Code of Maryland Regulations
Title 14 - INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
Subtitle 14 - HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES SITING BOARD
Chapter 14.14.05 - Treatment and Disposal Needs for the State
Section 14.14.05.01 - Findings
Universal Citation: MD Code Reg 14.14.05.01
Current through Register Vol. 51, No. 19, September 20, 2024
A. Hazardous Waste Generation and Disposition in 1981-1982. The Board finds that the total demand for hazardous waste treatment or disposal, during the period August 1, 1981 through July 31, 1982 was, in U.S. Short Tons of 2,000 pounds, as follows:
| (1) Total generated in Maryland | 286,000 Tons |
| (2) Total treated/disposed of on generator's property ("on-site") | -28,000 |
| (3) Total Maryland off-site treatment/disposal needs | 258,000 Tons |
| (4) Waste imported into Maryland Waste exported from Maryland | +79,000 -41,000 |
| (5) Total "off-site" treatment or disposal in Maryland | 296,000 Tons |
B. Hazardous Waste Management Alternatives.
(1)
Reduction, Recovery, and Reuse. The Board finds that the reduction of hazardous
waste generated and the recovery, re-use, or exchange of hazardous waste are
generally preferable to either the treatment or burial of hazardous wastes. The
Board recognizes, however, that the waste generator, not the Board, is the key
party in implementing reduction, recovery, or re-use. The Board can therefore
only endorse and support reduction, recovery, and re-use practices and the
implementation of policies or incentives that make them more likely to be
employed. The Board notes that reduction, recovery, and re-use are likely to
broaden in capability and improve in efficiency under encouraging regulatory
and economic conditions, and that in the future less waste would then require
treatment, or burial or other long-term storage.
(2) Treatment. The Board finds that total
dependence on treatment, including aqueous treatment, incineration, or other
techniques that reduce the hazard or volume of a waste, is not feasible at this
time. The Board notes that some existing techniques are being improved and new
techniques are being developed, and that in the future more wastes will be
capable of being treated. The Board finds that treatment facilities to reduce
the hazard or volume of residue or waste that would otherwise be buried are
desirable additions to the options available in Maryland.
(3) Disposal. The Board finds that ultimate
or indefinite disposal by burial or long-term storage of certain hazardous
wastes, including residues from treatment processes, are the only feasible
alternatives for many Maryland wastes even though burial is the means of
disposition generally least preferred by the Board.
C. Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal Needs Projections.
(1) The Board finds that
hazardous waste treatment and disposal needs depend upon the types and
quantities generated as influenced by economic conditions, prices and
availability of disposition services, and policies of state and federal
governments.
(2) The Board notes
the following facts concerning specific types and quantities:
(a) Overall changes in actual generation of
hazardous waste since 1980 have been small since previous findings based on
calendar year 1980. Significant increases in hazardous waste generation are
unlikely. The quantity of hazardous waste generated per year is likely to
decrease with time.
(b) On-site
disposition is likely to continue in its present pattern. Waste now being
treated or disposed of on-site is not likely to become a significant off-site
demand. The large reduction in on-site disposition between calendar year 1980
and the August 1981 to July 1982 period was due largely to regulatory decisions
that certain wastes were not hazardous. Shifts from on-site to off-site demand
appears to be less than 10 percent of the total off-site demand.
(c) Most of the 41,000 tons of hazardous
waste exported in 1981-1982 is likely to remain in the State if treatment or
disposal facilities are available.
(d) Oils and solvents are sufficiently
valuable that with few exceptions industry will return them to useful purposes.
The recovery or use of oil and solvents as fuel may become subject to increased
regulation in the future and more oils and solvents may require capacity in
treatment facilities.
(e) The Board
notes that the Maryland Environmental Service's Hawkins Point Hazardous Waste
Landfill, assuming issuance of a new facility permit, is estimated to provide
burial capacity for The Allied Corporation's hazardous waste for approximately
8 years. The Hawkins Point Landfill, assuming issuance of a new-facility permit
and favorable circumstances, could provide burial capacity for the general
industrial community's hazardous waste for approximately 10 years. Under
unfavorable circumstances the capacity available to the general industrial
community could be significantly less than 5 years.
(f) The Board finds that manifests recorded
79,000 tons imported in 1981-1982, and that this demand could continue or
increase in the future.
(3) The Board finds that the following
quantities and types of waste make up a reasonable estimate of the Maryland
annual disposal demand. This estimate includes primary industrial generation,
residues from waste treatment, shifts from on-site to off-site disposition,
changes in disposition methods as a result of anticipated policy changes, and
waste exported in 1981-1982 that was assumed to remain in the State in the
future. The estimate does not include imported waste. The quantities and types
of waste are:
(a) Wastes in which water is a
major component, and which may be neutralized, detoxified, or otherwise
treated: 87,000 tons;
(b) Wastes of
primarily organic make-up which could be managed in a variety of ways, one of
which may be incineration; 13,000 tons;
(c) Wastes which will not burn and are not
otherwise amenable to treatment to eliminate their hazardous nature, for which
secure land burial is the appropriate means of disposal: 169,000
tons.
D. Hazardous Waste Landfill Need.
(1) Total
Landfill Capacity.
(a) Noting that some
out-of-State hazardous waste and some non-hazardous waste may be received at a
landfill, that the data base itself has inherent uncertainties, and that some
flexibility is required, the Board hereby finds that the State's annual
hazardous waste landfill disposal capacity need is 200,000 tons per
year.
(b) The Board notes that
landfill capacity is needed as the disposal method for those wastes of
unreactive or undecomposable character for which alternative technology has not
been developed or for which a treatment facility has not been built.
(c) It should also be noted that most waste
treatment methods produce a waste which must be landfilled.
(2) Number of Landfills. The Board
finds that a single landfill offers economy of scale but that multiple
facilities offer price competition and an increased overall system reliability,
which would permit the closing of one landfill without destroying the ability
to dispose of waste safely. Multiple landfills will also reduce the impact on a
single area. The Board, therefore, finds a need for a total of either two or
three secure landfills in the State.
(3) Capacity of Individual Landfills. The
Board finds that any general purpose hazardous waste landfill should have a
total capacity of at least 5 years of the total Maryland hazardous waste
generation designated for landfill, and should be designed for a yearly burial
of at least 50 percent of Maryland hazardous waste generation suitable for
landfill.
(4) Landfill to Meet
Special Needs. The Board also recognizes that there may be a need for a smaller
hazardous waste landfill in an area which is convenient to a single hazardous
waste generator or group of hazardous waste generators and which meets their
special disposal needs.
E. Incineration Need.
(1) The Board finds that incineration of
certain, primarily organic, materials is an alternative to landfill disposal.
The Board finds that incinerator capacity in Maryland is presently insufficient
to treat the estimated 13,000 tons per year in the incinerable category
generated in Maryland but that unused capacity is available a short distance
away, in New Jersey and at other locations in the United States. The Board
believes that incineration may offer net benefits in spite of the fact that
only a small fraction of the waste is incinerable and that the cost of
incineration is very high. The Board also finds that incineration is not
entirely without risk. For treatment of some types of waste, incineration
involves fewer short-term risks than alternative treatment methods, while
burial involves irrevocable use of land and long-term risks. The Board notes
that "incinerable" means that the substance can be decomposed by fire, not
necessarily that the substance will support combustion.
(2) The Board finds that due to the high cost
of incineration, alternative management techniques (reduction, re-use,
exchange, innovative treatment) are likely to reduce the quantity of waste in
the incinerable category. The Board also notes that without a categorical
prohibition against disposing of incinerable wastes in landfills, a generator
is free to choose between two very differently priced alternatives.
(3) The Board therefore finds, in view of the
quantities and circumstances involved, that large-scale incinerator capacity is
not crucial to the State's management needs in the immediate future. It appears
unlikely that the market will attract the investment necessary to build a major
incinerator as described in Regulation .02E.
F. Aqueous Treatment Facilities Need. The Board notes the existence of two facilities in Maryland capable of treating hazardous wastes of which water is a major component. The Board recognizes, however, that competition will provide economic benefits to hazardous waste generators, and that existing facilities may not provide all the services needed by Maryland generators. The Board finds that additional treatment capacity and capability is desirable.
G. Facility Location. The Board finds that most of the hazardous waste generated in Maryland originates in the Baltimore area, although nearly all areas of the State contribute some hazardous waste. The Board wishes to minimize, consistent with other considerations, the expense and risk to the general public of long distance transport of hazardous materials. Therefore the Board finds that the disposal needs will best be met through facilities whose location takes into account these concerns.
H. Special Needs. The Board finds that a role may exist for special purpose facilities capable of, for instance, consolidating small lots of solvent for recovery or small lots of waste for treatment, or for satisfying landfill needs as outlying locations and/or of magnitudes different from those determined above. Other treatment facilities (such as evaporation or stabilization) designed to reduce the hazard or volume of the waste to be landfilled represent a desirable addition to the available treatment/disposal options.
Disclaimer: These regulations may not be the most recent version. Maryland may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
