II-1

Managing Solid Waste – RCRA Subtitle D SECTION II SECTION II

Subsequent amendments to the Solid Waste

Disposal Act, such as RCRA, have substantially

increased the federal government’s involvement in

solid waste management.

During the 1980s, solid waste management

issues rose to new heights of public concern in

many areas of the United States because of

increasing solid waste generation, shrinking landfill

capacity, rising disposal costs, and public

opposition to the siting of new landfills. These

solid waste management challenges continue

today, as many communities are struggling to

develop cost-effective, environmentally protective

solutions. The growing amount of waste

generated has made it increasingly important for

solid waste management officials to develop

strategies to manage wastes safely and costeffectively.

 RCRA Subtitle D encourages environmentally

sound solid waste management practices that

maximize the reuse of recoverable material and

foster resource recovery. Solid waste is

predominately regulated by state and local

governments. EPA has, however, promulgated

MANAGING SOLID WASTE – RCRA SUBTITLE D

SECTION II

WHAT IS A SOLID WASTE?

• Garbage

• Refuse

• Sludges from waste treatment plants, water supply

treatment plants, or pollution control facilities

• Nonhazardous industrial wastes

• Other discarded materials, including solid, semisolid,

liquid, or contained gaseous materials resulting from

industrial, commercial, mining, agricultural, and

community activities.

In this section...

Overview........................................................... II-1

Definition of Solid Waste .................................. II-2

Municipal Solid Waste ...................................... II-2

- Source Reduction ......................................... II-3

- Recycling ...................................................... II-4

- Combustion ................................................... II-4

- Landfilling ...................................................... II-5

Criteria for Solid Waste Disposal Facilities ....... II-5

- Criteria for Classification of Solid Waste

Disposal Facilities and Practices .................. II-5

- Technical Criteria for Solid Waste Disposal

Facilities ........................................................ II-5

- Technical Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste

Landfills ......................................................... II-6

- Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity

Generator Waste Disposal Facilities ............. II-8

Assistance to Native American Tribes .............. II-8

Solid Waste Management Initiatives ................ II-9

- Wastewise ..................................................... II-9

- Jobs Through Recycling Program................. II-9

- Unit Pricing.................................................... II-10

- Full Cost Accounting for Municipal Solid

Waste ............................................................ II-10

Summary .......................................................... II-11

OVERVIEW

Since the 1960s, Americans have sought to

provide efficient and favorable methods of waste

management. Congress enacted the Solid Waste

Disposal Act of 1965 to address the growing

quantity of waste generated in the United States

and to ensure its proper management.
II-2

 SECTION II SECTION II Managing Solid Waste – RCRA Subtitle D

some regulations pertaining to solid waste,

predominately addressing how disposal facilities

should be designed and operated. EPA’s primary

role in solid waste management includes setting

national goals, providing leadership and technical

assistance, and developing guidance and

educational materials. The Agency has played a

major role in this program by developing tools and

information through policy and guidance to

empower local governments, business, industry,

federal agencies, and individuals to make better

decisions in dealing with solid waste issues. The

Agency’s involvement is intended to create

incentives to motivate behavioral change in

reference to solid waste management through a

nonregulatory approach.

This section presents an outline

of the Subtitle D program. In doing

so, it defines the terms solid waste

and municipal solid waste, and it

describes the role EPA plays in

assisting waste officials in dealing

with solid waste management

problems. The section will provide

an overview of the criteria that EPA

has developed for solid waste

landfills, and will introduce some

Agency initiatives designed to promote proper and

efficient solid waste management.

DEFINITION OF SOLID WASTE

RCRA defines the term solid waste as:

• Garbage (e.g., milk cartons and coffee

grounds)

• Refuse (e.g., metal scrap, wall board, and

empty containers)

• Sludges from waste treatment plants, water

supply treatment plants, or pollution control

facilities (e.g., scrubber slags)

• Nonhazardous industrial wastes (e.g.,

manufacturing process wastewaters and

nonwastewater sludges and solids)

• Other discarded materials, including solid,

semisolid, liquid, or contained gaseous

materials resulting from industrial,

commercial, mining, agricultural, and

community activities (e.g., boiler slags).

The term solid waste is very broad, including

not only the traditional nonhazardous solid

wastes, such as municipal garbage, but also some

hazardous wastes. Hazardous waste, a subset of

solid waste, is regulated under RCRA Subtitle C.

(Hazardous waste is fully discussed in Section III.)

RCRA Subtitle D addresses solid wastes,

including those hazardous wastes that

are excluded from the Subtitle C

regulations (e.g., household hazardous

waste), and hazardous waste generated

by conditionally exempt small quantity

generators (CESQGs).

The definition of solid waste is not

limited to wastes that are physically

solid. As noted above, many solid

wastes are liquid, while others are

semisolid or gaseous.

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

Municipal solid waste is a subset of solid

waste and is defined as durable goods (e.g.,

appliances, tires, batteries), nondurable goods

(e.g., newspapers, books, magazines), containers

and packaging, food wastes, yard trimmings, and

miscellaneous organic wastes from residential,

commercial, and industrial nonprocess sources

(see Figure II-1).

Municipal solid waste generation has grown

steadily over the past 35 years from 88 million

tons per year (2.7 pounds per person per day) in

1960, to 208 million tons per year (4.3 pounds
II-3

Managing Solid Waste – RCRA Subtitle D SECTION II SECTION II

to source reduction, and second to recycling as

preferences to combustion and landfilling (see

Figure II-2).

■ Source Reduction

Rather than managing waste after it is

generated, source reduction is designed to

change the way products are made and used in

order to minimize waste generation. Source

reduction, also called waste prevention, is defined

as the design, manufacture, and use of products in

a way that reduces the quantity and toxicity of

waste produced when the products reach the end

of their useful lives. The ultimate goal of source

reduction is to decrease the amount and the

toxicity of waste generated. Businesses,

households, and state and local governments can

all play an active role in source reduction.

Businesses can manufacture products with

packaging that is reduced in both volume and

toxicity. They can also reduce waste by altering

their business practices (e.g., reusing packaging for

shipping, making double-sided copies,

maintaining equipment to extend its useful life,

using reusable envelopes). Community residents

can help reduce waste by leaving grass clippings

on the lawn or composting them with other yard

waste in their backyards, instead of bagging such

materials for eventual disposal. Consumers play a

per person per day) in 1995. While generation of

waste has grown steadily, recycling has also greatly

increased. In 1960, only about 7 percent of

municipal solid waste was recycled. By 1995, this

figure had increased to 27 percent.

To address the increasing volumes of

municipal solid waste that are generated on a

daily basis, EPA recommends using an integrated,

hierarchical approach to waste management with

four components: source reduction, recycling,

combustion, and landfilling. The hierarchy favors

source reduction to reduce both the volume and

toxicity of waste and to increase the useful life of

manufactured products. Next preferred is

recycling, including composting of yard and food

wastes, because it diverts

waste from combustion

facilities and landfills and has

positive impacts on both the

environment and the

economy. The goal of EPA’s

approach is to use a

combination of all these

methods to safely and

effectively manage municipal

solid waste. EPA recommends

that communities tailor

systems from the four

components to meet their

individual needs, looking first

Figure II-1: PRODUCTS GENERATED IN

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY WEIGHT IN 1995

14.3%

Nondurable Goods 

57.0 million tons

Durable Goods

31.2 million tons Food and Other Wastes 

17.1 million tons

Yard Trimmings

Containers and Packaging 29.8 million tons

72.9 million tons

35%

27.4%

15.0% 8.3%

Source 

Reduction

Recycling

Combustion

Landfilling

INTEGRATED 

SOLID WASTE 

MANAGEMENT 

SYSTEM

Source reduction, landfilling, recycling, and combustion are all pieces of the solid 

waste management puzzle. Source reduction and recycling are preferred elements of 

the system.

=

Figure II-2: THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT HIERARCHY
II-4

 SECTION II SECTION II Managing Solid Waste – RCRA Subtitle D

crucial role in an effective source reduction

program by purchasing products having reduced

packaging or that contain reduced amounts of

toxic constituents. This purchasing subsequently

increases the demand for products with these

attributes. State and local governments include

source reduction in their long-term planning for

solid waste management in order to ensure its

effectiveness.

■ Recycling

Municipal solid waste recycling refers to the

separation and collection of wastes, their

subsequent transformation or remanufacture into

usable or marketable products or materials, and

the purchase of products made from recyclable

materials. In 1995, 27 percent (56.2 million tons),

of the municipal solid waste generated in the

United States was recycled (see Figure II-3). Solid

waste recycling:

• Preserves raw materials and natural resources

• Reduces the amount of waste that requires

disposal

• Reduces energy use and associated pollution

• Provides business and job opportunities

• Reduces greenhouse gas emissions

• Reduces pollution associated with use of virgin

materials.

Communities can offer a wide range of

recycling programs to their residents, such as

drop-off centers, curbside collection, and

centralized composting of yard and food wastes.

Composting processes are designed to

optimize the natural decomposition or decay of

organic matter, such as leaves and food.

Compost, the end product of composting, is a

humus-like material that can be added to soils to

increase soil fertility, aeration, and nutrient

retention. Composting can serve as a key

component of municipal solid waste recycling

activities, considering that food and yard wastes

accounted for 21 percent of the total amount of

municipal solid waste generated in 1995. Some

communities are implementing large-scale

composting programs in an effort to conserve

landfill capacity.

The key to a successful recycling program is to

ensure that the recovered material is actually

reprocessed or remanufactured, and that the

products are bought and used by consumers.

Recycling programs will become more effective as

markets increase for products made from recycled

material. The federal government has developed

several initiatives in order to bolster the use of

recycled products. The federal procurement

guidelines, authorized by RCRA Subtitle F, are

designed to bolster the market for products

manufactured from recycled materials. The

procurement program uses government

purchasing to spur recycling and markets for

recovered materials. (This program is fully

discussed in Section V.)

■ Combustion

For centuries, burning has been a popular

method of reducing the volume of solid waste.

Before the Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970 essentially

banned it, the burning of waste was rampant and

Combusted

33.5 million tons

Recycled

56.2 million tons

Landfilled

118.3 million tons

56.9% 27.0%

16.1%

Figure II-3: MANAGEMENT OF

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE GENERATED IN 1995
II-5

Managing Solid Waste – RCRA Subtitle D SECTION II SECTION II

(including landfills) in order to protect human

health and the environment. This study resulted

in the development of criteria for classifying solid

waste disposal facilities and practices.

■ Criteria for Classification of Solid Waste

Disposal Facilities and Practices

On September 13, 1979,

EPA promulgated

criteria to

designate

conditions

under which

solid waste

disposal

facilities and

practices

would not pose adverse effects to human health

and the environment (Part 257 Subpart A).

Facilities failing to satisfy the criteria were

considered open dumps requiring attention by

state solid waste programs. As a result, open

dumps had to either be closed or upgraded to

meet the criteria for sanitary landfills. States were

also required to incorporate provisions into their

solid waste programs to prohibit the establishment

of new open dumps.

■ Technical Criteria for Solid Waste

Disposal Facilities

The Part 257, Subpart A regulatory criteria

used to classify solid waste disposal facilities and

practices consist of general environmental

performance standards. The criteria contain

provisions designed to ensure that wastes disposed

of in solid waste disposal units will not threaten

endangered species, surface water, ground water,

or flood plains. Further, owners and operators of

disposal units are required to implement public

health and safety precautions such as disease

vector (e.g., rodents, flies, mosquitoes) controls to

prevent the spread of disease and restrictions on

the open burning of solid waste. In addition,

uncontrolled. While uncontrolled burning of solid

waste can be detrimental to health and the

environment, confined and controlled burning,

known as combustion, can not only decrease the

volume of solid waste destined for landfills, but

can also recover energy from the waste-burning

process. Modern waste-to-energy facilities use

energy recovered from the burning of solid waste

to produce steam and electricity. In 1995,

combustion facilities handled 16.1 percent (33.5

million tons) of the municipal solid waste

generated (see Figure II-3). Used in conjunction

with source reduction and recycling, combustion

can recover resources and materials and greatly

reduce the volume of wastes entering landfills.

■ Landfilling

Despite the effectiveness of source reduction,

recycling, and combustion, there will always be

waste that cannot be diverted from landfills. In

fact, landfilling of solid waste still remains the most

widely used waste management method as

Americans landfilled approximately 56.9 percent

(118.3 million tons) of municipal solid waste in

1995 (see Figure II-3). Many communities are

having difficulties siting new landfills largely as a

result of increased citizen and local government

concerns about the potential risks and aesthetics

associated with having a landfill in their

neighborhoods. To reduce risks to health and the

environment, EPA developed minimum criteria

that solid waste landfills must meet in order to

alleviate some of the concern raised over landfill

siting and health concerns.

CRITERIA FOR SOLID WASTE

DISPOSAL FACILITIES

One of the initial focuses of the Solid Waste

Disposal Act (as amended by RCRA) was to

require EPA to study the risks associated with solid

waste disposal and to develop management

standards and criteria for solid waste disposal units
II-6

 SECTION II SECTION II Managing Solid Waste – RCRA Subtitle D

facilities are required to install safety measures to

control explosive gases generated by the

decomposition of waste, minimize the number of

birds attracted to the waste disposed of in the

unit, and restrict public access to the facility. The

criteria also restrict the land spreading of wastes

with high levels of cadmium and polychlorinated

biphenyls (PCBs) in order to adequately protect

ground water from these dangerous contaminants.

These criteria serve as minimum technical

standards for solid waste disposal facilities. As a

result, facilities must meet the Part 257 standards

to ensure that ongoing waste management

operations adequately protect human health and

the environment. If they fail to do so, the facility

is classified as an open dump and must upgrade its

operations or close. States have the option of

developing standards more stringent than the Part

257, Subpart A criteria.

■ Technical Criteria for Municipal Solid

Waste Landfills

Protection of human health and the

environment from the risks posed by solid waste

disposal facilities was an ongoing concern of

Congress after RCRA was passed in 1976. As a

result, HSWA required EPA to report on the

adequacy of existing solid waste disposal facility

criteria and gather detailed data on the

characteristics and quantities of nonhazardous

solid wastes.

Report to Congress on Solid Waste Disposal

In October 1988, EPA submitted a Report to

Congress indicating that the United States was

generating an increasing amount of municipal

solid waste. The Report revealed that

approximately 160 million tons of municipal solid

waste were generated each year, 131 million tons

of which were landfilled in just over 6,500

MSWLFs. EPA also reported that although these

landfills used a wide variety of environmental

controls, they may pose significant threats to

ground water and surface water resources. For

instance, rain water percolating through the

landfills can dissolve harmful constituents in the

waste and can eventually seep into the ground,

potentially contaminating ground water. In

addition, improperly maintained landfills can pose

other health risks due to airborne contaminants, or

the threat of fire or explosion.

To address these environmental and health

concerns, and to standardize the technical

requirements for these landfills, EPA promulgated

revised minimum federal criteria in Part 258 for

MSWLFs on October 9, 1991. The criteria were

designed to ensure that MSWLFs receiving solid

waste would be protective of human health and

the environment. All landfills that were not

MSWLFs remained subject to the Part 257,

Subpart A criteria.

WHAT IS AN OPEN DUMP?

An open dump is defined as a disposal facility that

does not comply with one or more of the Part 257 or

Part 258 Subtitle D criteria. Using the Part 257,

Subpart A criteria as a benchmark, each state

evaluated the solid waste disposal facilities within its

borders to determine which facilities were open

dumps that needed to be closed or upgraded. For

each open dump, the state completed an Open

Dump Inventory Report form that was sent to the

Bureau of the Census. At the end of fiscal years

1981 through 1985, the Bureau compiled all of the

report forms and sent them to EPA, where they were

summarized and published annually.
II-7

Managing Solid Waste – RCRA Subtitle D SECTION II SECTION II

Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

A municipal solid waste landfill is defined as

a discrete area of land or excavation that receives

household waste. A MSWLF may also receive

other types of RCRA Subtitle D wastes, such as

commercial solid waste, nonhazardous sludge,

CESQG waste, and industrial nonhazardous solid

waste. In 1995, there were approximately 2,500

MSWLFs in the United States.

The revised criteria address seven major

aspects of MSWLFs (see Figure II-4):

• Location

• Operation

• Design

• Ground water

monitoring

• Corrective action

• Closure and post-closure

• Financial assurance (i.e., responsibility).

The first set of criteria restrict where a MSWLF

may be located. New landfills must meet

minimum standards for placement in or near flood

plains, wetlands, fault areas, seismic impact zones,

and other unstable areas. Because some bird

species are attracted to landfills, the criteria also

restrict the placement of landfills near airports to

reduce the bird hazards (i.e., collisions between

birds and aircraft that may cause damage to the

aircraft or injury to the passengers).

The operating criteria establish daily operating

standards for running and maintaining a landfill.

The standards dictate sound management

practices that ensure protection of human health

and the environment. The provisions require

covering the landfill daily, controlling disease

vectors, and controlling explosive gases. They also

prohibit the open burning of solid waste and

require the owner and operator of the landfill to

control unauthorized access to the unit.

The design criteria require each new landfill to

have a liner consisting of a flexible membrane and

a minimum of two feet of compacted soil, as well

as a leachate collection system. Leachate is

formed when rain water filters through wastes

placed in a landfill. When this liquid comes in

contact with buried wastes, it leaches, or draws

out, chemicals or constituents from those wastes.

States with approved MSWLF permit programs

can allow the use of an alternative liner design

that controls ground water contamination. The

liner and collection system prevent the potentially

harmful leachate from contaminating the soil and

ground water below the landfill.

In order to ensure that the liner and leachate

collection system are working properly and that

the landfill is not contaminating surrounding

ground water resources, MSWLF owners and

operators must also establish a ground water

monitoring program. Through a series of

monitoring wells, the facility owner and operator

is alerted if the landfill is leaking and causing

Ground Water 

Monitoring Well

Liner Explosive Gas 

Monitoring Well

Leachate Collection 

System

Figure II-4: CROSS-SECTION OF A MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE LANDFILL
II-8

 SECTION II SECTION II Managing Solid Waste – RCRA Subtitle D

contamination. If contamination is detected, the

owner and operator of the landfill must perform

corrective action (i.e., clean up the

contamination caused by the landfill).

When landfills reach their capacity and can no

longer accept additional waste, the criteria

stipulate procedures for properly closing the

facility to ensure that the landfill does not present

any danger to human health and the environment

in the future. The closure activities at the end of

a facility’s use are often expensive and the owner

and operator must have the ability to pay for

them. As a result, the criteria require each owner

and operator to prove that they have the financial

resources to perform these closure and postclosure activities, as well as any necessary

corrective action.

Most of the solid waste program is overseen by

the states, and compliance is assured through

state-issued permits. Each state is to obtain EPA

approval for their MSWLF permitting program.

This approval process assesses whether a state’s

program is sufficient to ensure each landfill’s

compliance with the criteria. In addition to the

minimum federal criteria, states may impose

requirements that are more stringent than the

federal requirements.

■ Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity

Generator Waste Disposal Facilities

Businesses that produce small amounts of

hazardous waste, known as conditionally exempt

small quantity generators, need not manage

their hazardous waste under the Subtitle C

program. This means that CESQG waste can be

disposed of in solid waste landfills. However,

HSWA required EPA to establish standards to

ensure that CESQG waste disposal in solid waste

disposal units did not pose threats to human

health and the environment. As a result, on July

1, 1996, EPA revised the Part 257, Subpart B

criteria to contain standards for nonmunicipal,

nonhazardous waste disposal units that receive

CESQG hazardous waste. These revisions

addressed location restrictions, requirements for

monitoring for ground water contamination, and

corrective action provisions to clean up any

contamination. (CESQGs are fully discussed in

Section III, Chapter 3.)

ASSISTANCE TO NATIVE AMERICAN

TRIBES

EPA developed a draft municipal solid waste

strategy to assist Native American tribes in the

establishment of healthy, environmentally

protective, integrated solid waste management

practices on tribal lands. The strategy is based on

input from tribal focus groups convened by the

National Tribal Environmental Council and

discussions with tribal organizations, EPA Regional

Indian Program coordinators, other EPA offices,

and other federal agencies with trust

responsibilities on Native American lands. The

strategy emphasizes building tribal municipal solid

waste management capacity, developing tribal

organizational infrastructure, and building

partnerships among tribes, states, and local

governments. Direct EPA support of these goals

includes technical assistance, grant funding,

education, and outreach.

Solid waste managers on Native American

lands face unique challenges. To address issues

such as jurisdiction, funding, and staffing, EPA

offers several resource guides featuring in-depth

information specific to Native American lands.

The Agency recognizes that every solid waste

management program needs funding to survive

and that, in an era of tightening budgets, it may be

difficult to find necessary resources. One of EPA’s

ongoing priorities is to make current information

available to help tribes locate the funding they

need to develop and implement safe and effective

solid waste programs.

Outreach and education materials are two

other tools EPA provides to tribes to support

environmentally sound integrated solid waste

management practices. The Agency’s outreach
II-9

Managing Solid Waste – RCRA Subtitle D SECTION II SECTION II

support helps tribes connect and learn from each

other’s experiences. Educational resources help

tribal leadership as well as the general tribal

community understand the importance of good

municipal solid waste management. Better

understanding ensures that tribal municipal solid

waste programs are assigned a high priority and

facilitates the communities’ adoption of new and

improved waste disposal practices.

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

INITIATIVES

With the bulk of the RCRA Subtitle D program

already in place, EPA launched several new

initiatives to further the development of the solid

waste management program. These initiatives

promote proper waste management, and

encourage source reduction by both industry and

the public.

■ Wastewise

Many companies,

institutions, and

governments have

demonstrated that they

can save money by

reducing waste and

recycling material that would otherwise be

disposed. The Wastewise program is designed to

assist companies, states, local governments, Native

American tribes, and other institutions in

developing cost-effective practices to reduce

municipal solid waste. These partners set and

acheive certain goals within three areas: waste

prevention, recycling collection, and buying or

manufacturing recycled products. Participation

offers the partners several advantages. EPA

provides technical assistance, publications, and

program updates. Successful waste reduction

efforts are highlighted in EPA documents,

magazines, and trade publications. Participating

organizations can also use the Wastewise logo to

promote their participation.

These benefits along with the direct financial

savings that result from waste prevention and

recycling activities are helping to improve waste

management and resource efficiency. In 1996,

partners eliminated over 453,000 tons of

materials through waste prevention, a 30 percent

increase from 1995. Such waste prevention

represents approximately $80 million in avoided

purchasing and disposal costs. Partners also

recycled over 4.8 million tons in 1996, avoiding

approximately $162 million in disposal costs.

Since the program’s inception in 1994, partners

have reduced nearly 11 million tons of waste.

■ Jobs Through Recycling Program

To support recycling markets, EPA launched

the Jobs Through Recycling program in 1994.

The goal of the program is to foster markets for

recycled goods by promoting and assisting the

development of businesses using recovered

materials, creating new recycling jobs, and

spurring innovative technologies. Under the

program, EPA awards over $1 million each year in

grants to states and tribes. Jobs Through Recycling

funds programs that help develop or retain

intermediate processing and end-use

manufacturing capacity for recyclables and

reusable materials. Jobs Through Recycling

supports the development and strengthening of

state, multi-state, and tribal market development

and economic development programs. The

activities funded thus far include the creation of

Recycling Economic Development Advocates

(REDAs), Recycling and Reuse

Business Assistance Centers

(RBACs), and commodityspecific demonstration

projects. REDAs are

staff in state or

tribal economic

development

agencies who

pursue recycling

business growth,

whereas RBACs
II-10

 SECTION II SECTION II Managing Solid Waste – RCRA Subtitle D

are state full-service centers providing business,

technical, and financing assistance to businesses

using recovered materials.

 Jobs Through Recycling bolsters the job

market by actively promoting the recycling

industry. Recycling is estimated to create nearly

five times as many jobs as landfilling. One 1994

study reported that 103,000 jobs, or 2.7 percent

of all manufacturing jobs in the Northeast region

of the United States, are attributed to recycling.

In addition, the jobs created by recycling

businesses draw from the full spectrum of the

labor market (ranging from low- and semi-skilled

jobs to highly skilled jobs). Materials sorters,

dispatchers, truck drivers, brokers, sales

representatives, process engineers, and chemists

are just some of the jobs needed in the recycling

industry.

Since Jobs Through Recycling’s inception in

1994, $7.2 million in grants has been awarded to

36 states, 3 multi-state organizations, and 5 Native

American tribes. Grant winners from 1994 have

provided assistance to over 1,600 potential or

existing recycling/reuse businesses who have in

turn produced over 2,000 jobs, $300 million in

investment, 1.7 million tons in recycling capacity,

and 1 million tons of recycled material.

■ Unit Pricing

Some communities are using economic

incentives to encourage the public to reduce solid

waste sent to landfills. One of the most successful

economic incentive programs used to achieve

source reduction and recycling

is variable rate refuse

collection, or unit pricing.

Unit pricing programs,

sometimes referred to as payas-you-throw systems, have

one primary goal: customers

who dispose of more waste

pay more for the collection

and disposal service. There

are a few different types of unit pricing systems.

Most require residents to pay a per-bag fee for

refuse collection, and require the purchase of a

special bag or tag to place on bags or cans. Other

systems allow customers to choose between

different size containers, and charge more for

collection of larger containers. EPA’s role in the

further development of unit pricing systems has

been to study effective systems in use and to

disseminate documentation to inform other

communities about the environmental and

economic benefits that unit pricing may have for

their community. The number of communities

using unit pricing grew to more than 3,400 in

1995 and the population served has doubled

since 1990 to over 20 million today.

■ Full Cost Accounting for Municipal Solid

Waste

Full cost

accounting is

an additional

financial

management

tool that

communities

can use to

improve solid waste management. Full cost

accounting is an accounting approach that helps

local governments identify all direct and indirect

costs, as well as the past and future costs, of a

MSW management program. Full cost accounting

helps solid waste managers account for all

monetary costs of resources used or committed,

thereby providing the complete picture of solid

waste management costs on an ongoing basis. Full

cost accounting can help managers identify highcost activities and operations and seek ways to

make them more cost-effective.

EPA is continually studying these and other

programs in order to assist communities in

deciding whether one of these programs is right

for them. In addition to these initiatives, EPA has

published numerous guidance documents
II-11

Managing Solid Waste – RCRA Subtitle D SECTION II SECTION II

designed to educate both industry and the public

on the benefits of source reduction, to guide

communities in developing recycling programs,

and to educate students on the benefits and

elements of source reduction and recycling.

SUMMARY

Subtitle D addresses primarily nonhazardous

solid waste. The term solid waste includes

garbage, refuse, sludges, nonhazardous industrial

wastes, and other discarded materials. Solid waste

also includes hazardous wastes that are excluded

from Subtitle C regulation (e.g., household

hazardous waste).

Municipal solid waste, a subset of solid waste,

is waste generated by businesses and households.

EPA recommends an integrated, hierarchical

approach to managing municipal solid waste that

includes, in descending order of preference:

• Source reduction

• Recycling

• Combustion

• Landfilling.

As part of Subtitle D, EPA has developed

detailed technical criteria for solid waste disposal

facilities, including specific criteria for MSWLFs.

These criteria include specific provisions for

MSWLF:

• Location

• Operation

• Design

• Ground water monitoring

• Corrective action

• Closure and post-closure

• Financial assurance (i.e., responsibility).

EPA has helped develop and implement new

initiatives and programs that aid businesses, states,

local governments, and Native American tribes in

implementing effective solid waste management

programs. Focusing particularly on the

environmental and economic benefits of source

reduction and recycling, EPA fosters integrated

solid waste management in communities and

businesses. These initiatives include:

• Wastewise

• Jobs Through Recycling program

• Unit pricing

• Full cost accounting for municipal solid waste.