The Washington site

To the Powell River Legacy group:

i am wondering where in Washington the fly ash is currently going.

thanks

Reply from PR Legacy:

The flyash does not currently go to Washington, it is being dumped right here in Wildwood and space is running out as we speak. Until recently, Catalyst sent their flyash to a state of the art facility in Washington State with a company known as Rabanco Allied Wastes Industries Inc. In Washington, Rabanco deposits waste at the Roosevelt Regional Landfill, a space in the desert far away from homes that meets or exceeds all requirements set out in the province's "Landfill Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste."

Catalyst previously took care their fly ash in this way and they have always had the option to do so. By all appearances, it was a thoughtful, responsible choice.

I've enclosed excerpts from Rabanco's own description of this landfill below.

Comparison with British Columbia Criteria

The Roosevelt Regional Landfill and its associated facilities and policies meet or exceed all the performance criteria listed in the B.C. landfill criteria document…It is a clearly defined facility in a secure setting, in every sense of the words.

Roosevelt’s climate, operating philosophy and engineered features combine to control gas and leachate problems in both the short and long term. Roosevelt Regional Landfill is in the desert, where the average annual precipitation is approximately 8 inches. This simplifies surface water control efforts and avoids the difficult leachate management issues associated with an excess supply of water.

The natural shortage of water allows Roosevelt’s operators to control the supply and add just enough water to enhance decomposition while not significantly increasing leachate production. The landfill’s liner monitoring stations and gas extraction system allow this optimizing of decay and methane generation to be well controlled. Gasses will be collected and burned as fuel in an electricity generating plant, possibly in other direct uses and in a controlled flare whenever complete use as fuel is not possible. This approach to landfill management “recycles” the organic materials into fuel and compresses the most active part of a landfill’s life cycle into a period of time when the facility is being very actively managed. The end result is a much reduced, less potent mass of waste left behind for future generations.

The facility was invited by the host county and it is far out in the desert, with the nearest neighbors about three miles away, and it is served by rail. The hydrogeology is simple, well understood and practically perfect for use by a regional landfill. The landfill site is large, bowl shaped and underlain by about 100 feet of fractured basalt which sits on a very large clay deposit. The topography of the clay surface is also bowl shaped (though much more gentle than the land surface) and inclined so as to form an efficient monitoring aquifer. The entire recharge area of this small aquifer is on the facility’s property and no one uses it as a source of drinking water. In addition, there are no floodplains on the site and no unstable areas.

The design criteria for non-modified, engineered, sanitary landfills (in British Columbia) are similar in some ways to Roosevelt’s design but allow for substantial variation and are vague in places. For the liner, the regulations start with 1 meter of compacted, very low hydraulic conductivity clay (conductivity<10-7 cm/sec) but allow for variances, equivalent features and natural in-place substitutes. Roosevelt has 2 feet of engineered clay with the same basic specification and an 80 mil. HDPE plastic membrane to form a composite liner system. Plastic/clay composite liners are widely considered superior to a single material liner of either type.

The criteria for leachate collection systems(in BC) is similar to Roosevelt’s design. Both have a foot of free draining material (though the criteria allow substitutes) and both hold 1 foot of standing leachate as the maximum allowable head on the liner. Roosevelt does however use aggregate that is much more permeable than that called for by the criteria and is unlikely to experience high leachate generation do to it’s desert climate. The criteria call for piping to augment the drainage layer if appropriate. Roosevelt has extensive, oversized leachate collection pipes.
The final cover criteria compare to Roosevelt’s design much the same way as the liner criteria. The same soil barrier is called for but Roosevelt will also include a plastic membrane to make up a composite cap. All the intentions to control water and gas exchange are met by Roosevelt though the specific requirement to cap within 90 days.

All the operational criteria (for BC) are also, generally, met or exceeded at Roosevelt. There is a waste screening system in place to keep out liquid and hazardous wastes. This system is based on the Washington State Dangerous Waste Regulations which encompass and expand on the U.S. federal rules. Roosevelt practices daily covering, waste compaction, dust litter and vector control and does not burn wastes. There is an extensive groundwater monitoring system and systems to monitor air quality and insect pests. All the record keeping called for by the criteria is generally conducted at Roosevelt.

Roosevelt has a 30 year post closure plan complete with financial security instruments. The plan, generally, meets or exceeds all the requirement for closure and post closure set out in the criteria.

------------

Should you require any more information about this site I can probably find it for you. Just let me know. I am happy to provide this research.