Stakeholder Meeting to Discuss

Scope and Key Concepts

November 19, 2010 1w-swrule2-05

Introduction: Meeting Logistics

• Note sign-in sheet for attendees

• Microphone use & note taking

• Emails during live webcast should be sent to: william.wilde@state.mn.us

2

Purpose of SSOM Rule ProcessRecognize state strategy of moving organic

material management up the hierarchy

Clarify regulatory requirements appropriate to SSOM composting facilities

Provide regulatory relief without jeopardizing environmental protection

3

IntroductionsIntroductions of attendees

Introductions of MPCA participants

We want your opinion – we have made no final decisions

4

Compost Rules MPCA Mgmt. Team

5

Compost Rules MPCA Staff Team

6

Overview: SSOM Rule ProcessAPA requirements must be followed, once formal process begins

MPCA is not yet in that formal process: has been working on scope and key concepts, along with fact-gathering

7

Overview: SSOM Rule ProcessHow this meeting fits in the larger timeline, leading to publication of a draft ruleMeeting purposeTimeline of rule process

8

Layout of Current Minn. R. 7035.2836: Two Tracks

Yard Waste Composting c

Solid Waste Composting

Subp. 1. Scope Subp. 4. Design requirements

Subp. 2 Notification

Subp. 5. Operation requirements

Subp. 3 Operation Requirements

Subp. 6. Compost classificationSubp. 7. Compost distribution & end use

9

Fitting SSOM into Current Compost RuleParameter Yard Waste

(current)SSOM

(to be added)Solid Waste

(current)Acceptable materials

yard waste only

source separated yard, food and ? (TBD)

mixed solid waste & other

Siting * Min 5 ft to groundwater and ? (TBD)

Yes

Permitting Permit by Rule

See SW track Public notice, local role

Pad for compost All-weather All-weather, unless ? (TBD)

Impermeable

Training * ? (TBD) YesOdor Controls * ? (TBD) YesStormwater controls

* See SW track Yes

Classification, Distribution & End Use

* See SW track Yes

10

IdeasSource Separated Organic Material (SSOM)

must be source separated at the generator, not picked from Mixed Municipal Solid Waste (MMSW) at a transfer station or a landfill

Goal is not to develop excessively prescriptive standards, but outcome-based ones that are matched to the needs and any environmental or health risk

11

Ideas

Portions of Demonstration Agreement template will be used for rule (most current version)

Guidance documents to follow will fill in some of the details (e.g. technical standards on how to measure compaction)

12

SSOM Rule Concepts - Overall

Stringency of requirements might need to reflect material types accepted at the facility:If the variety of SSOM to be accepted were to go beyond food and yard waste, does it make sense to require greater stringency for feedstock testing and monitoring?

13

SSOM Rule Concepts - OverallFeedstocks beyond yard waste and food: What about industrial by products from food processing (e.g. vegetable trimmings)?

What about industrial byproducts not from food processing (e.g. paper sludge from deinking mill)?

14

SSOM Rule Concepts - ContinuedStormwater management requirements - carried forward from existing rules

Existing requirementsFlexibility when stormwater managed on-site

Less flexible if stormwater discharged off site

15

SSOM Rule Concepts - Continued

Example, Industrial Stormwater permit requirement is triggered if:Stormwater/leachate discharge off site, OR

Operator purchases feedstock materials, such as carbon for bulking

16

SSOM Concepts - ContinuedCurrently, Financial Assurance (FA) requirements are not planned, retain existing authority based on risk factors

Would continue to rely on current 503 standards, as modified in Minn. R. 7035.2836, Subp. 6A

17

SSOM Concepts, ContinuedQuestion to discuss: should MPCA offer lesser requirements for “small” SSOM facilities?What materials would be acceptable?

What site evaluation process would be acceptable?

What size or input limit?

18

Subp. 1. Scope Discussion

What should scope allow for SSOM?Statutory definition (broad)Use in rule (narrower)Industrial waste streams?

19

20

Subp. 1. Scope DiscussionFeedstocks

The following list is being considered as prohibited materials:Treated woods (they introduce metals)

Demolition debris (sheet rock, insulation, etc.)

Creosote or railroad tiesManufactured wood (glues)

21

Subp. X. Location Stds. Discussion

Not on Karst (Anoka Sand Plain?)

5’ minimum separation to water table

Flood plain? 7035.2555? Same as with composting.

22

Subp. X. Location Stds. Discussion

Should there be a minimal buffer distance?

Local government role?

23

Subp. 8. Design Rqmts. Discussion

Size______Large (more requirements)______Small (less requirements)

 Type

Windrows (aerated)Static Piles (non-aerated)In-vessel

 

Subp. 8. Design Rqmts. Discussion

Pad Impermeable pad required only under certain circumstances

All weather work surface required (accessible for all seasons for management operations)

24

25

Subp. 8. Design Rqmts. DiscussionPad

Soil infiltration necessary and verified every 5?-10? years with soil boring

Curing pad (may not)/(will not) need impermeable surface (in reference to using soil as a form of leachate management)

26

Subp. 9. Operation Rqmts: Odor Control

Mixing food waste with bulking agentImmediately upon delivery of food waste, IF

NOT, Place a biofilter on food waste and mix and

incorporate into windrow be end of working day

Odor Management Plan requiredIf odor complaints, plan will be required to be

modified to include increasing odor mitigation steps (guidance document?)

Sampling and Analysis plan

Subp. 9. Operation Rqmts. DiscussionWindrows (aerated)

Static Windrows/Piles (no mechanical aeration)

Invessel with aeration

Maintain aerobic conditions 55°C for at least 3 weeks

Maintain aerobic conditions 55°C for at least 7 daysTurn at least once every 3-5 days

Minimum retention time in vessel – 24 hours, temperature maintained at 55°C, stabilization period of at least 7 days at 55°C

O2 requirements

Biofilter – VOC/control: approx. 6” to “12”, first 2-4 weeks (metro, non-metro??? Based on AQ classification)

Maximum windrow height (8’, 10’,12’ with/without biofilter??)

27

28

Subp. 9. Operation Rqmts. Training

• Training with ceu’s required for facilities over XX size, if rule proceeds with a “big/small” approach– Need training only if greater than XX size–All should be trained?–Add as a permit requirement?–Training set out in rule language or Guidance?

29

Subp. 10. Compost Classification

Use readily available test methods (bucket method & log of testing – this list kept up to date by guidance, not a list specified in rule)

Industry standard testing methods for finished product

30

Subp. 10. Compost Classification

Maturity testing – Solvita

STA requirements – additional detail on methods?

31

Subp. 11. Compost distribution & end useNo change to current rule language

Class IUnrestricted distributionComply with DOA Rule 18C.005, if sold as a

fertilizer, specialty fertilizer, soil amendment or plant amendment

Class IIRestricted distribution – commissioner

approvalDocuments required for use

Closing ThoughtsThere will be plenty of opportunity in months to come for more public engagementContact rules staff during informal

phaseSecond stakeholder meeting to

share preliminary draft in 2011Formal public comment period

when rule is proposed 32

Closing Thoughts

Keeping the scope focused on clarifying technical requirements suitable to SSOM composting will help this rulemaking move more quickly

33

Closing Thoughts

Minnesota’s source-separated organics-handling capacity (all types, from compost to animal feeding) is much too small to process up to 15% of the MSW stream if source separated as organics

34

Closing ThoughtsSSOM rule clarification could help

bring down the capital costs of future capacity (e.g. by cutting per-acre costs for compost pad)

But rules can’t fix other, key factors that drive up total composting costs compared to costs of cheap landfill disposal

35

Closing Thoughts

Fixing the larger economic problem will need new action by policymakers at county level and in Legislature

36

Questions?

Reminder: Written comments (informal) should be submitted no later than December 10, 2010, to: yolanda.letnes@state.mn.us

37

Questions?

38

39

Discussion: Key questions on ScopeMaterial range: Should MPCA allow

The full range of materials that could fit the broad statutory definition of SSOM (incl. diapers, industrial byproducts)

OR, limit to yard and food waste only?

Should certain substances be subject to a flat prohibition from all SSOM facilitiesNo CCA lumber or Other ___________________?

Differences in capacity of sizeAre all SSOM facility sizes equal, or should “small”

SSOM facilities be relieved of certain protective requirements?

If so, what size threshold?

40

Discussion: Key questions on LocationProhibited locations:

Karst and flood plainsOther__________?

Minimums:Require 5-foot separation to water table?Minimum buffer distance?Other?

How build in local government role

41

Discussion: Key questions on DesignBig vs. small, vs. “one size fits all” approach

(discussed)

Compost Pad DesignWhen is an impermeable liner needed, vs. a less

expensive all-weather work surface?Where soil quality is relevant to leachate/stormwater

treatment, how do we verify this before siting, and then check after 5-10 yrs. of operation – soil borings?

Curing PadDoes curing pad ever need an impermeable liner?

42

Discussion: Key questions on OperationsOdor Control and Testing

Rqmt. to mix food with bulking agents, use biofilter?Reliance on Odor Management Plan - Lay out BMPs or

make OMP adjustable based on facility performance?Feedstock testing frequency – Standard, or based on

facility specific circumstances?How much detail on windrows, static piles, in-vessel?

TrainingSize related, or apply to all SSOM as a permit rqmt.?Details in rule language or in guidance?

43

Discussion: Key questions on classification

Use of Guidance for readily available test methods, or in rule?

Additional details on testing of finished products, outside MPCA purview of protecting health and the environment?

Maturity testing with Solvita, any updates?

STA requirements – additional detail on methods?