 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
Advisory Committee Materials | Planning Commission | Board of Adjustment Files | Floodplain Maps
Solid Waste Management Plan
Blue Earth County is working in cooperation with other counties and private entities in the region to develop and continue an Integrated Solid Waste Management System. This System includes and encourages waste processing and re-use, and encourages land disposal only as a last alternative.
Solid Waste Management Plan Executive Summary
Solid Waste Management Plan Table of Contents
The entire Solid Waste Management Plan can be reviewed at Blue Earth County’s Environmental Services Department.
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. Project Background
Blue Earth County is located in South Central Minnesota. Blue Earth County is working in cooperation with other counties and private entities in the region to develop and continue the Integrated Solid Waste Management System contained in this update. This System includes and encourages waste processing and re-use, and encourages land disposal only as a last alternative.
Since the flow of waste occurs across state and county lines, regional cooperation and planning are key components of a successful solid waste program. Blue Earth County continues to make every effort to cooperate with other entities on solid waste issues. An example of this is the Regional Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Program housed at the Blue Earth County HHW Facility. Blue Earth County will continue to seek opportunities for regional cooperative ventures.
Federal and State rules and regulations affecting solid waste management in addition to technologies available are always subject to change. Although these changes may supply the answer to the nation’s waste management situation, careful consideration must be given to the fact that unproven technology may have associated risks not yet realized. Due to these potential changes occurring in solid waste management, it is important to incorporate a degree of flexibility in any plan.
B. Existing Conditions
This report details existing solid waste management procedures in Blue Earth County and recommends alternatives for the future. The County has historically relied on and supported the advancement of the private sector in solid waste management. The Minnesota Waste Management Act and State Committee on Recycling and the Environment (SCORE) legislation have given counties increased responsibilities for waste management, but funding provided by the State has not been commensurate with these increased responsibilities and requirements. Though costs associated with managing solid and hazardous waste have increased, the amount of money flowing to Blue Earth County from the SCORE program has actually decreased.
Solid waste collection in the County is a combination of commercial and individual services. All cities in Blue Earth County have private contracts with haulers to serve their communities. Other waste is either collected by commercial haulers, under direct agreement between the hauler and the generator, or self-hauled to a disposal site by individual waste generators.
There is one MSW sanitary landfill operating in Blue Earth County. The Ponderosa Landfill was purchased by Blue Earth County in 1996, and is currently operated by a private contractor. Part of the waste generated from within the County is currently managed through the Minnesota Waste Processing Company (MWPC) Transfer Station in Mankato. Waste collected at MWPC is then transported to the Newport Resource Recovery Facility and processed into refuse derived fuel for use at the Wilmarth NSP Power Plant in Mankato. Residuals from the processing are deposited in a separate, designated cell at the Ponderosa Landfill. All other waste generated within the County is disposed of at the Ponderosa Landfill or the Dickinson County Landfill in Iowa according to information gathered for the 1999 SCORE Report from haulers.
Recycling efforts in the study area have been a combination of public and private operations. Materials generally recycled are glass, corrugated cardboard, aluminum and steel/tin cans, small scrap metal items, #1 through #7 plastics, newsprint, magazines, mixed paper, and textiles. Communities, townships and private concerns arrange for their own collection and transportation of recyclables. Blue Earth County, under contract with Waste Management, provides the County Recycling Center. All of the residential recyclables and some of the commercial recyclables are brought to this facility. Blue Earth County also provided 18,000 bins to all cities that had implemented or agreed to implement curbside recycling programs for residents. This provided all residents covered by city collection contracts with a recycling bin.
According to the 1999 SCORE Report, 251.93 tons of solid waste are generated each day in Blue Earth County. Of this total, 145.18 tons are recycled; 51.76 tons go to an out of state landfill, 46.29 tons are sent to be processed; 5.1 tons are landfilled at the Ponderosa Landfill, and 3.6 tons are disposed of on site. In 1999, 66% of waste generated in Blue Earth County was recycled, including credits given for waste reduction and yard waste composting.
The existing solid waste management program is financed through the County budget. Yard waste composting is managed at the municipal level in some cities, and also at the County level through the County/SMC Compost site. Recycling collection is managed at the municipal level through hauler collection contracts and/or drop-off sites. Blue Earth County contracts with Waste Management to operate the County Recycling Center. The County also provides drop-off sites for recyclables at the Compost Facility, in Eagle Lake and in Pemberton. The following table projects the County budget for the next five years. These projections are rough estimates that are dependent on legislative mandates, changes in the economy, population changes, and other factors.
Anticipated Solid Waste Budgets
Table I-1| 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | |
| Blue Earth County S.W Budget | $521,013 | $534,038 | $547,389 | $561,073 | $575,100 | $589,478 |
C. Design Conditions
The Minnesota State Demographer’s Office estimates a population of 56,650 in the year 2010. Based on this population figure and the generation rates listed previously, a total generation of 256.97 tons per day of solid waste is estimated for the County in the design year.
The State Legislature has established waste abatement and recycling for non-metropolitan Minnesota Counties equaling thirty-five percent of the total generation rate. Blue Earth County consistently exceeds this requirement.
D. System Alternatives
In 1991, Blue Earth County contracted with the Solid Waste Management Consulting firm of Gershman, Brickner and Bratton, Inc. (GBB) to provide “An Integrated Solid Waste Management Program Implementation Strategy for Blue Earth County, Minnesota.” This document is included in this Plan in Appendix L.
Construction, operation and maintenance, and equivalent annual costs have been estimated for each system alternative. These cost estimates are presented in detail in Appendix L.
The monetary cost estimates for all alternatives indicate that energy recovery costs are twice as expensive as the costs to landfill the waste unless operating facilities already exist. The costs are significantly higher because electrical co-generation equipment must be added to the incinerator for the energy produced to be used on a year round basis. Also, estimated costs could increase substantially if additional air pollution control equipment were required for the facility or if the ash is determined to be hazardous and must be shipped out of state for disposal. However, landfills also become more expensive as regulations continue to become more strict and when other environmental risks are factored into the system costs.
Municipal solid waste (MSW) composting facilities are generally less costly to construct and operate than incineration facilities for similar capacities but more expensive than landfilling. Their increased usage in the state may result in increased regulation, additional process controls requirements, and related expenses. MSW composting systems have a major advantage in that the system does not require high technology equipment and low technology equipment is readily available and adaptable. Though the Prairieland Composting Facility was included in the previous Solid Waste Management Plan for Blue Earth County, it is not included as a preferred facility in this plan due to lack of capacity at the Facility. However, should conditions change that would make it possible for MSW from Blue Earth County to be processed at Prairieland, Blue Earth County would consider the use of this facility as an option.
Proper site selection, design, construction, and operation can mitigate some of the potential environmental impacts for either of these resource recovery alternatives. However, certain risks remain associated with either type of facility.
Sanitary landfilling has the potential to have an adverse affect on groundwater quality because leachate will be formed with the potential of reaching the groundwater table. A composite clay and polyethylene liner with a leachate collection system will be required at any landfill utilized by the County to minimize the possibility of leachate seeping through to the groundwater. Existing landfills or new sites are required to meet the latest EPA and MPCA regulations requiring leachate collection and composite liner. A landfill is also necessary to handle residuals and non-processables from an energy or resource recovery facility.
Recycling and yard waste composting, which pose little or no risk to the environment, are integral components of the final solid waste system for Blue Earth County. Recycling and yard waste composting improve the quality of the waste stream prior to other processing systems and may improve the refuse derived fuel (RDF). Recycling programs generally do not generate sufficient income from the sale of recovered materials to be self supporting, and usually require additional subsidies.
Governmental units must realize that there are long term liabilities associated with solid waste management. The risk of environmental contamination from existing waste management practices varies from immediate risk to the contamination being identified decades from now. The least risk will be incurred when the majority of the waste stream is either reused or rendered inert. Residuals that can contaminate air, soil, surface water or groundwater need to be minimized to reduce long term liabilities. Logically, the smaller the volume of waste, residuals, or ash landfilled, the lower the municipality’s liability exposure. Future legislation may address this issue.
Any alternative will require packer truck traffic in and out of the facility. Noise from packer truck traffic is difficult to mitigate except by proper site selection.
Aesthetically, the energy recovery alternatives should be somewhat more acceptable since the major operation occurs in a building and less volume of material is landfilled. Energy recovery alternatives generally have less impact on land use, because less area is needed than for a sanitary landfill and the energy recovery plant can often be built in an industrial zone. An ash mono-fill is required with an energy recovery alternative to dispose of ash and non-burnables can be placed in a sanitary landfill. However, the long term effect that solid waste combustion may have on air quality is not completely known. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is currently taking a hard line on issuing additional air quality permits for new facilities, and requires existing facilities to have extensive air pollution control equipment and monitoring systems in place.
MSW composting alternatives generally have less impact on land use, because less area is needed than for a sanitary landfill and the processing facilities can often be built in an industrial zone. Odors do create potential problems at MSW composting facilities and markets may be difficult to establish.
If Blue Earth County solid waste were to be transported a long distance to a resource recovery facility, a transfer station may be economically viable; however, transportation of waste to a facility out of the area would add additional costs.
In addition to recycling and household hazardous waste collection facilities, a sanitary landfill, demolition landfill, ash mono-fill, RDF waste-to-energy facility and mixed municipal solid waste composting facility exist in Blue Earth County, or the surrounding counties.
Over a two year time period, the Blue Earth County Environmental Services Advisory Committee and Environmental Services staff evaluated a variety of resource recovery and waste processing alternatives. The results of this assessment are included in Section III and form the basis of many of the proposed recommendations. Appendix G contain the actual procedures and documentation used during the evaluation. There were also a number of other documents used to assess resource recovery alternatives. Part IV of the GBB report An Integrated Solid Waste Management Program Implementation Strategy for Blue Earth County, Minnesota included in Appendix L is a review of solid waste management alternatives. Appendix H includes the Resource Recovery/Land Disposal Cost Analysis.
E. Recommended Plan
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requires all counties to assess the feasibility of resource recovery when completing five year solid waste management plans.
It is recommended that Blue Earth County continue to pursue the following state solid waste management hierarchy to the extent possible emphasizing the continued utilization of existing and future local options:
- “Pursuant to the Statutes of State of Minnesota, Chapter 115A.02, section (b). The waste management goal of the state is to foster an integrated waste management system in a manner appropriate to the characteristics of the waste stream. The following waste management practices are in order of preference:
- 1) Waste reduction and reuse;
- 2) Waste recycling;
- 3) Composting of yard waste and food waste;
- 4) Resource recovery through mixed municipal solid waste composting or incineration;
- and
- 5) Land disposal.”
- In 1999 the “land disposal” component of the State’s hierarchy was revised further:
- “5) Land disposal which produces no measurable methane gas or which involves the retrieval of methane gas as a fuel for the production of energy to be used on-site or for sale; and
- 6) Land disposal which produces measurable methane and which does not involve the retrieval of methane gas as a fuel for the production of energy to be used on-site or for sale.”
State law requires the development of county solid waste reduction, recycling, yard waste management and household hazardous waste programs. In addition, state law requires that Greater Minnesota counties consider and, where feasible and prudent, implement programs to process mixed municipal solid waste by solid waste composting, incineration or other mixed waste processing techniques.
As a part of Blue Earth County’s commitment to an alternative solution to the disposal of solid waste, the County should continue to generally endorse the current public/private enterprise system in place which utilizes and maximizes the existing resource recovery facilities.
This system includes the Minnesota Waste Processing Company (MWPC) Transfer Station located in Mankato, where the waste stream is accumulated and then transported to the Washington/Ramsey Resource Recovery Facility in Newport. Upon receiving the waste from the transfer station, it is processed to produce refuse derived fuel (RDF) from the burnable fraction. The RDF is then transported to the Wilmarth Power Generating Plant in Mankato for use in the production of electricity. The remaining waste (approximately 10%) are residuals from the processing and are landfilled in a separate lined cell at the Ponderosa Landfill near Mankato dedicated to the system.
The ash generated from the Wilmarth Facility is disposed of in a lined mono-fill landfill adjacent to the Ponderosa Landfill located in Blue Earth County and owned by Northern States Power (NSP).
When this system began on October 1, 1993, it included the Prairieland MSW Compost Facility; however, there is no longer capacity at this facility for waste generated in Blue Earth County.
Most residential waste from the public entities within Blue Earth County is under contract to be brought into this system. Where there is no contract, public entity waste is brought to the system without price structure guarantees made to those with contracts.
Because these technologies and facilities are currently available, operational and viable, and because this is a mature system that has met the stated goals, it is recommended that Blue Earth County continue to endorse this system as the primary disposal option for waste generated in its jurisdiction. If future agreements cannot be reached for the use of these facilities, Blue Earth County should support other similar resource recovery technologies, because the State of Minnesota has determined that the processing of waste is an environmentally preferred management method and ranked it above the landfilling of unprocessed waste on the State’s hierarchy as provided in Minnesota Statute 115A.02, section (b).
Therefore, Blue Earth County’s goal is to continue to support resource recovery technologies that have the potential to realize at least an 85% volume reduction in the solid waste processed. It is Blue Earth County’s intent in this recommendation to allow municipalities, upon prior consent of the County, to contract with other firms who offer an integrated solid waste management system with waste processing consistent with the implementation of this plan. Other disposal options may, however, be utilized consistent with the State of Minnesota’s waste management hierarchy.
Blue Earth County also has a progressive residential and commercial recycling program. The quantity of waste recycled is expected to continue to exceed State goals for Greater Minnesota counties over the next 10 years through existing and proposed residential and commercial recycling programs. Each of the 11 cities in Blue Earth County has a mature and efficient curbside recycling program. The success seen in these programs is due in part to the continuing educational efforts by city management to ensure residents are informed of any changes, and keep a constant reminder to recycle in front of residents. Through these efforts, recycling rates remain strong in Blue Earth County, and residents are able to reduce disposal rates for their garbage as much as possible. The proposed system includes County-wide waste abatement programs, public education programs and the continued use of a nearby landfill for disposal of residuals.
Currently Blue Earth County has a recycling contract with Waste Management, Inc. It is recommended that to increase and maximize opportunities to recycle, Blue Earth County should continue to explore all options for the providing these services. Although all services have been provided by a private contractor, Blue Earth County should also explore other future options as well, such as joint governmental ownership or operation of a recycling facility.
For instance, Blue Earth County should examine the potential for building and operating a County-owned Recycling Center. Another option to be explored is the potential to partner with the neighboring Tri-Counties (Nicollet, Sibley and LeSueur), or the City of North Mankato to continue discussions on mutual recycling opportunities.
It is recommended that Blue Earth County and other counties involved in resource recovery petition the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance (OEA) to be allowed to include resource recovery numbers, or a portion thereof, as a part of our recycling numbers on the annual State required SCORE reports. Counties that implement resource recovery as part of their waste abatement program should receive additional credit beyond counties that rely solely on land disposal. It is further recommended that Blue Earth County petition the OEA to receive increased SCORE funding, based on County’s support of the State solid waste hierarchy and the fact that Blue Earth County actively supports resource recovery, while most Minnesota counties are not. This would be consistent with and support the Minnesota Solid Waste Policy Report (January 2000). The policy initiative in Section IV is to eliminate the landfilling of unprocessed MSW by 2008.
It is recommended that Blue Earth County and the OEA continue to pursue all avenues available to get NSP to remove the $16+ burn incentive from RDF being utilized at the Wilmarth Power Plant in Mankato.
It is recommended that Blue Earth County continue to pursue enactment of federal flow control legislation through the Minnesota federal delegation.
F. Plan Implementation
Chapter IV of this plan discusses implementation considerations, such as institutional arrangements and financing, public participation, and a historical implementation schedule. Institutional arrangements include inter-governmental agreements, ownership and operation decisions, site acquisition, market commitments, intra-state waste flow commitments, program management, and coordination with the private solid waste industry. Financing options and methods of generating revenue (property taxes and user charges) are also discussed in both Chapters III and IV. A continued public education program is recommended because the public must realize the need for and support improvements to the solid waste system.
One of the key components of plan implementation is the education of residents on both the costs and reasons for the solid waste management system. If new recycling or yard waste composting programs are adopted without education, low levels of participation by residents could stifle implementation momentum or raise questions of economic viability. If tipping fees/hauling fees are indiscriminately raised, problems with open dumping could result. Blue Earth County has taken the first steps by joining efforts with an area wide recycling contract, a yard waste composting facility, public education program and household hazardous waste program.
This plan has been prepared in accordance with the Minnesota Waste Management Act of 1980 and subsequent amendments of the Act through 1999 by the Blue Earth County Environmental Services staff. The Waste Management Act’s purpose is to provide a framework for County solid waste planning efforts and to emphasize resource recovery and coordinated and orderly waste management.
The Minnesota OEA will review and approve the County solid waste management plan upon its completion. The State’s current rules also require that this plan be updated and reviewed every five years. This process is explained in section IV of this plan.
BLUE EARTH COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
| PAGE | |||
| Table of Contents | i | ||
| List of Tables | iii | ||
| List of Figures | iv | ||
| List Of Common Environmental Acronyms | v | ||
| I. | Executive Summary | ||
| A. | Project Background | I- 1 | |
| B. | Existing Conditions | I- 1 | |
| C. | Design Conditions | I- 2 | |
| D. | System Alternatives | I- 3 | |
| E. | Recommended Plan | I- 5 | |
| F. | Plan Implementation | I- 8 | |
| II. | Background Information | ||
| A. | Background Information | II- 1 | |
| B. | Waste Collection and Generation Information | II- 8 | |
| III. | Resource Recovery and Disposal System Analysis | ||
| A. | Introduction | III- 1 | |
| B. | Historical Review and Evaluation of Resource Recovery Options | III- 4 | |
| C. | Discussion of Available Technologies and Existing Facilities | III-11 | |
| D. | Waste Assurance Options | III-43 | |
| E. | State Development of an Integrated Waste Management System | III-49 | |
| IV. | Solid Waste System Evaluation and Five Year Implementation Plan | ||
| A. | Implementation Considerations of Recommended Plan | IV- 1 | |
| B. | Waste Reduction Program | IV- 3 | |
| C. | Waste Education Programs | IV- 7 | |
| D. | Recycling Programs | IV-10 | |
| E. | Yard Waste Management Program | IV-19 | |
| F. | MSW Composting Facilities | IV-23 | |
| G. | Waste-to-Energy Facility | IV-28 | |
| H. | MSW Land Disposal Facilities | IV-30 | |
| I. | Transfer Facilities | IV-33 | |
| J. | Demolition Debris Management | IV-36 | |
| K. | Waste Facility Siting Program | IV-38 | |
| L. | Household Hazardous Waste (HHW) Management | IV-46 | |
| Electronics Management | IV-50 | ||
| N. | Waste Tire Management | IV-52 | |
| O. | Major Appliance Management | IV-55 | |
| P. | Used Oil Management | IV-58 | |
| Q. | Battery Management | IV-60 | |
| R. | Ordinance and Licensing | IV-62 | |
| S. | Solid Waste Staff/Advisory Committee | IV-64 | |
| T. | Solid Waste Program Funding/Budget | IV-66 | |
| U. | Numeric Goal/Volume Table Development | IV-71 | |
| V. | Mitigation of Environmental Risks | IV-77 | |
| W. | Plan Development/Documentation and Public Participation | IV-79 | |
| X. | Implementation Schedule | IV-84 | |
| Contingency Plans | IV-86 | ||
| Z. | Plan Amendments and Updates | IV-87 | |
| APPENDICES | |||
| A. | Solid Waste Ordinance | ||
| B. | Solid Waste Management Fee Ordinance | ||
| C. | Summary of Known Illegal Dumps | ||
| D. | Major Industry | ||
| E. | Licensed Waste Tire Transporters and Recyclers | ||
| F. | List of Appliance Processors Handling Refrigerants | ||
| G. | Environmental Services Advisory Committee Alternatives Recommendation and Review Documents | ||
| H. | MSW Composition Study | ||
| I. | Environmental Risk Discussion (ERD) of Solid Waste Management Systems | ||
| J. | Evaluation of Ponderosa Landfill for Possible Purchase | ||
| K. | Rural Recycling Committee Recommendations | ||
| L. | An Integrated Solid Waste Management Program Implementation Strategy for Blue Earth County, by Gershman, Brickner and Bratton (GBB) | ||
| M. | Agreement for Waste Processing Among, Minnesota Waste Processing, NRG Energy, Inc. and the Counties of Blue Earth, Nicollet, Sibley and LeSueur | ||
| N. | Blue Earth County/MPCA Household Hazardous Waste Contract | ||
| O. | Resolution to Approve and Adopt the Blue Earth County Updated Solid Waste Management Plan | ||
LIST OF TABLES
| PAGE | ||
| Table I-1 | Anticipated Solid Waste Budgets | I- 2 |
| Table II-1 | Population in Blue Earth County Municipalities | II- 1 |
| Table II-2 | Population of Blue Earth County Townships | II- 2 |
| Table II-3 | Percentage of County Population | II- 4 |
| Table II-4 | Mankato and North Mankato Population | II- 4 |
| Table II-5 | Blue Earth County Population Projections | II- 5 |
| Table II-6 | Median Income | II- 5 |
| Table II-7 | Blue Earth County Land Use and Cover | II- 7 |
| Table II-8 | Blue Earth County MSW Disposal | II- 9 |
| Table II-9 | Blue Earth County Licensed Haulers | II-10 |
| Table II-10 | Municipal Refuse Collection Programs | II-11 |
| Table II-11 | Ponderosa Landfill Tipping Fees | II-12 |
| Table II-12 | Documented 1999 Recyclables Collected from Blue Earth County | II-14 |
| Table II-13 | 1999 Blue Earth County Special Waste Generation | II-15 |
| Table II-14 | 1999 Disposal Practices of Residential and Commercial Waste Generators in Blue Earth County | II-16 |
| Table II-15 | Blue Earth County SCORE History Summary | II-17 |
| Table II-16 | Demolition Debris Disposal | II-17 |
| Table III-1 | Wilmarth Fuel Usage/Ash Disposal | III-21 |
| Table III-2 | Ponderosa Landfill Waste Disposal History | III-33 |
| Table III-3 | 1998 Blue Earth County Recycling, Waste Processing and Landfilling | III-43 |
| Table IV-1 | Recyclables Collected in Blue Earth County | IV-15 |
| Table IV-2 | Blue Earth County Waste Deposited in Landfills | IV-30 |
| Table IV-3 | Acceptable New Construction Material SMC Demfill | IV-36 |
| Table IV-4 | Landfill Siting Criteria | IV-44 |
| Table IV-5 | Blue Earth County Solid Waste Management Budget | IV-68 |
| Table IV-6 | Blue Earth County Goal/Volume Table | IV-72 |
LIST OF FIGURES
| PAGE | ||
| Figure II-1 | Population Map of Blue Earth County Cities and Townships | II- 3 |
| Figure III-1 | Solid Waste Alternatives | III- 3 |
| Figure III-2 | Ramsey/Washington Resource Recovery Facility Processing Diagram | III-15 |
| Figure III-3 | Schematic of Prairieland MSW Composting | III-27 |
| Figure III-4 | Ponderosa Landfill - Existing Conditions | III-36 |
| Figure III-5 | Ponderosa Landfill - Phases 1, 2 and 3 | III-37 |
LIST OF COMMON ENVIRONMENTAL ACRONYMS
| ANSI | American National Standards Institute |
| ASTM | American Society for Testing and Materials |
| AU | Animal Unit |
| AWMA | Air and Waste Management Association |
| BACT | Best Available Control Technology |
| BADCT | Best Available Demonstrated Control Technology |
| BART | Best Available Retrofit Technology |
| BEC | Blue Earth County |
| BECES | Blue Earth County Environmental Services Department |
| BERBI | Blue Earth River Basin Initiative |
| BMP | Best Management Practices |
| BOD | Biological Oxygen Demand |
| BWSR | (Minnesota) Board of Water and Soil Resources |
| CAA | Clean Air Act |
| CERCLA | Comprehensive Env. Response, Compensation and Liability Act (Superfund) |
| CFC’s | Chloroflouro hydrocarbons |
| CFR | Code of Federal Regulations |
| COD | Chemical Oxygen Demand |
| CPI | Consumer Price Index |
| CREP | Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program |
| CRP | Conservation Reserve Program |
| CSAH | County State Aid Highway |
| CWA | Clean Water Act |
| CWI | County Well Index |
| CWP | Clean Water Partnership |
| DNR | (Minnesota) Department of Natural Resources |
| DO | Dissolved Oxygen |
| DTED | (Minnesota) Department of Trade and Economic Development |
| EAW | Environmental Assessment Worksheet |
| EIS | Environmental Impact Statement |
| EPA | (United States) Environmental Protection Agency |
| EQB | (Minnesota) Environmental Quality Board |
| ERD | Environmental Risk Discussion |
| ESA | Endangered Species Act |
| ESAC | (Blue Earth County) Environmental Services Advisory Committee |
| ESP | Electrostatic Precipitator |
| F&VD | Foth and Van Dyke (consultants) |
| FEMA | Federal Emergency Management Agency |
| FIFRA | Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act |
| FSA | (US Department of Agriculture) Farm Services Administration |
| FTE | Full Time Equivalent (employee) |
| GBB | Gerschman, Brickner & Bratton, Inc. (consultant) |
| GIS | Geographic Information System |
| GPS | Global Positioning System |
| HDPE | High density polyethylene |
| HHW | Household Hazardous Waste |
| HW | Hazardous Waste |
| I&M | Inspection and Maintenance |
| ISTS | Individual Sewage Treatment System |
| LC50 | Median Lethal Concentration |
| LD50 | Median Lethal Dose |
| LEC | Lower Explosive Limit |
| LGU | Local Governmental Unit |
| LUST | Leaking Underground Storage Tank |
| MAE | Mankato Area Environmentalists |
| MCL | Maximum Contaminant Level |
| MDA | Minnesota Department of Agriculture |
| MDH | Minnesota Department of Health |
| MGS | Minnesota Geological Survey |
| MLCL | Maximum Leachable Control Limits |
| MMSW | Mixed Municipal Solid Waste |
| MNDOT | Minnesota Department of Transportation |
| MPCA | Minnesota Pollution Control Agency |
| MRAP | Minnesota River Assessment Project |
| MRBJPB | Minnesota River Basin Joint Powers Board |
| MRF | Materials Recovery Facility |
| MSDS | Material Safety Data Sheet |
| MSW | Municipal Solid Waste |
| MWPC | Minnesota Waste Processing Company |
| NAAQS | National Ambient Air Quality Standards |
| NBS | National Bureau of Standards |
| NESHAP | National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants |
| NIMBY | “Not In My Back Yard” Syndrome |
| NIOSH | National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health |
| NPDES | National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System |
| NPL | National Priorities List (Superfund) |
| NRCS | (US Department of Agriculture) National Resources Conservation Service |
| NSP | Northern States Power Company |
| NSPS | New Source Performance Standards |
| NWWA | National Water Well Association |
| OEA | (Minnesota) Office of Environmental Assistance |
| ONP | Old Newspaper |
| OSHA | Occupational Safety and Health Administration |
| OSWER | (Environmental Protection Agency) Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response |
| PCB | Polychlorinated biphenyls |
| PETE | Polyethylene terephthalate |
| ppb | parts per billion |
| ppm | parts per million |
| PRP | Potentially Responsible Party (Superfund) |
| PSA | Public Service Announcement |
| PVC | Polyvinyl chloride |
| QA/QC | Quality Assurance/Quality Control |
| RACT | Reasonably Available Control Technology |
| RCRA | Resource Conservation and Recovery Act |
| RDF | Refuse Derived Fuel |
| RFP | Request for Proposals |
| RIM | Reinvest in Minnesota |
| SARA | Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act |
| SCORE | (Governors) Select Committee on Recycling and the Environment |
| SCS | Soil Conservation Service |
| SDWA | Safe Drinking Water Act |
| SLF | Sanitary Landfill |
| SMC | Southern Minnesota Construction Company |
| STEL | Short-Term Exposure Limit |
| SWCD | (Blue Earth County) Soil and Water Conservation District |
| TCLP | Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure |
| TDS | Total Dissolved Solids |
| TLV | Threshold Limit Value |
| TOD | Total Oxygen Demand |
| TSCA | Toxic Substances Control Act |
| TSDF | Treatment, Storage, Disposal Facility |
| TSP | Total Suspended Particulates |
| TSS | Total Suspended Solids |
| USDA | United States Department of Agriculture |
| USGS | United States Geological Survey |
| UST | Underground Storage Tank |
| VOC | Volatile Organic Compounds |
| VSQG | Very Small Quantity Generator |
| WCA | (Minnesota) Wetland Conservation Act |
| WRC | (University of Minnesota - Mankato) Water Resources Center |
