Appendix II

EPA SAYS ALL LANDFILLS LEAK, EVEN THOSE USING BEST AVAILABLE LINERS

Environmental Research Foundation

P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403

Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@rachel.org

Epa Says All Landfills Leak, Even Those Using Best Available Liners

People who are enthusiastic about garbage incinerators often fail to mention that every incinerator has a landfill associated with it. The ash left over from incineration needs to be landfilled, and the ash is toxic. Some engineers (especially those employed to promote garbage incinerators) try to argue that the toxic constituents of the ash will remain safely in the landfill "forever."

But this is a flawed view: the weight of evidence and opinion in the technical world does not agree with this argument. On the contrary, even the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says that all landfills will leak. The agency has published this opinion on many occasions in the FEDERAL REGISTER.

In the FEDERAL REGISTER Feb. 5, 1981, the EPA first stated its opinion that all landfills will eventually leak:

"There is good theoretical and empirical evidence that the hazardous constituents that are placed in land disposal facilities very likely will migrate from the facility into the broader environment. This may occur several years, even many decades, after placement of the waste in the facility, but data and scientific prediction indicate that, in most cases, even with the application of best available land disposal technology, it will occur eventually." [pg. 11128]

"Manmade permeable materials that might be used for liners or covers (e.g., membrane liners or other materials) are subject to eventual deterioration, and although this might not occur for 10, 20 or more years, it eventually occurs and, when it does, leachate will migrate out of the facility." [pg. 11128]

"Consequently, the regulation of hazardous waste land disposal facilities must proceed from the assumption that migration of hazardous wastes and their constituents and by-products from a land disposal facility will inevitably occur." [pg. 11129]

"Some have argued that liners are devices that provide a perpetual seal against any migration from a waste management unit. EPA has concluded that the more reasonable assumption, based on what is known about the pressures placed on liners over time, is that any liner will begin to leak eventually." [pgs. 32284-32285].

In the FEDERAL REGISTER May 26, 1981, pgs. 28314 through 28328), the EPA argued forcefully that all landfills will eventually leak. Another EPA quote:

"Many organic constituents are stable (degrade very slowly); other hazardous constituents (e.g., toxic metals) never degrade. Yet the existing technology for disposing of hazardous wastes on or in the land cannot confidently isolate these wastes from the environment forever.

"Since disposing of hazardous wastes in or on the land inevitable [inevitably?] results in the release of hazardous constituents to the environment at some time, any land disposal facility creates some risk." [pg. 28315]

Appendix III

The Gara Valley Environment Preservation Association has 10 questions that Armidale Dumaresq Council has failed to address with regard to locating a regional waste and rubbish dump on the Gara River:

Question 1: What was the background to the development of the list of possible waste dump sites that Council has considered? It is believed that the original list was closer to forty-two. On what basis did Armidale Dumaresq Council reject 41 sites so as to arrive at this site, adjacent to the Gara River as its preferred site?

Question 2: Why did Armidale Dumaresq Council not make available to the community all data relating to the selection of all sites and the reasons why all other sites have been rejected?

Question 3: In the light of the Gara Valley Environmental Preservation Association’s first-hand knowledge of the particular soils on-site, knowledge which contradicts the Site Assessment conclusions, we ask:

(a) What are the physical properties of clay at the site that is alleged to render it suitable for use in a landfill liner?

(b) What testing regime was used to test for these properties?

(c) How did these properties compare with those of clays from the other forty-one sites? Was this analysis even undertaken?

Question 4: Why did Council not undertake the gathering of equivalent data on all its listed sites as part of its formal site assessment process?

Question 5: Why did Council not make available to the community all data and plans relating to the choice of waste dump site and the subsequent facility to be built?

Question 6: What analysis has been undertaken by Armidale Dumaresq Council into alternative waste management technologies that might be used instead of a waste dump?

Question 7: Why did Council not explore the possibility of cooperation with other Councils in order to determine the best location for a shared facility?

Question 8: What kind of wastes will be put into the dump, will sorting be done and in what form will waste be taken to the site for dumping? What assurances have Council given that no toxic substances will be introduced into the dump?

Question 9: As the Guyra, Uralla, and Walcha Shires are all to use the waste dump, why has Council not chosen to site a new dump in a location that is better located for access from all 4 towns? Trucks from Guyra, Uralla and Walcha will have to travel through Armidale.

Question 10: Why has Council been unable to set out the grounds upon which it believes that the international opinion on the vulnerability of landfill sites to loss of leachate into the surrounding groundwater is wrong? If, on the other hand, it does not hold that opinion, then why has not Council not set out the grounds upon which it believes that the contamination and poisoning of the Gara River, Oxley Wild Rivers National Park and World Heritage Site is an acceptable price for the community and environment to pay?

Appendix IV

Extract from:

OXLEY WILD RIVERS NATIONAL PARK, CUNNAWARRA NATIONAL PARK AND GEORGES CREEK NATURE RESERVE DRAFT PLAN OF MANAGEMENT

NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service

August 2002

2.2 OBJECTIVES OF MANAGEMENT

World Heritage objectives

The primary purpose of management of a declared World Heritage property is, in accordance with Australia’s obligations under the World Heritage Convention, to identify, protect, conserve, present and transmit to future generations, the World Heritage values of the property. Australian World Heritage Management Principles, set out in regulations to the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, have been developed from these obligations, and these are given in Appendix 4.

These principles place an obligation on NPWS for long-term care and stewardship of Oxley Wild Rivers NP and other listed areas to ensure that their values are identified, protected, conserved, presented and, if necessary, rehabilitated, and that individual or cumulative actions do not degrade their values over time.

There are also specific principles regarding management planning, environmental impact assessment and public involvement in the management of World Heritage Areas.

Broad strategies to achieve the obligations of the World Heritage convention for the Central Eastern Rainforest Reserves of Australia are provided in the Strategic Overview (CERRA 2000).

5.2 CATCHMENT PROTECTION

Apart from some small tributaries, Kunderang Brook and much of the Georges Creek catchment, the headwaters of the Macleay River Catchment are located outside the planning area. Recent water quality monitoring has found poor water quality to be characteristic of streams such as the Gara, Wollomombi and Apsley Rivers on the tablelands upstream of Oxley Wild Rivers National Park.

These same rivers, however, were much cleaner downstream of the park, indicating that the relatively undisturbed environments of the park contributed to removal of excess nutrients. As well as excess nutrient levels, streams within the Macleay River system are often heavily laden with sediment from erosion of tableland agricultural and grazing land.

The New England Highway, Oxley Highway and Waterfall Way cross the headwaters of most of the major streams that flow into Oxley Wild Rivers National Park at points close to the park boundaries. A vehicle accident involving a chemical or fuel spill would pose a major threat to water quality.

The Catchment Management Act 1989 provides an umbrella framework to aim for, amongst other matters, cleaner water, less soil erosion, improved vegetation cover, the maintenance of ecological processes and a balanced and healthier environment. It also p provides a focus to balance conservation needs and development pressures and encourages a more aware and involved community. An important means of achieving these aims is the formation and support of catchment management boards at a local level. The planning area is within the area of the Mid North Coast Catchment Management Board.

Desired Outcomes

Strategies