MWCCEnvironmental!Conference! July!12!–!14,!2015 ... · Page%2%–%2015Conference%!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Monday,!July!13,2015!! 7:30am! Registration,!breakfast!andexhibits!open!!

Page 1 – 2015 Conference

Conference Overview SUNDAY, July 12 11:00 am

Golf Tournament

2:00 pm Exhibit Set Up 4:00 pm 6:00 pm

Registration Opens Welcome Reception

9:00 pm Board Reception for Young Professionals (new to the industry, less than five years)

MONDAY, July 13 7:30 am Registration, Breakfast, and Exhibits Open 8:30 am Plenary Session – Award Presentations; Speakers: Sara Parker Pauley, MDNR;

Becky Weber & Barnes Johnson, US EPA 10:00 am Break 10:30 am Concurrent breakout sessions 12:00 pm Lunch – Cheri Chastain, Sierra Nevada Brewing Co. 1:30 pm Concurrent breakout sessions continue 3:00 pm Break 3:30 pm 4:15 pm

Concurrent breakout sessions continue Brownfields panel discussion

5:00 pm Reception -‐ bring the family! TUESDAY, July 14 7:30 am Registration, Breakfast and Exhibits Open 8:30 am Concurrent breakout sessions 10:00 am Break 10:30 am Concurrent breakout sessions 12:00 pm Lunch – Chaz Miller, National Waste & Recycling Association 1:30 pm Concurrent breakout sessions 3:00 pm Conference Closes 3:00 pm SWANA Meeting

MWCC Environmental Conference July 12 – 14, 2015 • Tan-‐Tar-‐A Resort • Lake Ozark MO


Monday, July 13, 2015

7:30 am Registration, breakfast and exhibits open

8:30 am

PLENARY SESSION – Award Presentation Speakers: Sara Parker Pauley, Mo Department of Natural Resources; Becky Weber, Air and Waste Management Division, US EPA; Barnes Johnson, Office of Superfund Remediation & Technology, Innovation, OSWER, US EPA

10:00 am

Break

10:30 am

CONCURRENT SESSIONS:

Solid Waste: * -‐ Heat Maps: Using GIS to Manage Your LFG Patrick Switzer and Aaron Weier, Cornerstone Environmental Group

Operations and maintenance (O&M) at landfills is a great fit for implementing GIS. Because of the frequency and volume of data collection for landfill gas (LFG) monitoring and/ or Surface Emissions Monitoring (SEM), a GIS can be used to quickly capture, store, manage, display, and analyze the data related to gas collection and control systems (GCCS). Data can be represented in quantities and symbology can be used to show high levels of gas concentrations. Tailoring appropriate symbology to the data allows the viewer to quickly see what’s going on and where it’s happening in the landfill. This presentation will cover some simple ways heat maps can provide a quick and easily understood visual reference to landfill managers and operators. By visualizing SEM data, heat maps allow managers and operators to quickly and easily identify areas that have recorded surface emissions at critical thresholds. By visualizing the magnitude of these, operators are able to prioritize key areas for surface emissions mitigation. The graphical representation also provides key insights regarding the health and proper tuning of the GCCS. Heat maps generated from GCCS monitoring data can provide a visual reference to allow operators to quickly identify nearby collectors in order to adjust GCCS components adjustments to provide a spatial reference to aid coordination of remediation efforts.

-‐ Using GIS to Make Better Decisions Aaron Weier, Cornerstone Environmental Group

With so much data being captured at Landfills these days it’s difficult to manage and analyze it on paper, in spreadsheets, and in 2D hard copy maps. Using GIS can help in a variety of ways. This presentation will cover three of the ways in GIS can be beneficial to your operations. One, using mobile devices, maps and data can be visualized and collected in the field to increase data quality, efficiency, and effectiveness of your field staff. Two, visualizing data on maps, and in 3D models, provides greater insight into what’s really happening at your site and can provide answers that are difficult to see in reports. Three, visualizing your data over time also provides information and trends that can be analyzed to help make better decisions for the future.


10:30 am cont’d

Environmental Issues: *

-‐ EPA’s 2014 New Definition of Solid Waste James T. Price, Spencer Fane Britt & Browne

In 2014 EPA once again revised its definition of solid waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. These changes will affect Missouri facilities that intend to beneficially reuse materials that might otherwise be considered wastes. This presentation will discuss the impact of this new rule on Missouri's RCRA regulations, the new requirements that will be imposed on Missouri generators, and the "no stricter, no sooner" aspects of Missouri law on these requirements.

-‐ Environmental Law Update

Stephen G. Jeffery, Jeffery Law Group An update on legal aspects of topical environmental issues.

Coal Ash: *

-‐ CCR Regulations – Changes Between Pre & Post Publication Kira Wylam, Burns & McDonnell

USWAG (Utility Solid Waste Activities Group) mentioned that the EPA has indicated there will be a fairly significant number of changes made from the pre-‐ and post-‐publication versions of the CCR rule. Since the pre-‐publication version came out in December, people have had a decent amount of time to digest the rule. This will be presentation on the changes in the CCR Regulations between the pre-‐ and post-‐publication versions.

-‐ New CCR Rules – Some Thought and Options Bruce Boomer, Larry Almaleh, Michael Preston, Michael Remillard, Black & Veatch

The new rule on Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) was released by the US EPA in December 2014. Since then, interested parties actively have been evaluating the impact of the rule on their operations and have been seeking the most favorable compliance options. Also a new set of Effluent Limitations Guidelines (ELG) is pending from US EPA later in 2015, with some overlap potential for CCR planning. This presentation will highlight some current thoughts on likely options for CCR compliance at a -‐reference power plant-‐ and general cost considerations associated with these options. Topics will include: -‐ Regulatory Timeline -‐ Comparison to present Missouri CCR Rules -‐ Immediate needs for continued operation -‐ Options for continuing current operations -‐ Considerations of early closure -‐ Impacts on decommissioning schedules -‐ Continued operations of ash ponds -‐ The role of dry systems and possible overlap with ELG -‐ Planning new landfills -‐ Planning for later closure

Brownfields: So You Want to Know About Brownfields?

Scott Huckstep, Christine O’Keefe, MDNR; Kristin Allan Tipton, EIERA; community representatives

12:00 pm

Lunch Cheri Chastain, Sustainability Manager, Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.


1:30 pm


Solid Waste: *

-‐ Waste to Energy Technologies Laura Drescher, Burns & McDonnell

Presentation will provide an analysis of some of the main thermal and biological waste to energy technologies currently available or emerging in the solid waste industry. Thermal processes presented will include gasification, incineration, and pyrolysis. Biological processes will include anaerobic digestion, bioreactor landfill, and fermentation. Secondary technology applications and heat recovery from waste to energy technologies will also be discussed. Analysis of technologies will be based on energy type and quantity produced, feedstock utilized, capital and operating costs, and environmental impacts including byproducts and regulatory issues. Examples of previous, current, and proposed projects will be provided.

-‐ Practices of Identifying and Addressing Landfill Gas Migration (LFG), Scott Martin, Burns & McDonnell

LFG is generated within the waste mass and usually moves from areas of high concentration to areas of low concentration in and around a landfill. LFG migration is affected by the permeability of the landfill waste, surface soils and subsurface soils. Other factors include landfill cover type, man-‐made pathways, moisture content in the subsurface, groundwater levels, temperature, and differences in barometric and soil gas pressure. Since all of these influencing factors can vary both temporally and spatially, defining and then predicting LFG migration is challenging. This presentation will equip attendees with the tools to solve LFG migration challenges.


-‐ Best Practices for Conducting an Environmental Sustainability Audit, Rick Pandullo and Joletta Golik, Trinity Consultants

This presentation discusses best practices for performing an environmental sustainability audit and developing results that are functionally useful to an organization. Successful sustainability auditing can be achieved through an advanced benchmarking and company program analysis that examines key measures of sustainability. The presentation discusses the importance of maintaining a vision of the entire organization, its structure, compliance requirements and overall position in the marketplace when evaluating the key measures. The approach presented shows how an organization can readily identify internal best practices for each sustainability category to be compared with industry peers and facilitate overall “scoring.” The presentation also shows how audit results can best be communicated and integrated into the organization to assist with formulating corporate sustainability goals. The presentation discusses the importance of identify keying factors to be considered in defining the sustainability goals of the organization.

-‐ The Discarded Mattress: Villain or Agent for Sustainability? Lisa McDaniel, Mid-‐America Regional Council

According to the International Sleep Products Association, approximately 35 to 40 million mattresses are sold annually in the United States. There are no clear statistics on the number discarded, but it is estimated to be about 20 million annually. Because of their size and composition, discarded mattresses can be a challenge for both municipalities and landfills to manage. Mattress recycling is a relatively new practice. There are only about 45 mattress processing facilities located in North America. Fortunately, Kansas City is home to a mattress recycling facility that began operations in November 2014. This presentation will provide an overview of the mattress deconstruction process, end markets for recovered materials and the opportunity the facility provides to enable 7 local families to break the cycle of poverty.


Coal Ash: *

-‐ Coal Ash Risk Assessments – What Do They Tell Us? Lisa JN Bradley, Haley & Aldrich

Risk assessments have been conducted for coal ash in a variety of environmental settings and under a variety of regulatory programs to assess potential impacts to human health and the environment. This presentation provides a summary of the results of a number of these risk assessments, including several risk-‐based studies on the potential impact of unlined coal ash landfills on uses of groundwater and surface water, risk-‐based studies on the potential impact of unlined coal ash ponds on uses of groundwater and surface water, the human health and ecological risk assessment results for the TVA Kingston ash release, risk-‐based evaluations of beneficial uses of fly ash and bottom ash, and results of a wide array of toxicity testing conducted for coal ash under the European Union-‐s Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemical Substances (REACH) program. Taken in total, these evaluations do not support the claims of “toxic” coal ash or “environmental disasters” found on blogs and subsequently in the press.

-‐ CCR Subtitle D Groundwater Monitoring – Lessons Learned Eric Wallis, Golder Associates

The Subtitle D groundwater monitoring requirements may be new to CCR disposal facilities, but they are not new: they have been implemented at solid waste landfills for more than 20 years. This session will discuss the groundwater monitoring requirements in the CCR rule and provide practical implementation insights based on 20 years of lessons learned from the municipal solid waste industry.

Brownfields: Let’s Assess the Brownfield Situation Brian McCurren, Desiree Pigford, MDNR Canton Missouri community representatives

3:00 pm

Break

3:30 pm

CONCURRENT SESSIONS: Solid Waste: *

-‐ Unmanned Aerial Vehicles – Utilizing UAV Technology on Landfills Brian Weis, Burns & McDonnell

UAV technology has rapidly emerged to be one of the most exciting global technology developments. The use of UAV or “drones” is directly applicable to the management of solid waste landfills and environmental sites. UAV technology is anticipated to radically change the way we normally collect aerial imagery, topographic data, ground thermal imagery, and near infrared imagery for vegetation mapping. This presentation will explain how UAVs may be used in a cost efficient manner to assist in the management of solid waste landfills and environmental sites.

-‐ Surveying: Your Money Saving Solution Isac Shelton, SCS Aquaterra

What can give you useable metrics to evaluate equipment and operator performance, keep you from having to relocate waste or perform costly slope modifications, and generally improve your operations? A good surveyor on your team! Whether it’s a third party survey crew, onsite knowledgeable survey staff, or full-‐time machine control, land surveying is a necessity at a landfill these days. From density surveys to maximize airspace, to verifying slopes before they are impossible to fix, to documenting underground infrastructure so it can be found again in 10 years — having a land surveyor on your team is as important as having a spare tire when you have a flat. This presentation will provide some examples of how to maximize the benefit from survey time spent at your landfill.


3:30 pm cont’d 4:15 pm


-‐ Challenges of Drilling in Southern Missouri Neal Farrar, Sunbelt Environmental Services

Areas of Missouri south of the Missouri River present special challenges for drilling. The presence of chert, clay and rock can make for difficult sample collection and well installation. Due to Karst features, drilling in bedrock can be equally challenging with loss of circulation and running mud seams. This presentation explores these difficulties and possible solutions.

-‐ Water Tracing and New Findings of the Ozarks – Big Four Cecil Boswell, Missouri Geological Survey

The Missouri Geological Survey is performing ongoing water tracing to refine known groundwater recharge areas for a number of springs, including the “Big Four” located in the Ozarks region. Recent data collection shows that applying newer dye detection techniques reveal additional recovery points that were not detected in previous legacy traces, thereby expanding known groundwater recharge areas. Among the overall findings to date is that Mammoth Spring and Greer Spring share a portion of their recharge, with the majority of Greer Spring’s flow apparently traveling under a gaining segment of the Eleven Point River, ultimately surfacing more than four kilometers to the southeast.

Coal Ash: *

-‐ CCR-‐Reuse, Open Dumping and Citizens Suits, Oh My! James Price, Spencer Fane Britt & Browne

EPA's final rule on Coal Combustion Residue resolves some issues surrounding the management of this material, but leaves a lot to be determined by the states, future rulemaking, site-‐specific determinations, and even citizen suits. The rule makes clear that violations of the rule's requirements are "open dumping," inviting citizen suit enforcement. Certain reuses may be considered a "CCR landfill," and subject to new requirements. Many important legal issues remain to be resolved.

-‐ EPA Coal Ash Rule — Impacts to the Waste & Recycling Industry Don Grahlherr, AECOM

This presentation begins with a discussion of CCR engineering properties, followed by a summary of the new EPA CCR Rule and resulting changes it will lead to in the way CCR will be handled by utilities, and concludes with opportunities and challenges for MSW Landfill operators who may wish to handle these materials.

Brownfields: Moving Beyond Brownfield Assessments Scott Huckstep, Catherine Jones, MDNR Brownfields: Panel Discussion – all speakers from the day will be available to respond to questions from the audience

5:00 pm

Reception and Party – bring the family! There will be fun and games for the entire family, as well as good food.


Tuesday, July 14, 2015

7:30 am Registration, breakfast and exhibits open

8:30 am


Solid Waste: *

-‐ Transfer Stations – Past, Present and Future Debra Frye, HDR

Transfer stations were developed to provide an efficient location to load garbage into transfer trailers. As regulations and sustainability goals change, transfer stations are now one of the last opportunities to divert materials from the landfill. This presentation will look at how facilities across the country are changing their facilities, programs and operations to increase recycling and diversion at transfer stations now, and their plans for the future.

-‐ Waste Characterization Studies and Their Use in Understanding Your Waste Stream and

Controlling Its Impact on Your Operations Christopher Chappelle, Engineering Solutions & Design, Inc.

Every day throughout America solid waste is collected, transported, and delivered to transfer stations and landfills. This solid waste comes in a variety of sizes, weights, and characteristics, all of which can significantly impact the various facets of a solid waste system. Understanding the characteristics of the solid waste stream provides system operators with invaluable information regarding impacts to their collection vehicles, transfer trucks, and disposal equipment. This presentation presents a detailed description of the waste stream as it relates to solid waste system operations. The various aspects of a waste stream are dissected; how these waste stream characteristics impact the solid waste system is discussed. Information on methods to identify the waste stream characteristics as well as methods for approaching unique characteristics of a waste stream are examined. This information is invaluable for solid waste system operators as they face issues with collection, transfer, waste recovery, recycling, and disposal. In addition, having this information available can assist in identifying options to consider to improve system operations and attain cost savings.

Environmental Issues:

-‐ Missouri Brownfields Sites as Community Gardens Deborah English, SCS Engineers

Multiple urban properties in Kansas City, Missouri, were evaluated for suitability for use as community gardens. Surface soil samples were tested for metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, and pesticides to evaluate potential human health risks. The soil was also tested for nutrients and potential phytotoxicity to evaluate the suitability of the soil for growing fruits and vegetables. On the basis of the evaluation of the data, arsenic concentrations in surface soil exceed Missouri Risk-‐Based Corrective Action risk-‐based target levels for residential exposure, and zinc is present at potentially phytotoxic concentrations. However, the detected arsenic concentrations appear to be representative of typical regional urban background concentrations. A review of urban gardening best management practices (BMPs) indicates that potential human health risks associated with arsenic and lead concentrations in surface soil and potentially phytotoxic concentrations of zinc may

be minimized through the application of these gardening BMPs.

-‐ Vapor Intrusion Mitigation for Beneficial Redevelopment Mary Juan, Environmental Operations

This presentation will discuss the use of a passive vapor intrusion mitigation system for beneficial redevelopment of a state Superfund site.


Coal Ash: *

-‐ Compliance Strategies & The Final CCR Rule: How Electric Utilities Are Adjusting to This “Brave New World” Steven F. Putrich, Haley & Aldrich

With the new CCR Rule driving CCR management strategies, it's a "Brave New World" out there. Utilities (in Missouri and across the country), will be required to acclimate to a variety of paradigm shifts in the way they manage CCRs. Adhering to old ways (i.e., "the way we've always done it") will likely not be the status quo for electric utilities going forward; those changes will affect not only operations, but CCR unit closures and potential upgrades and/or retrofits of the same. In this high level overview, participants will have an opportunity to see how utilities across the country are addressing these changes and some of the lessons learned regarding compliance strategies that have helped them to successfully navigate the CCR Rule. We will also review "smart compliance management tools" developed by H&A for use by our electric utility clients, and integrated engineering solutions that have kept clients on track with their compliance objectives and timelines.

-‐ Coal Ash Closures (Traditional and an Alternate) Rosanna Saindon, Geotechnology, Inc.

This presentation will provide an overview of coal combustion ash pond closures including initial design through construction and post-‐closure activities for a typical soil based RCRA Subtitle D cover system as well as an alternative Subtitle D cover. Some of the topics covered include: -‐ Ash pond closure design options -‐ Ash pond closure construction -‐ Typical environmental remediation issues -‐ Wet ash constructability issues and dewatering -‐ Legal precedent in Illinois, the first state to have a specific ash pond closure law -‐ Illinois Power Station Case Study -‐Traditional Subtitle D System -‐ Alternative Subtitle D System Case Study

Tanks: LNAPL Site Conceptual Models

Laura Luther and Steve Lang, MDNR

10:00 am

Break

10:30 am


Solid Waste: *

-‐ Permitting/Compliance – It’s Not All About the Landfill Doug Doerr, SCS Aquaterra

In today’s world, a landfill facility isn’t used only for the disposal of waste. There are many supplementary activities that may take place on a landfill property, and many of these activities have associated environmental compliance requirements. Because the landfill tends to be the most onerous subject of the operators attention, these additional programs can sometimes fall by the wayside. Don’t misunderstand though, attention to their permitting and compliance needs are just as important as the landfill! This presentation will review non-‐landfill operations that may be occurring at your facility and provide a basic understanding of what to look for with respect to permitting and compliance requirements.

-‐ Membrane Liner Failures – Lessons from Case Studies Keith Connor, Burns & McDonnell

HDPE membrane liners have been in use for more than 30 years in composite landfill cell construction as well a leachate ponds and wastewater treatment lagoons. Some of these liners are beginning to show their age. This presentation will review the findings of several studies of HDPE liner system failures to see what lessons can be learned from failures in the hopes of furthering design improvements of such structures.


10:30 am cont’d

Environmental Issues:

-‐ The Remaining Residual – Treatment or Plume Management? * Derek Ingram, XDD, LLC

For many environmentally impacted sites, the common practice of excavation and disposal of impacted soils has occurred. Institutional controls (ICs) or deed restrictions have been established as a component of or the entire site-‐specific remedial action. Often, risk to receptors is also controlled by other various means to meet acceptable levels. However, there are many instances where impacts remain on or off-‐site, preventing site closure. When these residual impacts are not amenable to excavation/disposal and ICs approaches, the remediation project manager is faced with additional source treatment and/or plume management. The post-‐remediation level, location, and potential for mobilization of such residuals residing in these “management” areas has become of particular interest to state and federal regulators. The role of how bioremediation or monitored natural attenuation can be utilized for residual and plume management is of specific interest due to the relatively low cost, ease of implementation, and minimal environmental footprint. Using case studies, this presentation will provide a comparison for both treatment and plume management approaches, including cost implications. A special emphasis will be placed on the role of bioremediation. The applicability, limitations, and expectations of the following in-‐situ remedies will be discussed with select site-‐specific examples of both successes and failure.

-‐ Insights into NSZD Rate Measurements at LNAPL Sites Stephanie Deters and Keith Piontek, TRC Environmental

TRC was contracted by the Missouri Petroleum Storage Tank Insurance Fund to apply an innovative technology (carbon dioxide traps) for measuring the Natural Source Zone Depletion (NSZD) rate at two Missouri Underground Storage Tank (UST) release sites. This project was undertaken to assess the carbon dioxide trap technology, to obtain NSZD rate measurements, and to provide insight into the extent to which NSZD should be considered in assessing the “LNAPL recovery to the maximum extent practicable” requirement of the Missouri Risk-‐Based Corrective Action (MRBCA) process. TRC performed one round of CO2 flux measurements at a St. Louis-‐area site and four quarterly rounds at a southeast Missouri site. Results will be discussed within the framework of NSZD rate measurements performed by TRC at a total of 8 sites in 6 states, including an additional site in Missouri. At two of these sites, a minimum of four quarterly NSZD rate measurements have been performed. The presentation will cover the technical basis for the carbon dioxide flux measurements, insights gained into NSZD rates, factors affecting measured rates, and -‐lessons learned-‐ regarding rate measurement methodology. Popular approaches for product recovery often result in significant expenditures with little product removal. Furthermore, the endpoint of product recovery efforts is often a point of contention and hurdle to gaining regulatory agency consensus that corrective action is complete. Ultimately, the findings from this and similar studies have the potential to spark a paradigm shift for the management and regulatory closure of hydrocarbon-‐impacted sites.


Coal Ash: *

-‐ CCR Beneficial Reuse – KCFA Mine Stabilization Project Steve Kidwell, Kansas City Fly Ash; and Lindsay James and Anne Melia, Blackstone Environmental

Since 2001, Kansas City Fly Ash LLC (KCFA) and its predecessor, Lafarge, has received and used over 1.5 million tons of Coal Combustion Residuals (CCRs) produced at local electrical generating stations to stabilize portions of the former, Missouri Portland Cement underground mine. CCRs are delivered in bulk trucks, slurried with water, and pumped into either open subsidences or through boreholes advanced into openings within the former underground limestone mine. The beneficial use of CCRs is permitted and regulated at the Sugar Creek Mine Stabilization site by the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) and the City of Sugar Creek through a variety of beneficial reuse exemptions, operating permits, and local Special Use Permits. Also required is a Hydrogeological Site Characterization to investigate and characterize the geologic and hydrologic conditions at the site and to determine groundwater flow direction within the water bearing zone beneath the former mine floor. Information obtained as part of the Hydrogeological Site Characterization will be used to enhance current groundwater monitoring activities to design an appropriate and protective site specific groundwater monitoring program. Additionally, KCFA and Blackstone are in the process of examining how current regulatory mechanisms align with the new EPA CCR regulations.

-‐ CCR Final Rule; What Location Restrictions Mean for MO Gary Pendergrass, GeoEngineers Inc.

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy signed the Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities final rule on December 19, 2014. The rule establishes technical requirements for CCR landfills and surface impoundments under RCRA Subtitle D, and has far-‐reaching implications for management and disposal of CCRS in Missouri. This presentation will explain the location restrictions with respect to Missouri's geologic and physiographic settings, and discuss how appropriate engineering demonstrations maybe conducted to meet this criteria.

Tanks: Free Product Recovery Examples

Laura Luther and Steve Lang, MDNR 12:00 pm

Lunch Chaz Miller, Director of Policy/Advocacy, National Waste & Recycling Association

1:30 pm

CONCURRENT SESSIONS: Solid Waste: *

-‐ What You’ll Wish You Had -‐ A Consultant’s Perspective on Recordkeeping Renee Trenshaw, SCS Aquaterra

Recordkeeping. A troublesome necessity and a challenging issue for many solid waste facilities. Maintaining the multitude of records necessary to meet regulatory requirements is a task exacerbated by the number of different regulations to which a particular facility is subject. Compound that with all the additional records that may be needed for operations, business, and to assist engineers or consultants. Often specialty projects come up where supplementary information would be useful (and occasionally critical) to a particular project that brings up the thought -‐if only we still had [insert particular type of records]-‐. This presentation addresses recordkeeping from a regulatory perspective and provides some recommendations for how, what, and why you may want to hold onto a few extra documents without being buried in paperwork.

-‐ Shredding and Volume Reduction in Landfills Brad McAlister, Midwest Recon/Komptech

Introducing low speed high torque shredders into landfills to increase gas production, extend cell life and capture ferrous metals from MSW, C & D and wood waste is the topic of discussion of this presentation.


Any sessions with the “*” qualify for DNR Solid Waste Technician Recertification. PDH credits will be available for the conference. Missouri CLE credit is pending.

Coal Ash: *

-‐ EPA Region VII – CCR Rule, Don Toensing, US EPA Region VII -‐ Open Panel Discussion – CCR Rule, MDNR-‐SWMP, WPP and MGS

Tanks: New UST Regulations – What do they mean for us? Heather Peters, MDNR Brownfields: Long Term Stewardship

3:00 pm

Conference Closes

3:00 pm

SWANA Meeting

Documents

MWCCEnvironmental!Conference! July!12!–!14,!2015 ... · Page%2%–%2015Conference%!! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Monday,!July!13,2015!! 7:30am! Registration,!breakfast!andexhibits!open!!