hazardous wastes, dangerous substances, or materials that are incompatible with transfer station or landfill operations. AppendixA►: State Transfer station Regulations he table starting on page A-2 is designed to serve as a quick refer- ence guide and comparative index of all state transfer station regula- tions. Almost all of these regula- tions are available over the Internet, and the URLs are provided at the end of this section. Permit Requirements. Nearly all states require transfer facilities to obtain a permit before beginning operations. The vast majority of states issue standard permits after a transfer sta- tion's application has been reviewed and approved. A few states have permit -by -rule pro- visions, which allow transfer stations to forego the application process by demonstrating com- phance with a set of designated standards. Of the states not requiring permits for transfer sta- tions, about half require the facility to register with the state prior to beginning operation. Siting Requirements. Siting requirements refer to any additional regulatory require- ments beyond relevant and applicable state or local zoning requirements or conditions. Siting requirements could include prohibitions against siting in or near wetlands, flood plains, endangered species habitats, airports, or other protected sites. Design Standards. Nearly all states have at least minimal design criteria for transfer sta- tions. These requirements typically set stan- dards for waste receiving areas and waste -storage areas that include building structural features, access control, vector con- trol, and dust and odor controls. Operational Standards. These standards estab- lish how the transfer station will be run and how wastes will be handled. Standards often include hours of operation, safety issues, litter control, dust and odor control, disease vector control, facility cleaning/sanitation practices, waste removal, traffic control, and contingencies. Operator Certification. Only five states have mandatory operator certification for transfer station operators (Arkansas, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, and Ohio). Other state regulations stipulate that a transfer sta- tion operator must be a "qualified solid waste manager" but do not have requirements for any specific type of certification. Storage Restrictions. Many states have estab- lished time limits on how long waste may remain in a transfer station. Storage time restrictions vary from state to state, and some- times even within a state, depending upon the size of the transfer station. Recordkeeping Requirements. The majority of states require a transfer station to maintain onsite records of all incoming and outgoing waste as well as copies of the facility permit, operating plan, contingency plan, and proof of financial assurance, when such things are applicable. Reporting Requirements. Many states require transfer stations to submit reports at least annually to the state environmental agency. These reports often include information such as the name and location of the transfer station, the amounts and types of waste accepted, and the source and final destination of this waste. Monitoring Requirements. Monitoring refers to any surface water, soil, or air compliance monitoring that a transfer station may be required to perform by its state. Closure Requirements. Closure requirements include standards or timetables for removing wastes and cleaning the transfer station site after the facility stops receiving waste and per- manently ends operations. Most states with closure requirements require transfer stations to remove all wastes and close the facility in a manner that eliminates any threats to human health and the environment and minimizes the need for further maintenance. Financial Assurance Requirements. Some states require transfer stations to demonstrate that they have sufficient funds to properly close the facili- ty when it ceases operation. Financial assurance mechanisms often include trust funds, insurance policies, letters of credit, or other financial tests. Appendx A: State Transfer Station Regulations A-1 State Transfer Station Regulations State Regulation Permit Siting Design Operational Operator Requirements Requirements Standards Standards Certification Chapter Yes Yes Yes Yes No `(Alabama L 420-3-5-.12 ® Alaska 18 AAC 60 No No No Yes No Arizona None' No But must No No ', Yes No self certify or . _ notify state' � Arkansas Reg. 22, Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Chapter 9 r California Title 14 Yes No Yes Yes No Article 6 fw L-- Colorado 6 CCR 1007-2 No4 No Yes Yes No Connecticut 22a-209RCSA Yes Yes No _ Yes Yes u Delaware Delaware S.W. Yes Yes Yes Yes No Regs., Section 10 Florida Rule 62-701- Yes Yes Yes Yes No FAC _ _ Georgia Chapter 391- Yes - Permit-by- No No Yes No 3-4 rule, must notify state +Hawaii Title II, Yes No Yes Yes -. No Chapt.58.1-- Idaho (current IDAPA 58.01.06 Yes - Conditional No No Yes No rules use permit ,Idaho (proposed IDAPA 16 Yes Yes _ Yes Yes No rule)' Illinois IAC Title 35, - Yes No No (Yes)' No (Yes) No Subtitle G, Chapter I, Subchapter I, Part 807, Subparts A&B Indiana 329 IAC 11 Yes No No Yes ~ "" "° No Iowa IAC 567 Yes No Yes Yes No Chapter 100 ,Kansas � KAR 28-29 Yes Yes Yes Yes ' Nc '`' > A-2 Appendix A: State Transfer Station Regulations Storage Recordkeeping Reporting Restrictions Requirements Requirements Yes - 24 hours Yes No No � No pNo._.... .. .. No. Yes - No extended storage of putrescibles Yes - 48 hours for facilities; within 7 ® days for operations' Yes - No overnight storage on tipping floor r_Yes -.48 hours�� Yes - 72 hours, all overnight storage in enclosures t No Yes �^ Monitoring Closure Financial Requirements Requirements Assurance Requirements No No ,Yes -x�r �z� No kA ; No No No No a No No No No Yes - Periodic No No Yes - At state discretion Yes _ Yes Quarterly e Possible As part Yes y No � W of nuisance control measures Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes :- No No No Yes Yes Possible - State may Yes Yes require post -closure monitoring Yes No No No No No No No No Yes No No Yes_e Yes - Annual, No Yes 1 by June 30 No Yes No No No No' No No Yes No � No, Yes No No (Yes) No (Yes) No (Yes) No Yes No Yes - Remove next {t day (except on t weekends and holidays) Yes 72 hours Yes Yes - Annual, by_ _ No. � Yes , - Yes, - 77 January 31 and quarterly tonnage reports No No No Yes No Yes - Loaded into Yes Yes - Annus transfer vehicle March 1 next day Possible - At state's Yes Yes" discretion Appendix A: State Transfer Station Regulations A-3 State Regulation Permit Siting Design Operational Operator Requirements Requirements Standards Standards Certification Kentucky 401 KAR 47 Yes - Registered Yes No Yes No o, permit -by -rule Yes Yes No Louisiana LAC 33: VII Yes Yes Yes Yes No Subpart I ,Maine - ME SW Mgt. - YesV _ Rules Chapter 402 Maryland Title 26 Yes Chapter 07 YesYes �....a n..�. „�.—..�....,—.�.,o NHCAR Env- Yes No -7— 77. --4-s..�......�-..�. ' Yes _. Yes Wm Chapters No Yes Yes No (Massachusetts 310 CMR 16.00Yes Yes 1' Yes Yes No f m & 19.00 - Michigan MAC R299, Yes Yes Yes Yes No Part 5 Minnesota Chapter 7035 Yes Yes Yes Yes No c _ Mississippi Section V Yes Yes Yes Yes No Missouri 10 CSR 80-5 Yes Yes ,+a- Yes ` �. Yeses � � �r, No Montana ARM Title 17 Yes Chapter 50, Sub -Chapters 4 and 5 Nebraska n r Title 132 Yes Nevada YNAC 444.666 _ No' Yes Yes Yes No Yes� �^TYesYes.-�`� d No No Yes Yes No q�...�.—� �.,.m Hampshire �....a n..�. „�.—..�....,—.�.,o NHCAR Env- Yes .�.-......•• _ _.-,..-.� Yes .ate Yes --4-s..�......�-..�. ' Yes _. Yes Wm Chapters ,New & 2100. _- - — -- ._.314 RSA 149M New Jersey NJAC 7:26 Yes Yes - Must Yes Yes No perform an EHIS riNew Mexico _.. X20 NMAC 9.1 Yes ��—No �b'� No Yes Yes "' I C ks �., -. ._ ��_.—_s,�f..._.a ..e�.+.._..=�'w.—..t.=. hn.4.�md�u:?s S:'iww"•i-'r'�aa.-:,as�s�..ro�xsm �+.nom. New York 6 NYCRR Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Part 360 North Carolina— Norta_ Yes No Title 15A, — No tttttt pNCAC —Yes Subchapter 1363B v A-4 Appendix A: State Transfer Station Regulations Storage Recordkeeping Reporting Monitoring Closure Financial Restrictions Requirements Requirements Requirements Requirements Assurance Requirements N�No V-No No No .Yes Yes Yes - Annual, No .-._e. .� Yes Yes by August 1 No Yes Yes - Annual, Possible - At states Yes Yes . by October 31 discretion Yes - No overnight No Yes - Annual No No No storage, unless in containers Yes - no .� Yes No No e Yes Possible - At state's - 1 accumulation of discretion odor-causing wastes Yes - No overnight, No No No No No unless in closed containers - Yes - 1 week if in -Y-es- _. � Yes -Annual-, � .st Possible - At state's � —Yes— _Z- � No leak-and vector- by February,l discretion *. proof container or } enclosure Yes - Waste Yes No No No No removed at least once per week _Yes - No Yes No No No Yes putrescibles longer than 24 hours _ _ _j Yes - waste No Yes - Annual, No No No containers emptied by April 1 at least once a week No . - — -__ Te Yes No - _ _® No Yes Yes Yes - 72 hours Yes _ M- -. No..= - ^F. _.._,.-.No. Yes.. � No after acceptance Yes . Remove Yes Yes ,- Annual, No _Yes t Yes,_ putrescibles within by March 31 A I 1 week or before �Fproducing an odor „mu Yes - No Yes Yes - Monthly No No No overnight storage e Yes - <250 yards3, Yes Yes - Annual,... No - But mu's-t '£ Yes 's' Yes - every other day; within 45 days of demonstrate >250 yards3, no end of calendar groundwater will overnight storage year be protected Yes - When all Yes Yes Yes Yes Possible - At state's containers full or discretion 7 days No -� _ No -'° Possible - At state's No - - No il 7_0 discretion Appendix A: State Transfer Station Regulations A-5 State North Dakota Regulation Article 33-20 Permit Requirements Yes Siting Requirements Yes �$ Design Standards Yes Operational Standards Yes Operator Certification No Ohio 3745-27- Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Possible'- Yes iPTennessee r - (15, 21-24) Permit -by -rule ` Oklahoma OAC 252:520 Yes Yes No , Yes No No Yes Yes No rWestVirginia 33CSR17 -Yes`"- Yes - Yes' _ _ N ~z = °Yes ••- Oregon OAR Chapter Yes No Yes Yes No Wisconsin NR 502.07 340, Division 96 Yes Yes Yes No Wyomingm Pennsylvania 25 PA Code Yes Yes Possible at Yes No 3292 Chapter 6 Yes Chapt. 271, 279 - state's discretion Rhode Island Solid Waste 4 Yes tl Yes Yes Yes No Regulation No.1 & No.3 South Carolina _ Chapter 61, Y Yes Yes; Yes Part 8 (61-107.7) Yes _ No South Dakota Article 74:27 Yes No Yes Chapter Possible'- Yes iPTennessee r - 1200- 1-7 Permit -by -rule Yes Yes - No Yes Title 9 VAC Yes Yes T Yes...� Yes _ No Yes by -rule Yes No ` Washington WAC 173-304 Yes No Yes Yes No rWestVirginia 33CSR17 -Yes`"- Yes - Yes' Texas 30 TAC, Yes _ Yes w Yes +�1 Yes No Chapter 330 99Utah R315-313 No' No Yes' "' Yes No Vermont Chapter 6 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Virginia Title 9 VAC Yes Permit Yes T Yes...� Yes _ _ No 20-8-340 by -rule Washington WAC 173-304 Yes No Yes Yes No rWestVirginia 33CSR17 -Yes`"- Yes - Yes' ,. No - = °Yes ••- r Wisconsin NR 502.07 Yes Yes Yes Yes No Wyomingm Yes Yes Yes_ 3292 Chapter 6 Yes No _ A-6 Appendix A: State Transfer Station Regulations Storage Recordkeeping Restrictions Requirements No Yes +Yes - Must be in _ Yes — covered container or building if stored longer than 12 hours Yes - 24 hours Yes (48 hours with vector/odor -- controls) Possible - At state's Possible - At state' Z171 J Yes - 24 hours (up to 72 over weekend) Yes - Remove combustible SW within 48 hours iYes - Remove — putrescibles w/in t 24 hours No P No Reporting Monitoring Closure Financial Requirements Requirements Requirements Assurance -Yes '° Yes Requirements Yes No Yes -� 1-No�-"* No No Yes Yes - Though state Yes - Annual, by Possible - At state's Yes Yes April discretion Yes - Monthly, by the loth of each month No Yes No s� No _ A No Yes No discretion discretion Yes Yes - Annual, Possible - Atstate 's -Yes '° Yes by June 30 discretion No No No Yes Yes - Though state may wave if decides unnecessary Yes � � No � pPossible - At state's Yes No discretion Yes No No Yes No Yes _ — No m No ~Yes Yes - If facility has storage capacity of e 1000yds -or., greater No Yes No No Yes Possible p Yes- 7 days Yes Yes -Annual, No Yes No by March 1 Yes - Remove Yes Yes - Quarterly No Yes Yes waste from tipping floor by end of operating day Yes - Removes No No - waste at end of work day i — Yes - Remove 't waste at end of day/not more than t. .. 24 hours Yes - 24 hours (with some exceptions) P ®— No t Yes Yes - Annual, by March 1 Yes — Yes - Monthly y tonnage reports; b and annual by January 31 No No Yes w— -- No No "Yeses- =Yes .-. z- No Yes No -.,.,�.No.� .... �._ _. _Yes,.._a.�.��. Yes✓ - { Possible - At state's Yes Possible - At state's discretion discretion Possible - At state's Yes �� Yes discretion�y Appendix A: State Transfer Station Regulations A-7 Notes 1. Arizona currently does not have regulations gov- erning waste transfer stations, but the Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) have requirements that govern these facilities. The information in this matrix reflects these statutory requirements found at ARS 49-762. 2. In Arizona transfer stations that receive greater than 180 cubic yards/day must self -certify and demonstrate that the facility is in compliance with state rules. Transfer stations receiving less than 180 cubic yards/day must notify the state prior to commencement of operations and operate in accordance with state BMPs. 3. California classifies a transfer station as a facility if it receives greater than 60 cubic yards or 15 tons of waste per day or as an operation if it receives less than 60 cubic yards or 15 tons of waste per day. 4. While Colorado does not require a permit for transfer stations, the local governing body (county or municipal government) may. 5. Idaho has proposed a three -tiered system based upon the type of waste handled at a facility. This matrix assumes a solid waste transfer station would be considered a Tier II facility 6. Illinois does not have explicit design, operating, storage, recordkeeping, or reporting requirements in its regulations. The state establishes these stan- A-8 Appendix A: State Transfer Station Regulations dards for each facility by requiring a facility to demonstrate in its permit application that it will meet specific standards. The Illinois regulations require a facility to provide to the state all the information requested in its permit application and once the permit is approved to comply with the terms of its permit. 7. While no permit is required in Nevada, a facility must submit and have approved by the state an application to build or modify a transfer station prior to any action being taken. 8. In Tennessee transfer stations that compact or otherwise process waste are considered "process- ing facilities" and are subject to the permit -by -rule requirements. If no processing occurs at a transfer station, then the facility is not subject to permit- ting. Tennessee currently has rule amendments under review which would make all transfer sta- tions subject to the permit -by -rule standards. The responses in this appendix apply to permit -by -rule facilities. 9. While Utah does not require a transfer station to obtain a permit, it does require a transfer station to get a plan approval. In a plan approval, the operator states how the facility will meet the transfer station guidelines found in the solid waste regulations. Transfer Stations: State Regulations URLs (as of 11/30/2001) Alabama: <www.adem.state.al.us/ RegsPermit/ADEMRegs/rules.html> Note: Chapter 420-3-5: Solid Waste Collection and Transportation Rules contain regulations governing transfer stations but are not available on Alabama Public Health Web site <www.alapubhealth.org/>. Alaska: <www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ ENV CONSERV /titlel8/titlel8.htm> Arizona: Arizona Administrative Code <www.sosaz.com/public–services/Table of _Contents.htm>. Applicable statutes are located at <www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/49/ title49.htm>. Arkansas: <www.adeq.state.ar.us/ftproot/ Pub/regs/reg22.pdf> California: <www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Law.htm> Colorado: <www.cdphe.state.co.us/ regulate.asp> Connecticut: Regulations are not yet available on the Internet (as of 12/3/01). Delaware: <www.dnrec.state.de.us/ dnrec2000 /Divisions/AWM/hw /sw / swreg.htm> Florida: <www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/ categories/ solid waste/ default.htm> Georgia: <www.ganet.org/dnr/environ/> Hawaii: <www.state.hi.us/health/eh/shwb/ sw/index.html> Idaho: <ww-w2.state.id.us/adm/adminr-ules/rules /IDAPA58/58INDEX.HTM> — Idaho has proposed new solid waste management rules, which will include additional require- ments for transfer stations. See <www2. state.id.us/adm/adminrules/bulletin/ 99index.htm> - Select Bulletin 99-8, Vol. 1. Illinois: <www.ipcb.state.il.us/Title_35/ main.htm> Indiana: <www.in.gov/legislative/iac/ title329.html> Iowa: <www.legis.state.ia.us/IAC.html> Kansas: <www.kdhe.state.ks.us/waste/ bwm_download_page.html> Kentucky: <www.nr.state.kyus/nrepc/dep/ waste/regs/regulati.htm> Louisiana: <www.deq.state.la.us/planning/ regs / title33 / index. h tm> Maine: <www.state.me.us/sos/cec/rcn/apa/ 06/chaps06.htm> Maryland: <www.mde.state.md.us/ comar.html> Massachusetts: <www.magnet.state.ma.us/ dep/matrix.htm> Michigan: <www.deq.state.mi.us/wmd/ SWP/sw_r&s.htm> Minnesota: <www.pca.state.mn.us/rulesregs/ index.html> Mississippi: <www.deq.state.ms.us/ newweb/homepages.nsf> Look under Office of Pollution Control. Missouri: <mosl.sos.state.mo.us/csr/ 10csr.htm> Montana: <www.deq.state.mt.us/dir/legal/ titlel7.asp> Nebraska: <www.deq.state.ne.us/ RuleandR.nsf/ Pages/Rules> Nevada: <ndep.state.nv.us/admin/nrs.htm> New Hampshire: <www.des.state.nh.us/ desadmin.htm> New Jersey: <www.state.nj.us/dep/dshw/ resource/rules.htm> New Mexico: <ftp://www.nmenv.state. run.us/regulations/20nmac9 l.txt> New York: <www.dec.state.nyus/website/ regs/index.html> North Carolina: <wastenot.ehnr.state.nc.us/ swhome/rule.htm> North Dakota: <www.health.state.nd.us/ ndhd/environ/wm/> Ohio: <www.epa.state.oh.us/dsiwm/ pages/currentrule.html> Appendix A: State Transfer Station Regulations A-9 Oklahoma: <www.deq.state.ok.us/rules/ rulesindex.htm> Oregon: <arcweb.sos.state.or.us/rules/ OARS _300/OAR 340 / 340_tofc. htm l> Pennsylvania: <www.pacode.com/> Rhode Island: <www.state.ri.us/dem/pubs/ regs/index.htm> South Carolina: <www.lpitr.state.sc.us/ coderegs / statmast.htm> South Dakota: <legis.state.sd.us/rules/ index.cfm> Tennessee: <www.state.tn.us/sos/rules/ 1200/1200-01/1200-01.htm> Texas: <www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/oprd/ rules/indxpdf.html> A-10 Appendix A: State Transfer Station Regulations Utah: <www.deq.state.ut.us/EQSHW/ swrules.htm> Vermont: <www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/rules/ rulessum.htm> Virginia: <www.deq.state.va.us/waste/ wasteregs.html> Washington: <access.wa.gov/government/ awlaws.asp> West Virginia: <www.wvsos.com/csr/> Wisconsin: <www.legis.state.wi.us/ rsb/code/> Wyoming: <soswy.state.wy.us/cgi- win/sscgi_l.exe>