B08f Solid Waste Management Plan.pdf

State of Nevada Solid Waste Management Plan

Prepared by

Nevada Division of Environmental Protection 901 South Stewart Street, Suite 4001

Carson City, Nevada 89701-5249

For the

Nevada State Environmental Commission

Revised 8/22/17 i

This page intentionally blank ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Nevada’s Solid Waste Management Plan (Plan) provides a current snapshot of the State’s existing

Solid Waste Management system in accordance with applicable statutes and regulations. The Plan describes the roles and responsibilities of State and local government, and current trends in solid waste management. It also identifies management challenges and proposes solutions for future consideration to improve solid waste management in Nevada.

Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 444.570 requires the State Environmental Commission (SEC), in cooperation with governing bodies of Nevada’s municipalities to develop a plan for a statewide solid waste management system. The Plan strives to fulfill this requirement, providing information and guidance to support:

1. The SEC in their adoption of solid waste management regulations;

2. The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) in their efforts to effectively allocate solid waste management resources;

3. Nevada’s municipal governments in their efforts to develop and implement effective solid waste management plans and ordinances; and

4. Stakeholders and their activities to provide solid waste services to Nevada’s communities and businesses statewide.

In Nevada, state and local governmental entities share certain roles and responsibilities for solid waste regulations and program management. Governmental authority is defined in the Nevada

Revised Statutes (NRS) 444.440 – 444.645 (see Appendix 5), and the Nevada Administrative Code

(NAC) 444.570 – 444.7499 (see Appendix 6). In Southern Nevada, the authority to regulate solid waste is assigned by statute to Clark County’s Southern Nevada Health District (SNHD), and in the

North to the Washoe County Health District (WCHD). NDEP is the solid waste management authority for all other counties of the State.

Regulatory programs implemented by all three solid waste management authorities (SWMA) primarily focus on the administration of the environmental protection standards for the collection iii and disposal of solid waste; however, the NDEP has additional responsibilities for statewide planning, public information, and educational activities. The local municipal governments are responsible for planning and implementing solid waste management systems for the solid waste generated in their municipalities.

Statewide Trends (Section 2)

This section addresses current trends in Landfills, Collection, Waste Generation and Recycling

Rates, Importation, and Data Collection and Reporting.

Noteworthy Trends…

Since the early 1990’s, the major trend in Nevada’s solid waste management infrastructure has been toward regionalization. Landfills range in size from the very small (3 tons per day) to one of the largest in the U.S. (Apex, according to a 2016 report, receives over 6,800 tons per day). Nevada’s two largest landfills (Apex in Southern Nevada and Lockwood in the North) receive about 90% of all the municipal solid waste disposed in the entire state.

Solid Waste importation has decreased approximately 20% in the past 10 years; however, waste importation may increase due to an emerging trend toward existing landfills, and proposed new landfills, positioning themselves to accept larger amounts of imported waste.

Solid Waste Management Systems (Section 3)

The solid waste management systems in each of Nevada’s 17 counties are profiled in Appendix 3.

Each description includes a map of the county showing where the solid waste facilities are located, and a companion profile describing the solid waste infrastructure and services.

Solid Waste Management Issues (Section 4)

The challenges facing landfills, Recycling and Waste Prevention, Importation of Solid Waste, Special Waste Management, Rural Solid Waste Management, Illegal Dumping and Open Burning, and State and Local Funding are covered in this section. The Plan provides suggestions for future consideration to improve Nevada’s solid waste management system.

iv

Noteworthy Changes and Challenges…

Due to new research on traditional landfill liner requirements, the Plan recognizes that site-specific conditions are critically important in the liner decision-making process.

Nevertheless, any effort to further develop Nevada’s solid waste disposal infrastructure must put the highest priority on carefully assessing new innovations in landfill design to ensure that they protect the environment.

Recycling and Waste Prevention (Section 4.2)

In 1991, Assembly Bill (AB) 320 was enacted and set the stage for Nevada’s entrance into the world of recycling. Shortly thereafter, a 25% recycling goal was set in law for each municipality that is required to have a recycling program.

For the past several years, Douglas, Washoe, and Carson City counties have surpassed the

25% recycling goal. Nevada’s largest county, Clark, surpassed the 25% goal in 2012, but has since struggled to repeat those numbers. Since Nevada began tracking recycling rates, the statewide rate steadily increased to over 28.8% in 2012, but has fallen back to 22.3% in

2016. Proven as a powerful tool for increasing both participation and recycling rates, the availability of single-stream recycling has expanded to approximately 90% of Nevadans through the diligent efforts of several of Nevada’s larger municipalities.

As the largest county in Nevada, and as such, seen as the greatest opportunity for increasing the State’s overall recycling rate, the NDEP continues to promote recycling in Clark County and has implemented even more measures to increase recycling activity.

To evaluate the pros and cons of specific types of recycling, the Nevada Legislature authorized two studies: an electronics waste (e-waste) study in 2009 and a deposit on recyclable products study in 2011. Neither study evidenced enough clear benefit to warrant passage.

In counties over 100,000 in population, a recent bill amendment mandated that recycling services must be made available to newly constructed and major renovated multi-family v dwellings (MFDs), such as apartment complexes and condominiums. For approval, plans for said construction and/or renovation must provide space for collecting recyclables on premises.

Waste Importation (Section 4.3)

Although importation has been in decline, business interests and rural community development planners are beginning to market Nevada’s waste disposal capacity to out-of-state customers. Given this trend and the US Supreme Court’s prohibition on restriction of waste flow, it appears Nevada will continue to receive imported waste.

Special Waste Management (Section 4.4)

Because of their physical, chemical and/or biological characteristics, “special wastes” have the potential to be hazardous to living organisms and therefore must be specially handled to prevent exposure to them or release to the environment.

Following several elemental mercury spills in school-settings, NDEP developed a webpage

(https://ndep.nv.gov/land/mercury) and a brochure to inform the public of the dangers, proper handling and disposal of “household” mercury. A household generated solid waste with the identical characteristics of a hazardous waste is exempt from federal regulations as a hazardous waste.

Medical or pharmaceutical wastes generated by medical and veterinary facilities (e.g., businesses) are generally well-managed through the availability of commercial medical waste disposal services throughout the State. However, disposal services for home-generated medical and pharmaceutical wastes are harder to find as the demand continues to grow.

E-waste continues to grow in volume as does the concern with their components, many of which have been identified as hazardous waste (older model TV cathode ray tubes (CRTs)), computer monitors, and cell phones, etc.) As industry and government at the national level search for ways to relieve the accumulation of e-waste, the emphasis in Nevada is on public https://ndep.nv.gov/land/mercury vi education. Informing Nevadans of recycling and disposal locations available in their areas is a key element in e-waste management. NDEP continues to provide support for e-waste collection events and promotes reclamation efforts wherever possible.

Rural Solid Waste Management (Section 4.5)

Due to their sparse populations, many of Nevada’s rural municipalities are struggling to provide even the basic elements of a solid waste management system. Rural solid waste management (SWM) systems could benefit greatly from more coordinated planning efforts among communities, landfill operator training programs, and public education regarding recycling and waste reduction. Reinstating the State’s recycling and solid waste grant program could provide assistance to local governments to augment their planning efforts and acquire necessary equipment.

Illegal Dumping and Open Burning (Section 4.6)

In 2013, the Nevada Legislature passed Senate Bill 449 which increased enforcement penalties for illegal dumping in an effort to further protect the environment. Illegal, or open dumping, is a persistent problem for both rural and urban areas. Fundamentally local in nature, a combination of local solid waste management planning, local public education, and coordinated enforcement at the local level is essential for success in combating this problem.

Local community groups have been instrumental in organizing efforts to control illegal dumping, such as community cleanup projects that include the participation of local government officials, and using public information campaigns to raise awareness and promote a sense of environmental stewardship in its citizenry.

State and Local Funding (Section 4.7)

To supplement their allotted State Tire Fund (tax) revenues, all three SWMAs have established fees on disposal, permitting, and other activities associated with solid waste management. In October 2014, the SEC approved the implementation of solid waste fees for NDEP with collection beginning in 2015. These new solid waste fees are only applicable to solid waste management facilities under the DCNR-NDEP’s jurisdiction. This new funding source will help to defray the State’s costs of managing and regulating solid waste.

vii

Nevada’s rural local governments may also require increased funding to support local waste management operations. Although local taxing authority may be available, the tax base for some communities may not be sufficient to generate needed revenue. In such locations, private solid waste companies may not be profitable, leaving the municipality to face significant challenges meeting their solid waste needs in a manner that complies with all applicable environmental regulations.

Key Stakeholders

Although NDEP is required to submit this Plan to the SEC, it is also intended to be used as a resource and guide for the State Legislature, NDEP, SNHD, WCHD, state and local agencies, and

Nevada’s municipal governments as they seek to craft effective Solid Waste Management laws, regulations and policies. It is hoped that the Plan also provides useful information to generators of solid waste (residents, businesses, and various industries) and solid waste service providers (refuse collectors, landfill operators, recyclers). Implementation of the suggestions provided for future consideration in each section of the Plan could further serve to enhance and strengthen solid waste management in Nevada.

viii

Table of Contents

Page Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ ii

1. Introduction

1.1 Scope and Purpose

1.2 Governmental Roles and Responsibilities

1.2.1 Municipal Governments

1.2.2 Health Districts

1.2.3 State Government

1.2.4 Tribal Governments

1.2.5 Federal Facilities

2. Statewide Trends in Solid Waste Management

2.1 Landfills

2.2 Collection and Transportation

2.3 Waste Generation and Recycling Rates

2.4 Importation

2.5 Data Collection and Reporting

2.5.1 Disposal Quantities and Per Capita Generation Rate

2.5.2 Recycling Quantities

3. Profiles of Municipal Solid Waste Management Systems

4. Solid Waste Management Issues and Future Considerations

4.1 Landfills

4.1.1 Liner Requirements

4.1.2 Bioreactor Landfills

4.1.3 Post-closure Care Period

4.1.4 Final Cover Design

4.1.5 Landfill Gas

4.1.6 Items for Future Consideration

4.2 Recycling and Waste Prevention

4.2.1 Improving Recycling in Clark County

4.2.2 Legislative Changes to Municipal Recycling Programs

4.2.3 Recycling at Public Buildings

4.2.4 Items for Future Consideration

4.3 Importation of Solid Waste

4.4 Special Waste Management

4.4.1 Electronic Wastes (E-waste)

4.4.2 Household Hazardous Waste (HHW)

4.4.3 Medical Waste

4.4.4 Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products

4.4.5 Waste Tires

4.4.6 Items for Future Consideration

4.5 Rural Solid Waste Management

4.5.1 Items for Future Consideration

ix

4.6 Illegal Dumping and Open Burning

4.6.1 Items for Future Consideration

4.7 State and Local Funding

4.7.1 The Solid Waste Management Authorities (SWMAs)

4.7.2 Local Government

4.7.3 Items for Future Consideration

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Comparison of Average Daily Disposal Rates at Nevada Landfills

2. Solid Waste Generation and Disposal Trends in Nevada

3. Municipal Solid Waste Generated per capita for each County

4. Municipal Solid Waste Generated per capita for each County using

Disposal Sites equipped with Scales

5. Waste Importation Map

6. Tire Fee Revenue

7. Tire Fee Revenue per ton of Solid Waste Disposed

LIST OF APPENDICES

1. List of Amendments to Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) and Administrative Codes (NAC) pertinent to Solid Waste and Recycling

2. Estimated capacities of Active Landfills in Nevada

3. Maps & Profiles of Current Municipal Solid Waste Management Systems

4. Map of Current Solid Waste Facilities in Nevada

5. Solid Waste, Nevada Revised Statutes 444.440 – 444.645

6. Solid Waste, Nevada Administrative Code 444.570 – 444.7499

7. Recycling, Nevada Revised Statutes 444A.010 – 444A.110

8. Recycling, Nevada Administrative Code 444A.005 – 444A.655

9. U.S. EPA, 40 CFR part 258, Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

1. Introduction

1.1 Scope and Purpose

Solid waste management is vital to the infrastructure of every city and county. A comprehensive and effective management system includes the following key components:

Reuse and Recycling Programs: these help to conserve resources, while instilling a

“conservation ethic” in citizens and their communities;

Cost-effective and efficient waste collection systems: these help to prevent illegal dumping while protecting public health and the environment; and, Properly designed and operated landfill sites: these ensure safe disposal of solid waste at the end of its life.

The responsibility for planning and implementing effective solid waste management systems lies with local government.

The State’s primary role in solid waste management is regulatory through implementation of regulations adopted by the State Environmental Commission (SEC). Per NRS 444.570, the SEC is required to develop and update a statewide plan for solid waste management in Nevada. This update requirement provides the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) with the opportunity to meet with county government officials to review the efficacy of existing laws and regulations, and engage in an informational give-and-take as concerns challenges and planning efforts to improve their local solid waste management systems.

The regulations and statutes governing solid waste management are found in

Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) 444.440 – 444.645, Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) 444.570 – 444.7499, NRS 444A.010 – 444A.110; and

NAC 444A.005 – 444A.655

For complete references to these statutes and regulations, please see Appendices 5 – 8. Amendments to these NRS and NACs are in Appendix 1.

In addition to regulatory oversight, the State bears additional responsibilities for solid waste management planning, inter-agency coordination, and public education.

Central to the mission of the NDEP-Bureau of Waste Management (BWM) is ensuring that solid waste is handled safely. To this end, this Solid Waste Management Plan (Plan) presents the current status of collection and disposal systems within each county, and reviews the adequacy of landfill standards, especially in light of the potential for importation of solid waste to rural disposal facilities. Finally, this Plan attempts to identify economic incentives to encourage efficient use of available resources, reduce waste generation, and optimize recovery of reusable/recyclable resources from the solid waste stream.

Annual Solid Waste disposal reports show that Nevada’s infrastructure for solid waste collection and disposal has improved over recent years, especially in rural areas of the State. Curbside recycling services are now common place in our major urban areas, and a composting industry is taking root in

Nevada. It is estimated that at the end of 2016, single-stream (co-mingled) curbside recycling services was being offered to approximately 90% of the residents of Nevada in the more urbanized municipalities in Clark, Washoe and Elko Counties.

1.2 Governmental Roles and Responsibilities

1.2.1 Municipal Governments

Per NRS 444.510 (App. 5), each municipality, or Health District, in Nevada is required to develop and implement a plan for a, “solid waste management system.” A solid waste management system is defined in statute as, “The entire process of storage, collection, transportation, processing, recycling and disposal of solid waste. The term includes plans and programs for the reduction of waste and public education.” Municipalities are also required to implement recycling requirements as found in

NRS 444A.040 (App. 7). In order to carry out these responsibilities, the statutes give authority to municipalities to adopt ordinances, acquire land, offer franchises for solid waste collection, and levy appropriate fees (Note: these fees are not subject to the fee revenue cap specified in NRS 354.5989).

One of the common challenges local governments face is unlawful (illegal) dumping. Municipalities and Health Districts are largely responsible for enforcing the statutory prohibitions against unlawful dumping. Amendments to the solid waste statutes adopted by the 2001 and 2013 Nevada Legislature provide significant authority to local government agencies and peace officers to levy civil and criminal penalties for unlawful dumping. Penalties collected from unlawful dumping violations can be used to support the local government’s solid waste management programs. Unlawful dumping is classified as a misdemeanor crime subject to penalties/fines, community service, and/or revocation of a business license.

1.2.2 Health Districts

The Health Districts (Southern Nevada Health District (SNHD) in Clark County, and Washoe County

Health District (WCHD) in Washoe County), are the waste authorities and primary regulatory agencies over solid waste management in Nevada’s two most populated and urbanized counties. The

State’s statutes (NRS 444.495) designate these agencies as the Solid Waste Management Authorities

(SWMA) in their respective jurisdictions, with the programs of the Health Districts subject to periodic review by the NDEP. In addition to enforcing unlawful dumping provisions, the Health Districts are responsible for issuing permits to, and conducting compliance inspections at, disposal sites, transfer stations, materials recovery facilities (MRF), and other solid waste handling and/or processing facilities in their jurisdictions.

The governing boards of the Health Districts may adopt ordinances governing solid waste disposal sites and solid waste management systems, or any part thereof, which are more restrictive than those adopted by the SEC and other solid waste management regulations as long as they do not conflict with the SEC regulations.

1.2.3 State Government

NDEP is responsible for permitting and inspection solid waste disposal facilities and implementing public information programs outside of Washoe and Clark Counties. NRS 444A (App. 7) gave NDEP additional responsibility for encouraging statewide recycling programs. To ensure that solid waste management practices are consistent with state and federal criteria, all counties are required to submit their updated solid waste management plans to NDEP every five years for review and approval.

In 1994, the US EPA granted Nevada the authority to enforce the federal municipal landfill regulations. In order to receive that approval, the State had to demonstrate that its regulations were at least as stringent as the federal landfill criteria, and that it had adequate resources and authority to enforce the standards. The NDEP and Health Districts have the responsibility to ensure compliance with the minimum federal standards for municipal landfills. While unlikely, procedures are established in statute for the NDEP to exercise authority over SNHD and WCHD, if necessary the US

EPA retains authority to take enforcement action,. This may occur if evidence is found that handling or disposal of solid waste is presenting an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health or the environment, or in cases where there are violations of the federal landfill criteria and the State has failed to take remedial action.

1.2.4 Tribal Governments

The NDEP and the Health Districts do not have authority to regulate solid waste management on tribal lands. The Federal Subtitle D regulations are self-implementing on tribal lands; however the US EPA may issue site-specific flexibility waivers for landfills on tribal lands if a site wishes to establish a

“flexible” performance standard rather than adhering to the prescriptive standards set forth in 40 CFR

Part 258 (App. 9). This ensures that landfills located on tribal lands may apply for the same flexibility available to landfills in states with US EPA-approved municipal solid waste landfill permit programs.

Historically, coordination between the tribes and the NDEP has been informal regarding solid waste management. However, some issues do clearly cross jurisdictional boundaries. An example is waste collection and recycling services that must be coordinated between vendors and the tribes on and off tribal lands. Open burning (air pollution concerns) and protection of surface waters and groundwater from landfill contaminants are other concerns. NRS 444A.040 (App. 7) requires municipalities with approved recycling programs to make them available to reservations and colonies within their jurisdictions. In an effort toward improving coordination between NDEP and Nevada’s tribes, a tribal liaison position was established in the NDEP in 2007.

1.2.5 Federal Facilities

The federal government operates several solid waste facilities in Nevada, including some with proprietary landfills at Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Energy (DoE) installations.

These landfills are for the federal installations’ use and are not open to the public. A number of these facilities lie within publicly restricted areas but are regulated by the NDEP. NDEP’s Bureau of

Federal Facilities oversees DoE facilities. The remaining solid waste facilities under federal control are regulated by the appropriate SWMA.

2. Statewide Trends in Solid Waste Management

2.1 Landfills

In the 1990’s, more stringent state and federal landfill regulations were implemented which started the trend of regionalization of solid waste collection and disposal infrastructure. Faced with the option of upgrading to the new, “more costly” standards or closing their gates, more than 100 of Nevada’s small, rural landfills chose the latter. In their place, large, regional municipal landfills became the dominant disposal end-destination for solid waste, served by a network of transfer stations and public waste bins to manage solid waste disposal/collection/storage needs in rural communities prior to transportation to the landfills. (See Appendix 4 for the current map of Nevada’s solid waste infrastructure).

Roughly corresponding with Nevada’s population distribution, Nevada’s landfills can range in size from very large to the extremely small. Approximately 90% of all waste disposed of in Nevada (Fig.

1) goes to one of the following landfills: In the South, Apex Landfill serves the greater Las Vegas

Valley area; in the North, Lockwood Landfill serves the greater Reno-Sparks area. Both of these landfills are privately-owned and operated.

Figure 1. Daily disposal rate at Nevada’s permitted municipal landfills (averaged over 365 days).

Apex, Nevada’s largest landfill in Southern Nevada, ranks as one of the largest municipal landfills in the nation based on annual tonnage of solid waste received for disposal. According to 2016 data, Apex receives an average of over 6,800 tons of solid waste per day, while one of Nevada’s smallest landfills, Goldfield Landfill in Esmeralda County, receives an average of only about 4 tons of solid waste per day (population of 900 or fewer per the 2010 census data).

The disposal capacity of Nevada’s landfills is projected to be able to adequately accommodate

Nevada’s solid waste needs well into the future. However, the NDEP encourages municipalities to plan for, and take measures to ensure adequate future landfill capacity. A summary of the active municipal waste landfills, including their capacities and projected closure years, is presented in

Appendix 2.

2.2 Collection and Transportation

In response to the municipal recycling requirements adopted in 1991, Nevada’s solid waste collection has changed in two important respects. First is the trend toward bi-weekly recyclable collection

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000

Apex

Lockwood

Carson City

Russell Pass

Pahrump

Elko City

Laughlin

Mesquite

Boulder City

Humboldt

Battle Mtn

Ely City

Tonopah

W. Wendover

Hawthorne

Pershing

Crestline

Round Mtn

Eureka

Goldfield

2016 Rate of Waste Disposal in Tons/Day Permitted Municipal Landfills

Disposal Rate in Tons/Day

Apex's actual daily rate is 6,864

Lockwood's actual daily rate is 2,960

Note: Apex and Lockwood truncated here for scale availability to single-family homes in Carson City, Clark and Washoe Counties pursuant to the 1991 municipal recycling program requirements. The second important change was the establishment of an extensive network of transfer stations and rural public waste (storage) bins from which waste is collected and hauled to the regional landfills, at minimum of weekly runs. Covered roll-off containers and waste transfer trucks are used to transport waste collected from transfer stations and public waste bins to the regional landfills. In more highly-populated areas such as Clark, Washoe and Story

Counties, some of the public waste storage bin sites are staffed by attendants who collect fees from the public for waste disposal; however, most public waste bin facilities are unattended. Public waste bins are maintained by the counties at their expense, either by the county itself or through contracted services. The state’s transfer station and public waste bin locations are listed below by county and the communities they serve (See App. 4 for a map of this information).

Transfer Stations Clark: Cheyenne (North Las Vegas), Henderson, Sloan Churchill: Fallon Douglas: Gardnerville Elko: Jackpot Lyon: Fernley, Smith Valley, Sutro (Dayton), Yerington Washoe: Incline Village, Reno, Stead

Public Waste Storage Bin Facilities Clark: Searchlight, Sandy Valley, Mt. Charleston, Moapa Elko: Wells, Midas, Jarbidge, Montello, Carlin, Pilot Valley, Wendover Esmeralda: Dyer, Silver Peak Eureka: Crescent Valley Humboldt: Kings River, Orovada, Paradise Valley, Denio Lander: Kingston, Austin Lincoln: Rachel, Alamo, Hiko, Panaca, Pioche, Dry Valley, Caliente, Ursine, Mt. Wilson Lyon: Silver Springs Mineral: Mina-Luning Nye: Beatty, Amargosa Valley, Belmont, Manhattan Pershing: Grass Valley, Unionville, Imlay Storey: Virginia City Washoe: Gerlach, Empire

Transportation services vary widely, from waste collection services provided by large corporations in urban areas, to individuals self-hauling in sparsely populated rural area. Subject to franchise agreements negotiated with, and awarded by, the municipalities they serve, Waste Management, Inc., and Republic Services of Southern Nevada (Republic), collect and transport nearly all of the municipal solid waste in the urban areas of Reno/Sparks/Carson City and greater Las Vegas area, respectively.

About 15 small companies provide waste pickup service to the balance of the state’s smaller communities, while the cities of Fallon, Gardnerville, Minden, Lovelock, and Caliente operate their own garbage collection services. In sparsely populated areas, such as Esmeralda County, residents must self-haul their waste to the nearest landfill or public waste bin.

2.3 Waste Generation and Recycling Rates

As depicted in Figure 2, the total volume of solid waste disposed in Nevada steadily decreased from

2007-2012. The state-wide recession caused a population reduction and an accompanying decrease in construction starts, both of which contributed to a marked down-turn in waste generation. It is interesting to note that in 2010, within this time period, industrial and “Special Waste” increased slightly due to a resurgence of residential/ commercial construction and road construction projects;

however, the upward trend was short lived.

Between 2007 and 2010, the statewide recycling rate hovered between 20-22%. In 2011 the rate jumped to over 25%, and to nearly 29% in 2012. This significant increase is due to Clark County’s recycling rate jumping up 4% in 2011. Data suggests that the implementation of single-stream recycling programs in Clark County was responsible for this substantial increase. While significant local variations exist in recycling rates, Douglas, Washoe, and Carson City Counties have shown steady improvement in their recycling rates, consistently meeting or exceeding the State-wide recycling goal of 25%.

After several years of discussion and revealing pilot studies in multiple communities, single-stream recycling is proving to be a powerful new component in Nevada’s recycling program. All franchise agreements in Clark County now offer single-stream recycling services. Washoe County and the

Cities of Reno and Sparks are also offering single-stream recycling to their residents. Nevada’s recycling rate is certain to continue to increase owing to the fact that about 90% of state residents are now offered residential single-stream recycling.

Figure 2. Total municipal solid waste plus industrial & special waste and imported waste disposed and diverted in Nevada.

2.4 Importation

The amount of solid waste imported from out-of-state sources decreased 20% due, in part, to the national recession. Of the total volume of solid waste imported into the State, the Lockwood Regional

Landfill received greater than 94%. Lockwood, owned and operated by Waste Management, Inc., is the regional landfill for much of western Nevada (Washoe, Storey, Lyon, Douglas, and part of

Churchill County), and also receives waste from several California regions including the Lake Tahoe

Basin, and as far west as the City of Sacramento (Fig. 5). The volume of waste imported to Nevada presently accounts for about 7.5% of the municipal solid waste disposed in Nevada.

Although Apex is not currently receiving imported waste, the potential for increase solid waste importation is significant. This is due to the fact that it is privately-owned (Republic Services) and located along a rail line, and as such, is well-situated for future importation. Under its current permit, the estimated life of the Apex landfill is in excess of 100 years, and since Republic owns the land around the existing site, there is potential for its future expansion.

Another landfill poised for importation is Crestline Landfill. Located near Panaca in Lincoln County, Crestline is another privately-owned landfill situated on a rail line. The Class I MSWLF operating

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

S ol id W as te

D is po se d or

D iv er te d (T ho us an ds o f T on s)

Nevada Solid Waste Totals 2007 - 2016

NV MSW Disposed Imported Waste I&S Disposed Diversion permit was issued in December 2001 for the 660 acre parcel, which positioned them to receive a large volume of solid waste per day contingent on construction of lined disposal cells and demonstration of financial assurance to satisfy the landfill closure requirement. It remains to be seen when, or whether, the owners of the Crestline Landfill will obtain contracts for waste importation and disposal that would justify beginning operations at the Class I facility.

Other potential importation landfills include the Rawhide Landfill, located in Mineral County, and the

Jungo Landfill in Humboldt County. Rawhide Landfill, owned by the Nevada Resource Recovery

Group (NRRG) of Nevada, has not started operating as of this report, and may never open if a rail line is not extended to the site. In 2012, a Class I Landfill operating permit was issued for the Jungo

Landfill project, but it too, is not operational. Jungo could receive solid waste imported from the San

Francisco Bay area via railway.

Some municipal governments have shown interest in developing their own commercial waste disposal facilities for increased revenue. The City of Fallon recently increased its permitted disposal rate at the

Russell Pass Landfill. The City of Elko and Humboldt County have also sought to expand their landfill capacities beyond the needs of the local communities.

These and other efforts to gain new or expand landfill capacities indicate an interest in the potential for significant importation of out-of-state waste for profit. Whether the potential for large-scale importation is realized or not depends on the regional market for solid waste disposal, the availability of disposal capacity in the region, and the feasibility of individual projects. Imported waste is generally what is referred to as “dead waste,” already stripped of any valuable reclaimable, reusable, recyclable waste materials before it gets to Nevada landfills. Whether perceived by Nevadans as an opportunity for economic development, or as an exploitation of Nevada resources by other states, waste importation is a viable economic enterprise. As such, waste importation must be included in the solid waste discussion.

2.5 Data Collection and Reporting

Reliable data on the quantities of solid waste disposed and recycled are necessary in order to conduct

State and municipal waste management planning, to ensure future disposal capacity, and provide

Nevada’s citizens with a means to measure the success of local recycling and waste reduce efforts.

Terms used in the Plan include:

Municipal solid waste (MSW): solid waste from residential, commercial and institutional waste generators

Industrial waste: non-hazardous solid waste generated at industrial plants; also includes construction and demolition debris

Special waste: solid waste that requires special handling due to its physical, biological or chemical nature (e.g., medical waste, asbestos waste).

Recycling rate:

Waste imported from outside of Nevada is not counted in Nevada’s state recycling rate.

The data referred to in the above sections are useful for discussing trends and making comparisons, although there are areas where information is lacking or questionable. The following provides general comments on the quality and interpretation of the solid waste data.

2.5.1 Disposal Quantities and Per Capita Generation Rate

On a statewide basis Nevada’s solid waste disposal data is reliable. Quarterly, semi-annual or annual disposal reports are required from all landfills. The larger landfills weigh the incoming waste on scales, which captures over 95% of Nevada’s disposed waste. The smaller landfills, however, do not have scales and use volume estimates with conversion factors to calculate and report tonnage disposed.

In the rural counties, wide variations in per capita generation rates, shown on Figure 3, highlight the inexact nature of volume estimates. For example, the anomalously low rate in Lander County is probably due to underestimating disposal volume. Figure 4 shows greater consistency in the disposal data gathered from landfills with scales. These data indicate a weighted average MSW generation rate of under 8.0 pounds/person/day.

MSW recycled x 100% MSW disposed + MSW recycled

Figure 3. Municipal solid waste generated per capita for each County as reported by County. Esmeralda, Eureka, Lander, Lincoln, Mineral, Nye, Pershing, and White Pine weight is calculated from volume estimates. The generation rate in the figure represents landfilled or diverted MSW by County origin. The average represents the weighted average based on population. (The most current data compiled is calendar year 2016)

Figure 4. Municipal solid waste generated per capita for as reported by each county using scales at their disposal sites.

The generation rate in the figure represents landfilled or diverted MSW by County origin. The average represents the weighted average based on population. (The most current data compiled is calendar year 2016)

It has been suggested that Nevada’s tourism economy affects its municipal waste generation rate.

The Las Vegas Convention and Visitor’s Authority reported that over 42 million people visited the area during 2016. The visitor population, because it is considered a “transient” municipal solid waste

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

P o u n d s p e r

D a y

County

MSW Disposed MSW Recycled

2016 MSW Generation per Capita

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0

Carson City

Churchill Clark Douglas Elko Humboldt Lyon Storey Washoe Average

P o u n d s p e r

D a y

County

2016 MSW Generation per Capita at Facilities with Scales

MSW Disposed MSW Recycled generating group, is not counted in with residential solid waste group. As such, per capita waste generation tends to be higher in the high-tourism areas than in non-tourism economies. A waste characterization study would be helpful to assess tourism waste generation patterns, and to better understand the variations in waste generation rates in Nevada’s tourism affected municipalities.

2.5.2 Recycling Quantities

In 1991, the Nevada Legislature set a goal for 25% of the total solid waste generated in each municipality to be recycled. To assess Nevada’s progress toward this goal, the NDEP conducts an annual survey of the counties to determine their recycling rates. While reporting the quantities of all the materials recycled each county seems pretty straight forward, it demands the combined efforts and cooperation of municipal governments, recycling centers, and disposal services to gather, record and report accurate data. In counties with populations greater than 45,000, the county recycling centers are required to submit a certified annual report of the types, and volume of materials recycled to their city/municipal government officials. The data is then compiled into the county’s annual recycling rate and reported to the NDEP. As is often the case, the municipalities do not receive complete and/or accurate reports in a timely manner, requiring prompting and/or follow-up with the recycling centers.

Although regulations require recycling centers to report, there are no penalty provisions for failure to submit.

The municipality must also take measures to ensure that double counting of materials is avoided. This happens when a recyclable material generator, and the receiving recycling center, both report it as recycled. NDEP conducts the final review of the municipal reports, checking the data to verify its accuracy. Any abnormal or inconsistent numbers are flagged, which then necessitates NDEP staff contacting the reporting county for additional information or clarification to resolve the discrepancies.

To answer the question, “How well is Nevada recycling?” the NDEP evaluates the county and statewide data in their biennial recycling and waste reduction reports. Comparing current data to that of past years verifies whether the State is making progress. A comparison of one county’s recycling rate to that of another can provide useful information toward identifying whether the recycling measures or strategies being undertaken by higher recycling rate counties are worthy of duplication in lower rate counties. Yet caution must be used when attempting to draw conclusions. For example: In

2016, the urban municipality recycling rate varied between Clark County’s rate of 20.5% in Nevada’s most densely populated county, to tiny Carson City’s rate of 27.1%,andWashoe County’s rate of

29.5%. These rates bring the data into question as to whether the differences are real, or simply a reflection of differing calculation methods.

It is incumbent upon the State and local governments to provide the recycling community with reliable and meaningful measures for recycling rate calculation. In order to build public confidence in the aforementioned reports, the data must also be verifiable. Simple, consistent terms and methodology must be applied uniformly across the recycling universe to ensure accuracy in recycling rate calculations. Furthermore, every element and result must be made available for public review. To this end, the SWMAs (NDEP, SNHD and WCHD) have agreed upon a standard set of reporting criteria, and are working with local governments and recyclers to improve the collection and reporting of recycling data.

NDEP and the SWMAs have partnered with U.S. EPA Region 9 in development of consistent recycling reporting data among the Pacific-Southwest states. This will help resolve recycling measurement issues by providing means to produce uniform, and hence, comparable data. In collecting and reporting data, the State and local governments will strive to clearly differentiate between solid waste types using U.S. EPA's definitions.

3. Profiles in Municipal Solid Waste Management Systems

Maps and corresponding one-page solid waste profiles for each county in Nevada are provided in

Appendix 3. The maps provided a current “snapshot” of the existing solid waste management facilities and their locations (infrastructure), while their profiles provide specifics, such as, Name of the local solid waste planning authority Solid waste trends County population Active municipal solid waste landfills Solid waste and recyclables collection services Number of recycling drop-off sites Household hazardous waste collection services

Trends presented in the solid waste profiles are broken down into the following categories and defined as follows:

Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) generated: solid waste generated from residential, commercial and institutional sources within the county’s borders.

Industrial/“Special Waste” disposed: solid waste generated from industrial sources that do not have disposal facilities on-site. This type of waste may come from within, or from outside, the county. Examples are construction and demolition debris, waste tires, and sludges.

Imported waste disposed: solid waste disposed in Nevada that was generated outside the

State.

Recycling rate: Recycling rates are for MSW only and are presented as historically reported.

The “recycling rate” is calculated by the tons recycled divided by the tons generated.

4. Current Solid Waste Management Issues and Future Considerations

Since their adoption and implementation in 1991, Nevada’s disposal and recycling regulations have significantly changed the way solid waste is managed in Nevada. Our review of Nevada’s current solid waste management systems reveals the persistence of a few “old problems,” while new challenges have emerged. As Nevada’s ultimate solid waste authority, it is incumbent upon NDEP to ensure that the solid waste management systems in the State, Comply with applicable Federal and State standards, Protect public health and the environment, Conserve natural resources

As Nevada strives to create an effective statewide solid waste management system, regular assessment of the adequacy of solid waste laws and regulations is essential. In this section of the Plan, issues that require attention are identified, along with proposed strategies to address them as concerns the following topics: Landfills, Recycling and Waste Prevention, Importation of Solid Waste, “Special

Waste” Management, Rural Solid Waste Management, Open Dumping and Open Burning, and State and Local Funding.

4.1 Landfills

Since their establishment in 1991, landfill researchers and operators have identified problems with the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle D criteria and have proposed alternatives to address them. For example, in arid environments such as Nevada, the requirement for landfill liners and criteria for alternative cover have come into question, as have the landfill leachate and gas containment requirements as they relate to recent proposals for development of super-sized commercial solid waste disposal facilities.

4.1.1 Liner Requirements

All municipal waste landfills in Nevada are required to conform to the federal standards adopted under

RCRA Subtitle D. According to the federal regulations and the approved State regulations, a composite liner (composed of clay and a layer of plastic membrane) is required for all new or expanding landfills that receive an average of more than 20 tons of waste per day (i.e., a Class I landfill facility).

Landfill owners/operators may apply to the SWMA for approval of an alternative liner design if the landfill owners/operator can demonstrate that the alternative design is sufficiently protective of the waters of the State against degradation caused by the introduction of landfill pollutants and/or contaminants. The Plan recognizes that site-specific conditions should be taken into consideration as we plan for future development of our disposal infrastructure, and that, with attention to detail and careful oversight, alternative liner designs can provide surface and groundwater protection equal to, or even superior to the current standard.

4.1.2 Bioreactor Landfills

The standard approach to landfill design in Nevada is what is commonly known as “dry tomb” landfilling achieved by the exclusion of liquids from buried waste resulting in minimization of leachate generation. Dry tomb landfilling has been criticized by some researchers contending that, because it delays waste decomposition, the waste will always present a threat to groundwater. To address this threat, an alternative technology has emerged, the “bioreactor” landfill, and it is gaining the attention of the waste industry and government regulators.

Bioreactor landfills promote waste decomposition by recirculating the leachate inherently produced by the waste mass with controlled application of additional liquids. This technology is already in use in several other states; however, in Nevada, with its arid climate and its unique hydrogeologic conditions, whether bioreactor designs prove to be a safe and economical landfill alternative remains to be seen.

Until such time as a bioreactor landfill is proposed and receives SWMA approval, dry tombing is likely to continue.

In March 2004 the US EPA revised its municipal landfill criteria to allow states to issue Research, Development and Demonstration (RD&D) permits with associated variances from the standard criteria and requirements (specifically those concerning landfill design, operation, final cover, and closure/post-closure care). With the flexibility offered by RD&D permits, a variety of innovative landfill designs are possible as long as they, “include terms and conditions at least as protective” as the standard municipal landfill design. By the same token, because of their high degree of flexibility, one of the requirements of an RD&D permit is data collection and reporting on the performance of alternate designs. The data gathered under an RD&D rule requirement will help federal and state regulators, and landfill owners, evaluate the performance of these designs under different climatic conditions.

In general, the US EPA envisioned that RD&D permits would be issued for a three (3) year period, and extendable up to a maximum of 12 years. In order for Nevada to be able to offer the flexibility to try new technologies such as the “bioreactor” landfill, the solid waste regulations would have to be amended to adopt the RD&D rule.

4.1.3 Post-closure Care Period

After landfill closure, owners are required to provide post-closure care for a 30-year period. In general, post-closure care involves, but is not limited to, the following activities: maintenance of the final cover, monitoring and management of explosive gas, groundwater monitoring, and maintenance and operation of the leachate collection system. Advocates for revision of the post-closure care criteria contend that the 30-year time period is arbitrary, and propose that the standard should instead be risk-based: post-closure care should continue until the waste no longer poses a groundwater and/or explosive gas threat. Another concern with all landfills, current and future, is with the long-term integrity of the final cover. Due to the action of natural forces (wind, rain, dry, cold/heat, geologic shifting), all final covers will eventually fail, potentially compromising the integrity of their waste containment systems.

While the 30-year post-closure period is the standard in Nevada regulations, SWMAs have the authority to alter the timeframe. A shorter period may be approved if the owner demonstrates that it is sufficient to protect the environment; a longer period may be required if the authority determines that it is necessary to protect the environment. In the absence of a universally accepted methodology for making such demonstrations, the 30-year period was accepted as default by most states.