    [From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

                                                  L4 (-4
      Q

                       C01"t' STPL ZO.NIE
                       INFORMIATIOIN CENTER

      4=

                        Levs protect our earth

      fl -

                        NEW JERSEY

                                    AL PROTECTION
         DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT

           OFFICE OF COASTAL ZONE    MANAGEMENT

        TD
        795
        H47
      "I 4i

        1976

                                     COASTAL Z0NE
                                      INFORMATI0N  CENTER

                                 SOLID WASTE AND THE COAST

                                     A Staff Working Paper

                                        Kenneth Hess

                                                            U.S.DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
                                                            COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
                                                            2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
                                                            CHARLESTON SC 29405-2413

                                       November, 1976

                                                              Property of CSC Library

                               New Jersey Department of  Environmental Protection
                                 Division of Marine Services
                              Office of Coastal Zone Management
                                       P. 0. Box 1889
                                Trenton, New Jersey    08625

            ..Note: This.staff working paper is one of a series. of    Issue and

             Policy Alternative-Papers presdnting facts, analyses,    and

             conceptual policy alternatives on coastal resources and coastal

             land and water uses. *The purpose of this draft document is to

             stimulate discussion and comments that will assist preparation

             of the management program for the New Jersey coastal zone.

             This-report was prepared in part with financial assistance      from

             federal  Coastal Zone Management Act, P.L. 92-583.

             Comments, criticism, additions, and suggestiDns are welcome and

             should be addressed to the   New Jersey Office of Coastal Zone

             Management.

                                             CONTENTS

                                                                              Page

                  INTRODUCTION  . . . . . . . . . . . .

            I.    ISSUE    o 9 a o e 9 a e                                     3
            II.   POLICY ALTERNATIVES     . . . . . . . .                      5
            III.  WASTE DISPOSAL CHARACTERISTICS     . . . . .                 8
            IV.   ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .          . . . .    12

                                            APPENDICES

            A .  -.,Regional Reports . . .  o o  . . . . . . .        . . .    19

                  1.    Northeast. .      . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..       20
                  2.    North Shore  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         23
                  3.    Central  Shore ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         26
                  4.    South Shore  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         28
                  5. .,Delaware Bay                                            30
                  6.    Delaware River    Waterfront . . . . . . . . . .       32

            B.    Management Tools   . . . . . . . . . . . . . .               34
            C.    Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .           39
            D.    Definitions   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .          57
            E.    Sources  . . . . .      . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .        64

                                         INTRODUCTION

                   New Jersey's dense development and growing population generates.

             a considerable quantity of solid waste. The coastal area currently

             provides sites for the disposal of both coastal and non-coastal

             generated wastes. The amount of land suitable for waste disposall

             however, is diminishing, necessitating the consideration of new

             approaches. An additional problem is the extensive damage to

             groundwater supplies caused by the dumping of soluble chemical

             wastes into on-site disposal facilities.

                   This paper is intended to further debate on important solid

             waste disposal issues. The first two sections briefly define

             these issues in the coastal area and then present alternative

             policies which could be part of the coastal zone management program

             in New Jersey.

                   Section III describes current waste disposal practices and

             problems in New Jersey's coastal area.

                   Section IV analyzes the issues mentioned in Section I in

             the  light of existing and potential disposal methods.

                   Five appendices conclude the paper. First, the six coastal

             zone  regions are examined individually and problems specific to

             the region are highlighted. The second appendix briefly discusses

             possible management tools which could be used to implement waste

             disposal policies.

          Ib

                   Appendix C contains ten tables which provide supporting data

              on solid and liquid waste disposal, differentiated between the

              coastal plain counties and the northeast counties. Appendix D

              defines the various solid waste types discussed in the text and

              in the tables. The final appendix provides the sources used to

              support the text.

                                            -2-

                  -ISSUE

                       Solid waste @isposal raises  two basic issues. First, the

                  number of landfill sites capable  of handling the increasing

                  volume of solid waste is declining. Second, the disposal of

                  chemical wastes in landfills is damaging groundwater supplies,

                  particularly in the coastal plain. Both of these issues

                  suggest that new solid waste  disposal methods and attitudes may

                  become necessary in future years.

                       Though the problem associated with the lack o-f suitable

                  landfill sites is most critical in the northeastern counties,

                  it is becoming increasingly pressing in the coastal zone

                  and the rest of the state as well. Although ample open land is

                  still available in coastal counties, only a limited portion of

                  this land is actually suitable for solid waste disposal. This

                  is due to a"variety of factors, including incompatibility with

                  the physical environment, incompatibility with existing land

                  uses, and the failure of landfilling practices to achieve

                  environmental and health acceptability.

                       The shortage of suitable landfill sites can lead to other

                  problems which need analysis: the encroachment of waste

                  disposal sites into unsuitable areas or increased costs

                  resulting from the hauling of wastes to appropriate disposal

                  sites.

                         Obviously, all wastes must be disposed*of   somewhere.

                    Economic factors could cause continuation of current methods

                    resulting in continued landfilling of unsuitable areas. Such

                    action, which would create environmental and health hazards,

                    could be a necessary alternative, unless general changes in the

                    methods of disposal become accepted

                         The other problem related to lack of suitable land for

                    landfilling relates to cost. Since the cost of hauling

                    wastes from the collection point to the disposal site is

                    high, landfill sites relatively close to population centers may

                    be economically desirable from a municipal point of view. The

                    lack of suitable land is greatest near these population cen-

                    ters, however, so landfills will be pushed increasingly further

                    away -into more rural areas. It is likely that the urbanized

                    areas of Camden and Trenton and the rapidly developing eastern

                    New Jersey shoreline will soon experience this problem.

                         The second major solid waste issue is the spilling

                    and disposal of liquid chemical wastes in the coastal zone.

                    Such wastes, which may be inadequately treated or have a

                    tendency to leak or spill onto the ground, are particularly

                    damaging to groundwater supplies because they are often soluble

                    in water and thus are leached downward through   the soil  to

                    the groundwater table. Chemical waste generation and dis-

                    posal is particularly high in Camden and Gloucester Counties

                    where-the majority of the chemical manufacturing plants in

                    the coastal zone are located. Middlesex, Atlantic, and Salem

                    Counties also receive large amounts of chemicalwastes from

                    other coastal counties and areas outside the coastal zone-.

                                              -4-

                   POLICY ALTERNATIVES

                   1.   Sanitary landfill sites could be limited to those areas

                        which are environmentally and socially suitable. Criteria

                        would be developed in order to identify suitable areas.

                        Such criteria would include soil suitability, groundwater

                        level, topography, proximity to surface waters, proximity

                        to major transportation routes, proximity to population

                        centers, and compatibility with adjacent land uses.

                        This designation of criteria would be done separately for

                        each'category of solid waste.

                   2.   The amount and type of solid waste which would be accepted

                        for landfill disposal in coastal counties each year

                        could be limited. The ceiling level placed on disposal in

                        each county would be based on the amount of land identi-

                        fied as being suitable for landfilling. This policy would

                        tend to reduce the amount of solid waste which would be

                        accepted from outside the coastal region as well.

                   3.   A more regionalized approach could be adopted for com-
                        batting solid waste problems. Though it is largely

                        the local governments which will be experiencing the

                        problem of lack of suitable land for landfilling, the

                        generation and flow of wastes is a regional phenomenon.

                        Thus, a regional solid waste management system would be

                        better able to coordinate all collection, transfer and

                        disposal activities.

                     4.   A coordinated system of transferring the wastes from

                          points of collection to disposal sites could be insti-

                          tuted. Such a system would tend to.reduce municipal costs

                          of disposal but may require some sort of state financial

                          assistance. This procedure would be of particular benefit

                          to those municipalities required to dispose their wastes

                          in other counties having greater landfill capacities.

                     5.   The increased use of shredding, baling, and other methods

                          of greater volume reduction of wastes could be encouraged.

                          Maint:enance of such methods would be the responsibility

                          of each of the municipalities using the facility, with
                         -possibly, some s;rt of state financial assistance. The

                          large number of municipalities using each facility would

                          minimize individual costs.

                     6.   Industries in the coastal zone could be encouraged to

                          treat, process and reuse as much of their wastes as

                          is economically feasible. Guidelines would be issued by

                          the Department of Environmental Protection in order to

                          provide industries with technological and economic develop-

                          ments relating to resource recovery and recycling.

                     7.   Citizens in the coastal zone could be encouraged to

                          separate and sort their wastes in the home. This front-

                          end separation would tend to reduce costs involved in

                          recycling materials, resulting in the increased feasi-

                          bility of this form of waste reduction. Information

                        on recycling and existing solid waste problems would

                        be issued by the Department of Environmental Protection

                        in order to educate the general public.

                   8.   Methods of preventing severe environmental degradation

                        by landfilling could be adopted and enforced. In order

                        to eliminate environmental and health hazards associated

                        with landfills, existing regulations would require broad-

                        ened inspection and enforcement procedures of landfill

                        sites.

                   9.   No special consideration could be given to the determin-

                        ation of suitable landfilling sites and methods of waste

                        disposal. Such issues have traditionally been the respons-
                        ibilities of the individual municipalities, although

                        recent legislation has established county solid waste

                        management districts. There is a substantial amount of

                        legislation which already exists in order to regulate

                        municipal and private waste disposal practices. This

                        policy assumes that alleviation of the solid waste problem

                        can be adequately achieved at a lower government level

                        (i.e. municipal and/or county). These practices often

                        stress economics above other considerations.

                                            -7-

                III. WASTE DISPOSAL CHARACTERISTICS

                          The amount of solid waste generated is highly dependent

                     on population, commercial, industrial, agricultural activity,

                     and other factors. In New Jersey, these factors combine

                     to produce a significant amount of solid waste.

                          Most per capita estimates for domestic waste production

                     for New Jersey fall between 3.5 and 4.5 pounds per day.

                     The domestic wastes are largely composed of paper products,

                     plastics, glass, lawn substances, metals and food wastes.

                     Though the more-densely populated northeastern counties com-

                     prised more than half of the state's domestic solid waste

                     generation in 1968, the rapidly-growing southern coasta!l

                     counties are increasing their proportions of the state total.

                          Commercial activity has been steadily increasing over

                     the years in New Jersey, as a whole, and in each of the coastal

                     counties, leading to significant accumulations of commercial

                     wastes. Wastes produced from commercial activity are basically

                     the same as domestic wastes. An added component is provided

                     by health-related institutions which generate pathological

                     wastes.

                          Less than 35 percent of the state's industrial activity

                     occurs in the eleven coastal counties. Much of ihe industrial

                     wastes which are disposed in these counties, however, are

                                               8-

                    transported from Northern New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New York,

                    Delaware and other areas. In contrast, few wastes are trans-

                    ported out of the coastal area.

                        Major state industries include chemical manufacturing,

                    plastics, apparel, food products and textiles. The wastes

                    produced by industrial activity vary depending on the type

                    of industry.

                         Agricultural wastes have not yet proven to be a major

                    solid waste problem in New Jersey due to the frequency of

                    on-site disposal. However, the problem is likely to grow

                    as expansion of residential development onto agricultural

                    lands precludes continuation of these disposal techniques

                    which can be unsanitary and odor-producing. In addition,

                    new technological developments may tend to produce more con-

                    centrated crops and animal-grazing, thereby concentrating

                    the resultant.wastes as well. The principal wastes in the

                    state attributed to agriculture are animal manure, orchard

                    prunings, crop residues, animal carcasses, and greenhouse

                    wastes.

                         Other miscellaneous wastes include street litter, dis-

                    carded auto bodies, sewage sludge, oils,'tires, hazardous

                    wastes, and construction-demolition materials. This latter

                    type of waste produced from con struction activities has often

                    been illegally used as a filling material in wetlands areas,'
                    though the amount of land reclaimed each year is minimal.

                      Most of this disposal in the wetlands has been eliminated

                      as a result of the Wetlands Act of 1970, but small, isolated

                      instances do still exist.

                           The major method oi solid waste disposal used in New

                      Jersey is the sanitary landfill. These landfills vary through-

                      out the state in si-ze and types of waste accepted. Generally,.

                      the landfills are located in undeveloped land areas outside of

                      the higher density urban and suburban areas which they ser-

                      vice. Since the transport of solid wastes is one of the most

                      costly asl5ects of solid waste systems, landfills are usually

                      located within easy access to the population centers.

                           Landfills in New Jersey can be either privately or pub-

                      licly owned. Most are used to dispose of wastes generated

                      elsewhere though some collect on-site generated wastes.

                      Landfills which accept refuse for a fee from municipalities are

                      registered with the Public Utilities Commission for the purpose

                      of fee regulation. All known landfills are environmentally

                      regulated by the Department of Environmental Protection.

                           The process of sanitary landfilling theoretically consists

                      of-compacting the wastes,  placing in layers, and covering

                      with soil material. Such   landfilling may occur either in

                      trenches or on top of the  earth's surface. This process,    as

                      opposed to open dumping, is intended to reduce the problems

                      associated,with rodent and insect infestation, gas emissions,

                      fires, and the carrying of litter by the wind. Also, any

                      facility receiving pesticides, chemical wastes, hazardous

                                                _10-

                    wastes, and other liquids must have a system installed for the

                    interception, collection and treatment of all leachates gener-

                    ated. Unfortunately, violations are  often reported and reduc-

                    tion of these hazards is not always achieved.

                        Other methods of solid waste  disposal also exist in

                    New Jersey to a limited extent. These methods are presently

                    used mainly in the Northeast Aegion where' the lack of land-

                    fill sites is the most severe. The southern coastal counties

                    have made very little use of alternate methods since the

                    need is not yet as critical as in the Northeast.

                         The reason that alternatives to landfill disposal have

                    not yet gained widespread acceptance is one of economics.

                    For instance, incinerators were once fairly common but the

                    additional cost burden required for compliance with recently

                    enacted air pollution regulations has greatly contributed

                    to their disappearance throughout the state. In addition,

                    a very limited number of composting, resource recovery, and

                    recycling facilities exist. Composting and resource recovery

                    are not widely practiced in the coastal zone because only

                    a limited market exists for the finished products. Further-

                    more, recycling may be uneconomical if waste separation and

                    sorting is not done before the wastes enter the facility.

                         Many of these problems arise because recyclingr resource

                    recovery and other new technological.advances-challenge

                    traditional modes of operation. Efforts to increase their

                    acceptability and availability may, however, be necessitated

                    by the decreasing.availability of landfill sites.

                 IV. ANALYSIS

                           Total solid wastes disposed in coastal counties in 1974

                      measured approximately 9.75 million tons. In addition, liquid

                      wastes deposited in these counties measured 166 million gal-

                      lons. Of these totals, 30 percent of solid wastes and 36

                      percent of liquid wastes were generated outside of the coastal

                      planning area.* The landfills in the coastal counties there-

                      fore, play an important role in solid waste disposal for many

                      areas. This is primarily due to the even lower landfill

                      capacitiem available in these other areas.

                           It is anticipated that the need for disposal of non-

                      coastal generated wastes in the coastal area may increase in

                      the near future due to recent developments in the Hackensack

                      Meadowlands. These marshlands of northeastern New Jersey have

                      long been used as a cheap disposal site for wastes generated in

                      118 New Jersey communities.and a number of communities in New

                      York State, including New York City. In 1973, the region was

                      accepting a total of 50,000 tons of wastes each week. That

                      year however, the Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission

                      prohibited all out-of-state dumping in the Meadowlands in order

                      to prolong the life of existing landfills for use by the New

                      Jersey communities. Even so, five of the six remaining land-

                      fills are expected to be phased out by 1977 and.the last by

                 *The coastal planning area, for the purposes of this report, is
                  defined as all of Atlanticl Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland,
                  Gloucester, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth,.Ocean and Salem Counties.
                  A separate analysis for Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Passaic and Union
                  Counties is given in the Northeast regional report.

                                                -12-

                     1979. Many of the communities served by the Meadowlands will

                     seek other areas for disposal and the coastal area i,s a likely

                     location.

                          The amount of land area required each year for disposal

                     of wastes depends not only on the amount of wastes generatede

                     but also, on the amount of volume compaction which is achieved

                     before depositing in the landfill. In addition, the ideal

                     sanitary landfill situation would add one unit of cover soil

                     to every four units of solid waste in order to reduce rodent,

                     insect, firer gasi and odor problems. Such a situation would

                     tend to use up a considerable amount of land in solid waste

                     disposal, thereby presenting the need to continually seek

                     out new landfill sites. An example of acreage requirements

                     for a population of 1,000 persons assuming a solid waste

                     generation rate of 4.5 pounds per capita per day is given

                     below-.

                                                           Compaction Density

                                                        in pounds per cubic yard

                                                    700          1000          1200

                cubic yards

                per year                           2933          2053          1711

                acre-feet

                per year                           3.00          2.12          1.75

                source: Greenberg, keport on    Intuitive-Interactive Model, 1976.

                                                 -13-

                           At present, bulldozer compaction is the primary method

                      in use. This type of compaction yields an average density

                      of 700 pounds per cubic yard, resulting in the most extensive

                      land requirement. Greater compaction could be achieved

                      through shredding or baling. As existing disposal sites

                      approach capacity, new s-ites become necessary. These new

                      sites will be increasingly difficult to find due to the short-

                      age of compatible open spaces.

                           One reason for the lack of suitable landfill sites is

                      environmental factors. The coastal plain, which essentially

                      covers all eleven coastal counties in southern New Jersey,

                      is characterized by minimum slopes, sandy soils, good.perco-

                      lation, and a high water table. The potential for leaching of

                      soluble wastes into the ground of the coastal zone then, is

                      quite high. This creates a possible danger to the people in

                      the coastal zone and elsewhere in the state dependent on the

                      groundwater supply.   Surface water quality is also an important

                      factor to consider.   In order to prevent environmental and

                      health hazards to as  great an extent as possible, landfills

                      must be located only  in areas in which damage can be minimized.

                           The expanding urban, suburban, and seasonally-populated@

                      areas within the  coastal zone also reduces the  amount of

                      land available for landfilling. Not only does    such development

                      physically reduce the open space which could be used,lbut

                      the land uses adjacent to open space makes   waste disposal

                                                -14-

                    an incompatible use as well. Because of the various environ-

                    mental and health hazards, odors, and ugly appearance asso-

                    ciated with landfills, property values and quality of life

                    of the adjacent areas could be affected.

                         Also, because of the rapid residential development in

                    recent years, citizens often oppose the loss of additional open

                    lands. Landfilling is certainly not one of the most    appealling

                    uses to take the place of open spaces, even though proper

                    landfilling may be reclaimed for recreational and open space

                    purposes at completion of the process. Many people would

                    prefer to have the open spaces for immediate use or Preserved
                    in a natural condition, rather- than waiting for the sites to be

                    reclaimed at some future date.

                         The existence of such factors and characteristics presents

                    three alternatives for solid waste disposal: disregard envi-

                    ronmental factors and locate landfills anywhere vacant land

                    exists, relocate landfills in suitable areas even though such

                    areas may be located at a distance from population centers, or

                    adopt new methods of solid waste disposal

                         The first of these alternatives, that of locating land-

                    fills anywhere regardless of impacts, is unlikely since state

                    regulations preventing environmental degradation have already

                    been adopted.

                          The second alternative, which requires a relocation of

                     landfills to more rural areas while complying with envi-

                     ronmental considerations,-would increase public costs of

                     hauling solid wastes from the population centers to the

                     disposal sites. Since the hauling of wastes from the col-

                     lection point to the disposal site is among the highest cost

                     categories in the total solid waste system, each additional

                     mile could contribute significantly to costs.

                          The third alternative is the adoption of costly new

                     solid waste disposal and volume reduction methods, including

                     incineration, composting, recycling, and various types of

                     resource recovery. Such practices would greatly reduce odors,

                     disposal hazards and nuisances, and the volume of wastes

                     requiring final disposal. In addition, these methods have

                     the advantage of producing marketable resources which can be

                     reused in the system rather than requiring land disposal with

                     no economic value. For instance, pyrolysis yields a low BTU

                     value oil and/or gas from the solid waste, as well as a con-

                     glomerate of burnt char which may be used as a road-grading

                     material. A dry fuel process also yields a low BTU value fuel

                     and water-wall incineration produces steam for fuel. Com-
                     posting creates a fertilization maierial for soils. Recycling

                     allows for the reuse of glass, paper, metals and other original

                     waste products. At present, however, there is a lack of

                     experimentation, confidence, and economic commitment to such

                                              -16-

                    waste-reducing techniques. Because of the high cost of these

                    processes, they may be introduced in urbanized areas rather

                    than the less densely developed areas of the coastal zone.

                    Their use anywhere in the state, however,. could lessen the

                    waste disposal load falling on the coast.

                         The second issue related to solid waste in the coastal

                    zone is the generally uncontrolled dumping and spilling of

                    liquid chemical wastes which occurs at existing chemical

                    disposal sites. Though state legislation requires the instal-

                    lation of a system for the interception, collection, and

                    treatment of all leachates generated before a facility may be

                    approved for accepting chemical wastes, violations and acci-

                    dental spillings do exist. Thus, this potential pollution

                    problem occurs at many on-site chemical processing and treat-

                    ment facilities. Unlike many of the waste types deposited in

                    the coastal area which have only minimal.effects on the

                    environment, chemical wastes create a significant problem.

                    This is due to the permeable nature of the coastal soils and

                    the soluble character of many of the chemical wastes. Once the

                    chemicals are mixed with rain water, leaching from the landfill

                    occurs. The chemicals easily pass through the soils until they
                    reach the generally high groundwater level. in contrast,

                    liquid sewage sludge and septic tank clean-out wastes are often

                    filtered outbefore they reach   the groundwater.

                                              -17-

                          Because of the heavy use of groundwater.wells in the

                     coastal zone, chemical pollution to the groundwater may have

                     severe consequences. In fact, where chemical generation

                     and disposal rates are among the highest in the coastal area,

                     the groundwater characteristics are probably the most incom-

                     patible for receiving these wastes. This occurs along the

                     Delaware River area where the outcrop for the widely-utilized

                     Raritan-Magothy aquifer formation exists.

                                              -18-

                                          APPENDIX A

                                       REGIONAL REPORTS

                1. The-Northeast (Bergen, Passaic, Hudson, Essex, and Union

                    Counties)

                     The problem of solid waste disposal in the Northeast region

                is by far the most severe of all the regions in the state. For this

                reason, the region has been treated as a separate entity and was not
                included in the analysis of the main report. Virtually no vacant

                open space suitable for future landfilling exists in the Northeast.

                As a result, alternate solid waste disposal facilities have become

                increasingly popular.

                General Characteristics

                     The population of the five-county region comprises about

                50 percent of the state's total population. This figure represents

                an average population density of 4,895 persons/sq. mi. in com-

                parison to the overall state density of 957 persons/sq. mi.

                Obviously, the domestic wastes generated in this region would

                also exceed those of any other region in the state.

                     Industrial and commercial waste generation is also very

                high due to the heavy activity of both sectors. Agricultural

                wastes on the other hand, are slight as very few farms are inter-

                spersed with the urban and suburban development.

                     Only a small fraction of total solid wastes disposed in

                the region is generated outside the region although more than

                half of the liquid wastes fall into this category. The major

                                              -20-

               solid.wa.ste types are municipal wastes, industrial non-chemical

               wastes, construction-demolition wastes, bulky wastes, and junked

               autos.* The major liquid wastes are septic tank clean-out wastes,

               chemical wastes, liquid sewage sludge, and bulk and semi-liquids.

                   Unlike the other regions, alternative methods of waste dis-

               posal and/or volume reduction to landfilling are being used to
               a larger degree, although landfills are still extensively,used.

               Compost facilities are already fairly numerous. Several resource

               recovery facilities also now exist. Of the 42 landfills situated in

               the-five counties, many have already been closed and most of the

               others are expected to close before 1980.

               Analysis

                   Although waste disposal by landfilling in the Northeast

               region is very high, continuation of this practice will be impos-

               sible in the future. Due to the heavy d6velopment which has

               occurred in the past, there is literally no more land available for

               meeting the high acreage requirements of sanitary landfills.

               Envirorunental regulations prevent future haphazard use of the

               Hackensack Meadowlands which is the only open section of the region.

               With five of the six heavily used landfills which are now used in

               the Meadowlands scheduled to close in 1977 and the last in 1979, the

               need for additional methods of waste reduction and disposal is

               immediate.

               *The dFfI'nition8 of these and other waste types as defined by the
                Bureau of Solid Waste Management are provided in Appendix D.

                                             -21-

                     Fortunately, the solid economic base, the large amount of

                waste generation, and the availability of a market for recovered

                resources make alternate methods appear more feasible here than in

                any of the other regions. In fact, plans have been made for the

                use of a large resource recovery facility and baling facility in

                the Meadowlands, and construction is awaiting funding. The wide-

                spread use of alternate disposal methods in the Northeast region

                could also help to alleviate the problem of disposal in some of the

                other regions since fewer wastes would have to be exported.

                                              -22-

               2. North Shore (Middlesex and Monmouth Counties)

                    The North Shore region is a major disposal area for a large

                              -generating areas. If present practices continue,
               number of waste

               however, the existing landfill sites in this region will be almost

               exhausted within 25 years.

               General Characteristics

                    The geographical location of the North Shore region, par-
               ticularly Niddiesex County, has made it an attractive 'area for

               solid waste disposal by New York and some of the counties of

               northern New Jersey. The origins of liquid wastes disposed in

               Middlesex County are even more widespread than those of solid

               wastes, coming from New York, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and all but

               four New Jersey counties. Approximately 44 percent of all solid

               wastes and 82 percent of all liquid wastes deposited in the county

               come from outside the North Shore reqion.

                    The total amount of wastes deposited in the two-county region

               comprise@ 43 percent of all solid wastes and 29 percent of all

               liquid wastes disposed in the eleven-county.coastal planning area.

               The major solid waste types disposed in the region are municipal

               wastes, industrial non-chemical wastes, institutional wastes,

               construction-demolition wastes, and bulky wastes. The major liquid

               wastes are sewage sludge, chemical wastes, and septic tank clean-out

               wastes.

                                              -23-

                     The primary method of disposal is the sanitary landfill with a

                total of 50 in the two counties. In contrast, only 8 composting

                facilities and 3 chemical processing and treatment facilities

                exist. A 1973 study indicates that only 8 of the 38 landfills

                reporting have estimated remaining lives in excess of 25 years.

                Another 15 landfills have 1O.or less years remaining.

                Analysis

                     Many of the existing'landfills are subject to flooding and

                several are lodated on wetlands and aquifer recharge areas. These

                landfills were so, located due to the cheap land available and the

                lack of environmental restrictions on solid waste disposal. Some of

                these landfills have closed while others have remained open due to

                convenience, haul distance, availability of cheap land, and local

                dependence. Environmental and health violations abound, even in

                areas used for liquid chemical wastes. Kin-Buc Landfill in Edison,

                for instance, has been a center of controversy for several years.

                     Future landfills would be prohibited from being located in

                many environmentally-sensitive areas as in the past due to legis-

                lation preventing contact of disposal sites with water sources.

                Such a restriction would greatly reduce the amount of land capable

                of accepting solid wastes. In addition, the large, year-round

                populations of both counties, in comparison to the other coastal

                counties, has caused heavy suburbanization and development-of

                land to occur, reducing the number of suitable landfill sites

                even further.

                                              -24-

                   Because of the amount of industry which exists in the region,

              primarily in Middlesex County, and the close proximity to the

              urbanized north, this region probably holds a good potential for

              resource recovery and other waste-v.olume reducing methods. The

              large amount of wastes which come into the region and the presence

              of a potential market for recovered materials makes consideration

              of these other alternatives a practicality.

                                             -25-

                3. Central Shore (Ocean County)

                     The rapid increase in seasonal and nonseasonal development

                in Ocean County has created,a rise in waste generation while

                existing landfill sites approach capacity. Prospects for ac-

                quiring new landfill sites locally appear to be poor.

                General Characteristics

                     Ocean County has experienced more residential development
                in recent year@ than any other county in New Jersey. In fact,
                more than 17 percent@ of all housing units constructed in the

                state between 1971 and 1972 were located in Ocean. Most of these

                have been year-round homes rather than summer homes. The county

                population has increased by more than 20 percent between 1970 and

                1974. Obviously, the rapid increase in population has been accom-

                panied by a rapid increase in domestic waste generation as well.

                These internally-generated solid wastes comprise the major portion

                of total solid wastes disposed in the county, although liquid wastes

                originate from a wider area.

                     The five major solid waste types disposed in the county, in

                decreasing order of tonnage are: construction-demolition wastes,

                municipal wastes, tree stumps, bulky wastes, and vegetative and

                tree wastes. The largest liquid wastes in gallons are: septic

                tank clean-out wastes.and liquid sewage sludge.

                                              -26-

                   There are presently 20 sanitary landfills for disposal in

               the county. Of the 14 landfills reported in 1973 (this figure

               may not be complete because of the number of facility owners

               who did not report), five were listed as having five or less

               years of remaining life and another one having less than ten.

               Seven were reported to have more than 25 years of remaining life.

               Analysis

                   Ocean County soils are not particularly conducive to sanitary

               landfilling of wastes. The soils are generally sandy, thus pro-

               viding excellent subsurface drainage and rapid recharge of the

               aquifers underlying the county. The 36 percent of the county

               which lacks rapid drainage is considered to be wetlands, charac-

               terized by shallow ponds and standing water bodies. The presence

               of such geological conditions indicates that locating landfills

               without degrading water supplies could be a difficult task.

                   Solid waste disposal costs have already escalated for some

               communities as the hauling distance to the landfills has increased.

               This is particularly true of several of the barrier beach island

               communities which must transport their wastes over a limited number

               of bridges to the mainland. The problem is augmented by the fact

               that there are virtually no prospects for future landfills in the

               heavily populated mainland municipalities of Dover and Brick.

                                             -27-

                4. South Shore (Burlington, Atlantic and Cape May Counties)

                     The quantity of solid waste generated.in.the South Shore

                region is largely attributable to the seasonal influx of pop-

                ulation which occurs in resort communities each year. The wastes

                produced during this period are sufficient to create disposal

                problems within the region.

                General Characteristics

                     The South.Shore region is highly dependent on its attraction

                as a summer resort area for its economic base. Because of this

                dependency, seasonal migrations into the region are actually

                encouraged. As a result, the volume of waste produced in the

                region during the summer is roughly equivalent to the wastes

                generated during the remainder of the year.

                     In comparison to most of the other planning regions, the

                quantity of solid waste disposed in the region is small. The

                quantity of liquid wastes, however, is fairly high. Almost all

                of these wastes are generated within the region. The major solid

                waste types being disposed are municipal--was-tes, -bulky wastes,

                construction-demolition wastes, vegetative and tree wastes,.and

                tree stumps. The major liquid waste type is septic tank clean-out

                wastes, although Cape May County also receives liquid sewage

                sludge and chemical wastes.

                                              -28-

                   There are a total of 41-landfills in the region (excluding

               those located in the Burlington County portion) in addition to

               several composting facilities. Of the 30 landfills identified

               in 1973 (this figure only re flects those facilities reported

               by the owners) only 7 were estimated to have more than 25 years

               of remaining life. On the other hand, 12 had life expectancies

               of only 10 years or less.

               Analysis

                   The pr6blems which plague the other coastal regions.exist in

               the South Shore region. The lack of available land for landfilling

               is particularly evident in the barrier island resort cities,

               although many of the inland townships are also becoming quite

               developed. Farther inland, the region is characterized by a more

               rural setting. However, caution must be stressed when searching for

               adequate landfill sites since wetlands and other environmentally-

               sensitive lands abound.

                    Due to the inconsistent waste flows, the lack of industry

               and year-round population, and the tourism-oriented economic

               base, methods of disp osal other than landfilling seem econom-

               ically impractical in most of this region. The same is true

               of expensive and intufficiently-tested volume reduction tech-

               niques such as resource recovery. The options for this region

               are quite limited so it appears necessary that potential land-

               fill sites be acquired before additional development can occur.

                                             -29-

                5. Delaware Bay (Cumberland and Salem Counties)

                     The Delaware Bay region receives only a small portion of the

                total quantity of waste disposed in the coastal planning area. At

                the present time, it appears that this region has the least demand

                for additional, large-acreage landfill sites.

                General Characteristics

                     Solid waste disposal in the Delaware Bay region comprises
                a mere three p@rcent of the total quantity of solid wastes dis-

                posed in the eleven-county planning area.  Liquid wastes in the

                region, however, account for almost twenty percent of total liquid

                wastes disposed in the planning area. The  high percentage of liquid

                wastes in the region is largely attributed to the heavy reliance on

                septic tanks.

                     The small quantity of wastes disposed in the two counties

                is primarily due to the area's low population level. The Delaware

                Bay region is neither a popular seasonal attraction nor a popular

                year-round living area. As a result, the population of the region

                is on!_y___-s`ix-pe-r_cent of the total population in the planning area.

                     An additional reason for the small amount of disposal activity

                is the lack of easy access -into the region from other areas.

                Though some wastes are transported iInto the region from nearby

                areas, inter-regional disposal is quite limited.

                                              -30-

                   The principle solid waste types disposed in the region are

               municipal wastes, industrial non-chemical wastes, construction-

               demolition wastes, and tree stumps whereas the major liquid wastes

               are septic-tank clean-out wastes and liquid sewage sludge. These

               wastes are mainly disposed in any of the 39 landfills which exist,

               although some composting facilities are also available. Of the 31

               landfills reported in 1973, only three are shown to have more than

               25 years of remaining life while 17 have'10 or less years.

               Analysis

                   Though the Delaware Say region is primarily rural, a sig-

               nificant portion of the land area consists of wetlands and en-

               vironmentally-sensitive areas. Locating future landfills, there-

               fore, should be done with caution. Fortunately, the small volume

               of waste received for disposal in the county minimizes the future

               land area that will be needed in order to handle the wastes after

               existing landfills have closed. Future growth in this region is

               anticipated to be rather limited so this trend of a light volume of

               waste disposal should remain constant.

                   This region, probably Tnore than any other region in the

               coastal zone, is limited to the use of landfills rather than

               other techniques for the disposal of future wastes. The small

               population and lack of a solid economic. base makes widespread

               use of alternate techniques economically infeasible.

                                             -31-

                 6.  Delaware River Water Front (Gloucester, Camden,-Burlington,

                     'and Mercer Counties)

                      The Delaware River Water F.ront region presently serves as an

                 important disposal site for wastes generated in the Philadelphia

                 area in addition to its own internally-generated wastes. Many of

                 the wastes which are deposited on the land are dangerous chemical

                 wastes. Though much undeveloped land still exists in the region,

                 suburbanization is rapidly eliminating potential landfill sites.

                 General Characteristics

                      Due to the region's close proximity and easy access to the

                 Philadelphia area, a large portion of the total quantity of wastes

                 which are landfilled in the region originate across the river. In

                 fact, 39 percent of the solid wastes and 27 percent of the liquid

                 wastes deposited in the region are from Philadelphia and its sub-

                 urbs. Overall, the disposed solid wastes from all sources in the

                 four counties comprise 44 percent of the total tonnage received in

                 the coastal planning area. Liquid wastes in the region represent

                 about 23 percent of the total volume in the planning area.-

                      The principle solid wastes being disposed include municipal

                 wastes, construction-demolition wastes, industrial non-chemical

                 wastes, dry sewage sludge, and bulky wastes, in decreasing order

                 of tonnage. The major liquid wastes in decreasing number of

                 gallons are bulk and semi-liquids, septic tank clean-out wastes,

                 and liquid-sewage sludgeo Unlike many of the other regions,

                                               -32-

              chemicalwastes and waste oils are also disposed in large quanti-

              ties in the region due to the chemical plants and oil refineries

              located on the river.

                   There are presently 71 land;ills in the four-county region
              (the actual number is slightly lower due to part of Burlington

              County's inclusion in the South Shore region). A total of nine

              composting facilities also.exist.. In 1973, only three of the 47

              landfills reported were estimated to have more than 25 years of

              remaining life while 27 have less than 10 years.

              Analysis

                   Heavy manufacturing, including manufacturing of chemicals,

              is located primarily along the Delaware River. The important

              Raritan and Magothy aquifer formation also outcrops along the

              river. On-site chemical disposal at some of the industrial sites

              has serious implications for the widely-used groundwater from this

              aquifer. Though treatment of the wastes is generally enforced,

              violations and spills are believed to be frequent.

                   Urban development has also occurred mainly along the river

              where cities such as Camden and Trenton and their suburbs have

              been built. more recently however, development has been expanding

              into the more rural central and eastern portions of the region.

              h1though adequate open space still exists in these areas, develop-

              ment is rapidly reducing lands available for landfilling. This

              is particularly true of the central portion which has become part of

              Philadelphia's suburban ring.

                                             -33-

                   The regulation of solid waste collection, disposal and manage-

              ment is an indirect control on both local and regional growth.

              Sanitary landfill sites are now regulated or are capable of being

              regulated by numerous laws. Groundwater quality is a primary

              consideration in state approval for new sites or maintenance of

              operations on existing sites.

                   Within the coastal area, the CAFRA statute requires a permit

              for a sanitary landfill pursuant to N.J.S.A. 13:9-5. Sanitary

              landfills outside the coastal area but within the coastal zone
              will in many c@ses require a Stream Encroachment Permit pursuant

              to N.J.S.A. 58:1-26 et seq. or if the site is on a navigable water-

              way a permit must be obtained from the Division of Marine Services

              pursuant to N.J.S.A. 12:5-3. The Division has broad discretion to

              protect the public health, safety, and welfare in making the initial

              determination of waterfront development applications.

                   These statutes can use a wide range of environmental criteria

              both site specific and regional in evaluating applications for

              sanitary landfills.

                   The type and amount of solid waste is regulated pursuant to the
              S.olid Waste Management Act of 1910., N.J.S.A. 13:1E-1 et seq.

              and N.J.A.C. 7:26-1 et seq. No new solid waste facility can

              operate without first installing a groundwater monitoring system.

              No sewage.sludge or other fecal material-may  be lagooned under the

                                             -35-

                                                                         .00,

                solid waste regulations. These regulations further provide that any

                solid waste facility accepting pesticides, chemical, bulk liquids,

                semi-liquids or hazardous wastes on or in fhe ground must install

                monitoring wells approved by DEP.

                     A coordinated system of transferring waste from points of

                collection to disposal may be desirable. Municipalities are

                authorized to create joint facilities for the disposal of garbage

                and other refuse pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:66A-1 et seq. Revenue

                bonds may be issued by such authority. Financial assistance by the

                state to such intra-municipal authority could be authorized pursuant

                to N.J.S.A. 40:66A-1 31.11 et seq. which allows the State to pur-

                chase such bonds.

                     Industries within the coastal area could be required as part

                of the utilities plan of the proposed CAFRA Rules and Regulations,'

                8 NJR 176(a) section 12-4(g) to identify, locate and describe

                the proposed type and capacity of solid waste and garbage collection

                and disposal. These regulations if adopted could serve as an

                informational basis for developing solid waste guidelines outside

                the coastal area for the remainder of the coastal zone. These

                regulations can encourage or require recycling of wastes in larger

                industrial project applications, subject of course, to reasonable

                economic limitations.

                     Prevention of severe environmental degradation by irresponsibly

                operated landfills is an ongoing process within DEP. By Depart-

                mental Order, dated July 1976, and for violations of NJAC 7:26-1 et

                                              -36-

              seq. the Kin-BUC Solid Waste*Disposal Facility landfill in Middlesex

              County was ordered closed. The landfill occupies 40 acres and

              fronts on the Raritan River. Under the closure order, Kin-BUC

              -is required to submit a detailed plan for closure including the

              building of a dike for containing leachate   and preventing surface

              water from entering the site, as well as a plan for treating the

              leachate to protect the groundwater. The closure order resulted in

              Kin-BUC refusing to accept  wastes tainted with hazardous chemicals.

              The goal of complete closure of  the facility is the subject of a

              joint hearing to be held by  the Public Utility Commission and

              DEP.

                   New Jersey has addressed the problem of receiving wastes

              from other states by enacting the Waste Control Act of 1973,

              N.J.S.A. 13:11-1 et seq. The Commissioner of DEP has the authority

              to prohibit control and condition the disposal of solid wastes

              within the state which originated or were collected outside the

              territorial limits of the state. This statute and appurtenant

              regulations were upheld by the State Supreme Court in the case of

              Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission v. Municipal Sanitary

              Landfill AuthoriLZ 68 N.J. 451, 348 and 505 (1975).

                   This case has been consolidated with the City of Philadelphia

              v. State of New Jersey case and is now awaiting argument before

              the U. S. Supreme Court.

                                             -37-

                     In summary, the state has comprehensive controls to regulate

                construction and operation of all solid waste facilities throughout

                the coastal planning area. The state has authority to require.the

               .existence of adequate sanitary waste disposal facilities, however,

                only in the CAPRA area. Other types of landfills are not regulated

                by the CAPRA statute. In addition, the state lacks the authority to

                the use of alternative treatment methods such as recycling. However,

                through the application of existing controls, the state may be able

                to markedly increase the economic feasibility and attractiveness of

                the alternative methods.

                                              -38-

                                          APPENDIX C

                                            TABLES

                                             -39-

                                                                                                                     TABLE I
                                                                                           TYPES OF WASTES DISPOSED IN COASTAL ZONE COUNTIES IN 1974

                                          (First 11 waste type categories are given in tons. second 6 waste type categories are given In gallons)

                                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------               ----------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------
                                          WestIe Type                       Atlantic      Burlington         Camden       Cape May       Cumberland     Giouces er            Mercer      Middlesex        Monmouth          Cc  ean         Salem                  TOTAL
                                          SO-rfa-wa-ste -
                                          -16REM-87'                         157,975         750,421       525,567           32,331         176.789         60Z.73T         5Z?,g?2       1,470.631          276,941      173,997           10,500              4.700,stio
                                            Institutional                      6.192          30.632         5,686                 0          2,481           38,707           3,512          57,519         508,437        3.250                 0              656.416

                                            Cry Sewage
                                               Sludge                            224         134.379       172.186               542               1                0               0         1,772              156        2,210                 0              311.470
                                            Bulky Waste                       16,329          42,895       129,299          100,476              936          13,380           8,321         245.232          27,605      72.395                  28             658,896

                                            Construction
                                              Demolition                      42,859          26.047       344.508            2.666          19,681          177.129.         40.408         361.202         174,549      218.720             1,155            1.408,924
                                            Dry Pesticides                          0               0              0               0               0              40                a                               0            0                0                    42

                                            Hazardous Waste
                                              Containers                            0               1              0               0               0                3               1            107                0            0                0                   112

                                            Cry Hazardous
                                              Wastes                             M                  0              7               0               0          1.780                 0         1,00                  0            0                0                3.107

                                            Dry Chemical
                                              Wastes                             145           5.100         2,438                 0             562          2,282                 0         .7.822                0            0                0              18,349
                                            Junked Autos                            10              0              2               In              0             448                0               0               1            60               0                   530
                                            Tires                                   62            383        5,273               130          1 W9            4.170           11,765          23.522             200             234              0              106.748
                                            Vegetative &   Tree Wastes         7,567           3,794         12,227          10,779            3.005          2,884          145.562         115,045           9,879      21.850                  35             332,627
                                            Tree Stumps                       16,345          13,975             734             684         20,632           1,356            2,160          81,690           2,282      72,680                  25             212.563
                                            Dead Animals                            1               0              0               0               0                0               0               6               7            0                0                    14
                                            Food Processing Wastes               347                5        18,242                0             700                0               0         7.413              7SO             221              0              27.678

                                          (continued)
                                                                            Atlantic      Burlinoton        Camden         Cape Mal       Cumberland      Gloucester         fiercer     Middlesex                                             Salem                TOTAL
                                                                                                                                                                                                             Monmouth         Ocean            -
                                          Oil Spill
                                            Cleanup  Wastes                       1               0              2                0             20              780               0          37,757                0             92                 0               38.652
                                          Industrial Mon-                    6.393          75.705       232.557             1,050          28,226          79,858          79,729          695.2Z6          45.219           1,509          26,983             1,272,454
                                            Chemical

                                       TOTAL TONS                          256.600       1.083.337     1.448,728          148.668          254.042        925.554         874.380        3,106.116       1,046,025         567,218           38.776             9,749,444

                                            id   stes
                                             @eWa                                 0               0    1,755,057                  0          2,000        306,500         252,500        2.071.161                 0            150                 0           4,387,368

                                          Semi-Solid Waste
                                            Oil & Sludges                         0               0      786,552                  0             so        435,500         148,125        5,489.590                 0       225,017                              7.084,834

                                          Bulk Liquid
                                            Semi-Liquids                          0         18.000     3.784.224                  0             10      16,025,750        302,000        2,430,850                 0        95.000                  0           22,655,834

                                          Septic-Tank
                                            Clean-Cut Wastes           26.207.300        4.403,10D       116,750        2.999,400      2.4.435,100       2.837,386        678,550        4,980,100          743,700     12.353,900       5.046,500              84,801,786

                                          Liquid Sewage
                                            Sludge                         $49.800         303.000     2,145,000                  0     2,074,000        1,369.345                0    17,510.000                  0     4,414.775            4.000,            28,369,920

                                          Pesticide. Chemical
                                            & Hazardous Waste
                                            Liquids                        410,000                0      456.286                  0               0      2,773,359          63,333     15,131,919               192               0         232.000             19,067,089

                                          TOTAL GALLONS                27,167.100        4.724,100     9,043,869        2,999,400      26,511,160       23,747,840     1,444,508       47,613,620           743.892     17.088,842       5.282.500            166.366.831

                                          -Definitions of waste         types as    defined by      Bureau of    Solid Waste      Management      are provided      In Appendix D.
                                          SOURCE: Bureau of Solid Waste Management, Department of Environmental Protection,
                                                    County Disposal Data. 1974

                                          Disposal                                       SOLID WASTE FLOWS UWIN COASTAL ZONE COUNTIES
                                Origin         nty
                                Counv                     AtIA-qtic       @t@r I i n_qA o n Camden      Cape Hay Cumberland Gloucester                  Mercer    Middlesex        Monmouth        Ocean               Salem                     TOW
                                Atlantic                    248,334                 0           495              0              0              0              0             0             0             0                     0                  248,329
          a                     Bergen                             0                0              0             0              0              0              0       3,788               0             0                     0                   3, NO
                                :
                                urlington                     2,600         547.030         40,00;4              0              a        39.800               0             0             0       15.000                      0                  644,494
                                amden                             24          14,151       643,146               0         1,000         89.045               0             0             0             0                     0                  744,368
                                Cape May                      5,601                 0              0     140,668                0              0              0             0             0             0                     0                  154,269
                                Cumberland
                                                                   0                0              0             0      253,042           5,050               0             0             0             0                     0                 258,092
                                Essex                              0                0              0             0              0              0              0       38.069              0             0                     0                   38,069
                                Gloucester                        24             755         51,740              0              0      239.026                0            22             0             0               1.300                   292,867
                                Hudson                             0                0              0             0              0              0              0       3.388               0             2                     0                    3,390
                                Hunterdon                          0                               0             0              0              0        35,639        9,134               0             0                     0                  44,7    73
                                Mercer                             0         P4,648             102              0              0           100       838,158       166,028          1.841        2J60                        0              1,092,937
                                Middlesex                          0                0         1,300              0              0         1,190            579    1,692,486          2,066          360                       0              1,698,781
                                Monmouth                           0                0              0             0              0              0              0      46,071    1,023,209         16.678                       0              1,085,958
                                Morris                             0                0              0             0              0              0              0       2,271               0             0                     0                   2.271
                                Ocean                             17                0                            a              0           397               4           22       18,058      '532013                        0                 550,611
                                Passaic                            0                0.                           0              0              0              0             0             0             1                     0                          1
                                Salem                              0                0             10             0              0         3,507               0             0             0             0             30.451                     33,968
                                Somerset                           0                0              0             0              0              0              0     109,938               1             0                     0                 109,939
                                                                                                   0                            0              0              0             0             0
            a                   Sussex                             0                0                                                                                                                   0                     0                          0
                                Union                              0                0                            0              0             60              0     343,889                         120                       0                344,069

                                      (continued)                           Atlantic             BurlitLton             amqen          La@ma                                                                                                                                                                           Tot-i I
                                                                                                                                                         Cumberland         Gloucester             Mercer             H ddlesex        LIRMOV4           ocean                      Sa..Iem
                                      Warren                                       0                    0                  0                 0                  0                                      0                  0                 0               0                            0
                                                                                                                            0                0                  0             8,640                    0       673 .333                     0               0                                                    682 023
                                      New York                                     0                    0
                                      Pennsylvania                                 0          436,651             710,465                    0                  0        @541,069                      0           2 . 714                  0               0                     7.025                       1,698.124
                                      Delaware                                     0                    0                 30                 0                  0                 670                  0                  0                 0               0                            0                              700
                                      Unk/Other                                    0                    0           1 . 3 7 6                0                  0                    0                 0         14 91 3                   50             784                            0                         17,123

                                      TOTAL                              256,600          1 08 3 . 3 3 7      1 4 4 8 .7 28         148,668            254,042             925,554             874,380       3,106.116         1,046.025          557.218                        38,776                       94749,444

                                      SOURCE: Bureau of Solid Waste Management, Department of Environmental Protection
                                                  County Disposal Data, 1974

                                                                                                                                     TABLE 3
                                                                                                       LIQUID WASTE FLOWS (GALLONS) IN COASTAL ZONE COUNTIES
                                              Disposal
                                 Origin         ,uty                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Total
                                  County                         Atlantic           Burlington           Camd          Cape may       Cumberland       Gloucester           He cer        Middlesex        Nowouth              Ocean                  Salem
                                  Atlantic                     25,814,100                       0                0       153,000           20.500                  0                0               0               0                                                            25.987.&OD
                                  Bergen                                  0                     0                0               0                0         33,750          97,083          239.846                 0               0                       0                       370,679
                                  Burlington                         5,000            3,783,000          459,500                 0                0       100.700                   0        15.010               )Do       572,00D                         0                    4.935,300
                                  Camden                          680,000               13S,OD0        2,134,750                 0                0       246.790                   0     2.317.7iO                 0       719,375                         0                    6.233.665
                                  Cape May                        456.000                       0        941.500      2,846,400                   0                0                0               0               0       412,000                         0                    4,661,900
                                  Cumberland                              0                     0                0               0    26.423.660            8.000                   0               0               0         50.000                  7.000                      26.488.660
                                  -Essex                                  0                     0                0               0                0       107.000                   0       152.975                 .0              0                       0                       259,975
                                  filouceste  .r                          0                     0        14.843                  0         12,000        3.853.876                  0       130,0)0                 0               0                23.40D                      4.034.119
                                  Hudson                                  0                     0        862.474                 0                a       232.750           211,2SO         587,433                 0               0                       0                    1,893,907
                                  Hunterdon                               0                     0                0               0                0                0                0           5.000               0               0                       0                         S,000
                                  Mercer                                  0                     0        26.600                  0                0         4.000           981,800          52,1500                0       462,000                         %0                   1,527.000
                                  Middlesex                               0                     0        125.970                 0                0       591,620              7,500      7.331,123           43.900                0                       a                    8.100.113
                                  Nortmouth                               0              792,400                 0               0                0         96,300                  0     1,020.820          699,892      3.219,000                         0                    S,828.412
                                  Morris                                  0                     0                0               0                0      1.019.500                  a       900.405                 0               0                       0                    1,919,905
                                  Ocean                              2.000                13,700                 0               0                0       U3,200                    0           2,615               0     1.654.467                         0                    11,856.182
                                  Passaic                                 0                     0                0               0                a         23,900                  0        50.560                 0               0                       0                        74,460
                                  Salem                                   0                     0        667.706                 0          55.000       1,022.900                  0        13,185                 0               0             5,020.100                      6,778,891
                                  Somerset                                0                     0                0               0                0       256,300                   0     1,850.626                 0               0               232.000                      2.338.926
                                  Sussex                                  0                     0                0               0                0                0                0               0               0               0                       0                               0

                                                                                                                                                                                                                       (Continued)
                                                           Atlantic              Burlington       Camden        Ca-3e May     Cuniberland   Gloucester         Mercer      Middlesex                           Ocean               Salem                     TOTAL
                              Union                               0                    0               a             0               0         379,200         145,000      1,594,413               0            0                   0                     2,118,61?
                              Warren                              0                    0               0             0               0          79.500                0     3,748,015               0            0                   0                     3,827.515
                              New York                            0                    0               0             0               0      3,890,000                 0     1.159,960               0            0                   0                     5.049.960
                              Pennsylvania                        0                    0      2,902,566              0               0      7.860,104            1.875         920.258              0            0                   0                     11,684.803
                              Delaware                            0                    0        879,850              0               0      1.851,450                 0        768.100              0            0                   0                     3.499.400
                              Unk/Other                     210,000                               22,110             0               0      1,907,000                 0    24,752.736               0            0                   0                     26,891.846

                              Total                      27.167,100           4.724.100       9,043,869      2.999,400     26,511.160      23.747,840        1.444.508    4 7.613,6ZO        743.89Z    17.088.842           5,282.500                    166,366,831

                              SOURC.E: Bureau of    Solid Waste Kanagement, Department of Environmental Protection
                                        County Disposal Data, 1974

                                                            Table 4   Existing and Proposed Solid Waste  Facilities in the Coastal Counties

                                                                                                                                        Chemical Processing        Other
                        -County                   Sanitary Lpndfill             Compost Facility           I Resource Recovery          & Treatment Facility      Facility
                                                  Existing               q      Existing                     Existing &                 Existing  &             Existing
                                                   clos.ed   Proposed            closed    'Proposed          closed     Proposed        closed   Froposed       closed   Prop.

                        Atlantic                     27

                        Burlington                   27                            3

                        Camden                       -12          4                3

                        Cape May                     14     1     2                3

                        Cumberland                   20                            2

                        Gloucester                   22           1

                        Mercer                       10                            3                                                                               2

                        Middlesex                    30                            4                                                       3                       2

                        Monmouth                     20                            4

                        Ocean                        20

                        Salem
                                                     19

                        TOTAL                        221          7                24                            1                         6                       5
                             Source: Bureau of Solid   Waste Management, Department of Environmental Protection, Sanitary Landfill   Dlreet6ry, 5/25/76.

                                                                          TABLE 5
                                        EXPECTED REMAINING LIFE (IN YEARST OF SANITARY LANDFILLS IN COASTAL ZONE COUNTIES:
                                                                          1973 Data

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

                                   Less than                                                                           More than
                  County          3 years      3-5 years    6-10 years    11-15 yea      16-20 yea      21-25 yea       25 years    Unknown      Total
                                                                                   Ls-             Ls-            Ls-

                  Atlantic            1                          3              2             1                             5            4         16

                  Burlington          2            5             5              2             2                             1            1         18

                  Camden                           3             2                                            1                          1           7
                  Cape @ay                         2             6                                            1             2            3         14

                  Cumberland          2            2             S              2             2               1                                    14

                  Gloucester                       4             3                            2               3             2                      is

                  Mercer              I            1             1                                                                       4           7

                  Middlesex           1            5             5              2.            5               1             6            1         26

                  Monmouth                                       4              3                                           2            3         12

                  Ocean                            5             1              1                                           7                      14

                  Salem               1            2                                          2               1             3            3         17

                  Total               8            29           40             12             14              8             28           21        160

                  SOURCE:   Bureau of  Solid Waste  Management,  Cooperative Project on Solid   Waste Management with Glassboro State,College, 1975.

                                                                                        Table 6

                                                          TYPES OF WASTES DISPOSED IN NORTHEAST COUNTIES IN 1974

                                  (First 17 waste type categories are given in tons; second 6 waste type categories are given in gallons)

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

                                                 Bergen             Essex             Ifudson           Passaic              Union             TOTAL
                  Waste Type
                  Solid Waste

                  Municipal                   1,446,208            60,352           1,394,741           8,736                5,93S            2,915,972
                  Institutional                   4,898                 6             22,715                 0                    0              27,619
                  Dry Sewage Sludge                    0                0                  110               0                    0                  110
                  Bulky Waste                     37,970            2,589             86,430                 0                  175            127,164
                  Constr/Demo.                   118,779           42,060             85,893            4,270                1,S06             252,508
                  Dry Pesticides                       0                0                  250               0                    0                  250

                  liaz. Waste Cont.                    0                0                   0                0                    0                    0

                  Dry Haz. Waste                       4                0                   0                0                    0                    4
                  Dry Chem. Waste                 1,912                 0               9,902                0                    0              11,814
                  Junked Autos                         0                0             114,800                0                    0            114,800
                  Tires                           3,493                 0               1,952                0                    1                5,446

                  Vegetatives and
                  Tree Wastes                     42,156              672             13,904            1,520                3,155             61,407
                  Tree Stumps                     5,888                 8S                 742               0                    46              6,761 0
                  Dead Animals                         17               0                   0                0                    0                   17
                  Food Proc. Waste                8,941                 0               6,806                0                    0              1S,747

                                                                                        (con t)
                                             Bergen          Essex            Hudson           Passaic            Union           TOTAL
                 Waste Type
                 Solid Waste

                 Oil Spill Cleanup              100              0               493                0             59,134            59,727
                 Indus. Non-chem.           240,262          4,252        1,048,308                 0                 209      1,293.031
                 TOTAL TONS               1,910,628        110,016        2,787,046            14,526             70,161       4,892,377

                 Liquid Wastia
                 Waste Oil                  335,700         55,000            51,250                0             21,025          462,975

                 ,Semi Solid                     0         352,S40                 0                0                  0          352,540
                 Waste Oil & Sludge

                 Bulk Liquid &
                 Semi Liquids                    0               0        7,721,915                 0                  0       7,721,91S
                 Septic Tank Cleanout 2,056,000          1,573,000       10,552,510                 0                  0       14,181,510
                 Liq. Sewage Sludge              0               0        8,710,780                 0             33,000       8,743,780

                 Liq. Pesticides
                 Haz. Waste Liq.          2,186,174              0        6,233,989                 0           1,686,218      10,106,381
                 Chem. Waste Liq.

                 TOTAL TONS               4,577,874      1,980,540       33,270,444                 0           1,740,243      41,569,101

                 Source: Bureau of Solid Waste     Management, Department of Environmental Protection, County Disposal Data, 1974.

                                                                 Table 7 Solid  Waste Flows (Tons) in Northeast Counties

                                  )osal          Bergen              Essex             Hudson             Passaic             Union                TOTAL

                         Atlantic                   0                   0                0                    0                  0                   0

                         Bergen                 1,476,160               0            541,081                  0                  0              2,017,241

                         Burlington                 0                   0                0                    0
                                                                                                                                 0                   0

                         Camden                     0                   0
                                                                                         0                    0                  0                   0

                         Cape May                   0                   0        i       0                    0                  0
                                                                                                                                                     0

                         Cumberland                 0                   0                0                    0                  0                   0

                         Essex                    143,329           102,729          473,165                  0                 94                719,317

                         Gloucester                 0                   0                0                    0                  0                   0

                         Hudson                     57,020            4,104        1,172,079                  0                 i7              1,233,220

                         Hunterdon                  0                   0                0
                                                                                                              0                  0                   0

                         Mercer                     0                   0                0                    0                  0                   0

                         Middlesex                 83                   0              8,092                  0                  0
                                                                                                                                                    8,975

                         Monmouth                   0                   0                  10                 0                 38                     48

                                                                                                           (con't)

                            Origin/Disposal              Bergen                Essex               Hudson               Passaic              Union                 TOTAL

                               Morris                    6,501                   0                 30,895                  0                     0                 37,396

                               Ocean                       0                     0                  0                      0                     0                   0

                               Passaic                  211,535                 200              263,673                  .5,790                 0                 481,198

                               Salem                       0                     0                  0                      0                   1,325                 1,325

                                                                                                                  ?
                               .Somerset                   0                     0                  1,672                  0                     0                   1,672

                               Sussex                      0                     0                  0                      0                     0                   0

                               Union                     4,276                  2,983            293,124                   0                   9,553               309,936

                               Warren                      0                                        0                      0                     0
                                                                                                                                                                     0

                               New York                  1,030                   0                 2,120                   8,736                 0                 11,886

                               Pennsylvania
                                                           0                     0                  0                      0                     0                   0

                               Delaware                    0                     0                  0                      0                     0                   0
                               Unk/Other                 14                      0                 335                     0                  59,1341
                                                                                                                                                                   59,483

                               TOTAL                  1,899,9118              110,016          2,787,046                  14,526              70,161             4,881,697

                                          Source: Bureau of Solid      Waste  Management, Department of Environmental Protection. County Disposal             Data.  1974

                                                    7@6'ble8   Liquid Waste Flows (Gallons) in Northeast Counties

                Origi 'I\Disposal
                     r
                County      unty               Bergen            Essex             Hudson           Passaic            Union             TOTAL

                  'Atlantic                       0                0                0                   0                 0                0

                  Bergen                     2,153,956           .3,000         2,830,261               0              20,000         5,007,217

                  Burlington                      0                0                0                   0                 0                0

                  Camden                          4,000            0              719,375               0                 0             723,375

                  Capi@ May                       0                0                0                   0              18,725             18,725

                  Cumberland                      0                0                0                   0
                                                                                                                          .0               0

                  Essex                      1,104,400           29,100         2,140,800               0              10,000         3,284,300

                  Gloucester                      0                0                0                   0                 0                0

                  Hudson                        213,250            0            1,446,500               0                 0           1,659,750

                  Hunterdon                       0                0                0                   0                 0                0

                  Mercer                          9,400            0                0                   0              400,000          409,400

                  Middlesex                     129,500            0                7,500                              20,609           157,609

                                                                                               (con' 0

                                               Bergen            Essex            Hudson           Passaic           Union            TOTAL

                    Monmouth            1         0                0          41535,000               0                 0          4,535,000
                    Morris                        2,000          512,000      7,492,310      11       0                 0          8,006,310

                   .ocean                        21,000            0               0                  0                 0              21,000

                    Passaic                    104,000           382,000      4,929,877               0              300,000       5,715,877

                    Salem                         9,120            0               0                  0                 0               9,120

                    Somerset                   193,000             0             111,000              0               20,000          324,000

                    Sussex                        0                2,000          10,000              0                 0              12,000

                    Union                      501,000             0               0                  0              488,000          989,000

                    Warren                        6,000            0               0                  0
                                                                                                                        0               6,000

                    New York
                                                  0                0          2,225,000               0              451,300       2,676,300

                    Pennsylvariia              127,248          352,440          230,716              0               11,609          722,013

                    Delaware                      0                0               0                  0                 0
                                                                                                                                        0

                                                                         (con't)

                                     Bbrgen          Essex          Hudson          Passaic          Union          TOTAL

            Unk/Other                  0            700,000   1  6,592,105             0               0          7,292,105

            TOTAL                 4,577,874       1,980,540     33,270,444             0          1 7LI0,243     41,569,101

              Source: Bureau of Solid Waste Management, Department of Environmental Protection. County   Disposal Data, 1974

                                                         Table 9 Existing and Proposed Solid Waste Facilities in the Northeast Counties

                        County                                                                                                           Chemical Processing         Other
                                                 Sanitary Landfill            Compost Fa.11ity             Resource Recovery             & Treatmen Facility        Facility
                                                 Existing &                   Existing &                   Existing &                    Existing &                Existing  &,
                                                  closed    Proposed           Closed    IProposed    i     closed    Proposed            closed      Prop sed      closed   IPr2r.-

                        Bergen                       18                           23         2                1

                        Essex                        7                            10

                        Hudson                       9                                                        2           1                 1

                        Passaic                      5                             1

                        Union                        3          1                  3                          3

                        TOTAL                        42         1                 37         2                6           1

                              Source:   Bureau of Solid Waste Management, Department of Environmental Protection, Sanitary Landfill Directory, May 25, 1976.

                                                                         TABLE 10
                                     EXPECTED REMAINING LIFE (IN YEARST-0-F-9ANITARY LANDFILLS IN NORTHEAST COUNTJES:           1973 DATA

                                    Less than                                                                             IMore than
                                                                                                                          1
                                    3 years     3-5 years    6-10 years.    11-15 yeais.   16-20 years     21-2S ye.ars   @2S years      Unkown     Total

                   Bergen               2          4              1              1                              1                                     11

                   Essex                2                                                                                                              3

                   Hudson               2          2                                                                                        2          7

                   Passaic              2          1                                                                                                   4

                   Union                1                                                                                                              3

                   Total                9          7             3               1            0                 1              1            6         28

                   Source: Bureau of Solid Waste Management, Cooperative Project on Solid Waste Management with Glassboro State College, 1975.

                                       APPENDIX D

                                       DEFINITIONS

                                           -57-

              ,SOLID WASTES              DEFINITIONS*(see end-of list)

               Municipal                 Waste originating in the community con-

               (Household, Commercial)   sisting of household waste from private

                                         residences & commercial waste which ori-

                                         ginates in wholesale, retail or service

                                         establishments such as restaurants, stores,,

                                         markets, theatres, hotels & warehouses.

                                         Any one truckload may include small quan-

                                         tities of other waste.

               Institutional             Waste material originating in schools,

                                         hospitals, research institutions & public

                                         buildings. Laboratory waste & infectious

                                         wastes are not included in this category.

               Dry Sewage Sludge         Sludge from a sewage treatment plant

                                         which has been digested and dewatered

                                         and does not require liquid handling

                                         equipment.

               Bulky Waste               Large items of waste material such as

                                         appliances, furniture, large auto parts,

                                         whole trees, branches & tree trunks.

                                         Not included are items for which there

                                         is a specific waste category.

                                              -58-

             .Construction and         Waste building materials   & rubble resulting

             Demolition                from construction, remodeling, repair

                                       &-demolition operations on houses, commer-

                                       cial buildings, pavements and other struc-

                                       tures.

             Pesticides    Dry         A non-liquid chemical substance intended

                                       for use to control or manage insects,

                                       plant diseases, weeds & some other or-

                                       ganisms troublesome to man.

             Hazardous Waste           Emptied containers that were used for

             Containers                the shipment and/or storage of Hazardous

                                       Waste.

             Hazardous Waste-Dry       Non-liquid waste materials which are

                                       inherently dangerous to handle or dispose

                                       of. Included in this category are waste

                                       materials which are toxic, corrosive,

                                       irritating or sensitizing, radioactive,

                                       biologically infectious, explosive or

                                       flammable.

             Chemical Waste-Dry-       Non-liquid material normally generated

             Non Hazardous             by or used in chemical, petro-chemical,

                                       plastic, pharmaceutical biochemical

                                       or microbiological manufacturing processes

                                       that is not included in the hazardous

                                       waste or pesticide category.

                                             _59-

               SOLID WASTES   (cont'd)     DEFINITIONS

               Junked Autos                Discarded automobiles, trucks and trailers,

                                           usually devoid of easily-salvaged parts.

               Tires                       Discarded tires, in truckload quantities.

               Dead Animals                Does not include the occasional dead

                                           animals included in municipal waste.

               Leaves and Chopped         -Tree wastes that have been processed

               Tree Waste                  through a wood chipper, or fallen leaves.

               Agriculture Vegetative      waste materials from farms, plant nur-

               Waste                       series, & greenhouses produced from the

                                           raising of plants. This waste includes

                                           such crop residues as plant stalks, hulls

                                           and leaves.

               Tree Stumps                 The part of a tree trunk remaining after

                                           the tree has been felled.

               Food Processing Wastes      Processing waste materials generated

                                           in canneries, slaughterhouses, packing

                                           plants or.similar industries.

                                                 _60-

             Oil Spill Clean-Up         Wastes generated during an oil spill

             Wastes                     clean-up operation which include but

                                        are not limited to oil soaked sand and

                                        straw.

             Industrial                 Solid waste materials resulting from

             (Non-Chemical)             the manufacturing industry. Specifically,

                                        not included is waste material of a chem-

                                        ical nature which is normally   generated

                                        by or used in chemical, petro-chemical,

                                        plastic, pharmaceutical, biochemical

                                        or microbiological manufacturing processes,

                                        which has been selected for waste dis-

                                        posal & which is known to hydrolize,

                                        ionize or decompose, which is soluble,

                                        burns or oxidizes, or which may react

                                        with any of the waste,materials.which

                                        are introduced into the landfill, or

                                        which is bouyant on water, or which has a

                                        viscosity less than that of water or

                                        which produces a foul odor.

             LIQUID WASTES.             DEFINITIONS

             Waste Oil                  Automotive crank case drainings & other

                                        discarded free flowing oils from indus-

                                        trial,.aviation & miscellaneous appli-

                                        cations.

                                             -61-

             'LIQUID WASTES (cont'd)    DEFINITIONS

              Semi-Solid Waste          Waste oils and materials which are in

              Oils & Sludges            the form of a highly concentrated slushy

                                        residue.

              Bulk Liquid and           Liquid or a mixture consisting of solid

              Semi-liquids              matter-suspended in a liquid media which

                                        is contained within, or is discharged

                                        from, any one vessel, tank or other con-

                                        tainer which has the capacity of 20 gal-

                                        Ions or more. Included are bulk or semi-

                                        liquids for which there is not a specific

                                        waste category.

              Septic Tank               Pumpings from septic tanks and cesspools.

              Clean-Out Wastes          Not included are wastes from a sewage

                                        treatment plant.

              Liquid Sewage Sludge      Liquid residue from a sewage treatment

                                        plant consisting of sewage solids com-

                                        bined with water & dissolved materials.

              Pesticide Liquids         Chemical substance capable of flowing

                                        or of being poured intended for use to

                                        control or manage insects, plant diseases,

                                        weeds and some other organisms trouble-

                                        some to man,

                                             _62-

             Hazardous Waste           Free flowing material which is inherently

             Liquids                   dangerous to handle or dispose of. Included

                                       in this category are waste materials which

                                       are toxic,, corrosive, irritating or sensi-

                                       tizingy radioactive biologically infectious,

                                       explosive or flammable.

             Chemical Waste            Free flowing material normally generated

             Liquids                   by or used in chemical, petro-chemicalt

                                       plastic, pharmaceutical, biochemical or

                                       microbiological manufacturing processes.

                                       This material is known to hydrolize,

                                       ionize or decompose, is soluble, burns

                                       or oxidizes, or may react with any of the

                                       waste materials which are introduced into

                                       the landfill, or produces a foul odor.

                                       Not included is any chemical waste liquid

                                       for which there is a specific waste category.

             *These definitions are utilized by the Bureau of Solid Waste
              Management of the Department of Environmental Protection.

                                            -63-

             Bureau of Solid Waste Management, New Jersey Department       of Envi-

                   ronmental Protection, Cooperative Project on Solid       Waste

                   Management with.Glassboro State College, Trenton:        1975.

             Bureau of Solid-Waste Management, New Jersey Departme      nt of Envi-

                   ronmental Protectidn, County Disposal Data for 1974.

             Bureau of Solid Waste Management, New Jersey Department of Envi-

                   ronmental Protection, New Jersey State Solid Waste Management

                   Plan,.Newark: Planners Associates, Inc., July 1970.

             Bureau of Solid Waste Management,-New Jersey Department of Envi-

                   ronmental Protection. Sanitary Landfill Directory for 1974.

             Camden County Planning Board. Solid Waste 1970. Pennsauken,

                   New Jersey: Camden County Planning Board, 1970.

             Cape May County Planning Board, Refuse Disposal in Cape May County,

                   New Jersey, Cape May Court House:     Cape May County Planning

                   Board, 1968.

             Day & Zimmermann, Inc., Mercer County, New Jersey Comprehensive

                   Plan: Solid Waste Disposal Study and Plan, Mercer County

                   Improvement Authority, June 1971.

             Disko, M., Associates, Ocean County Solid Waste Disposal and

                   Resource Recovery Management Study, Vol. 1: Inventory of

                   Existing Solid Waste Systems and Background Information,

                   West Orange, New Jersey: M. Disko Associates, 1975.

                                               -65-

            Greenberg, Michael, Report on Intuitive-Interactive  Model 2:

                 Initial Report, March 6, 1976.

            Greenberg, Michael R. and others, Solid Waste Planning in Metro-

                 politan Regions, Rutgers University: Center for Urban Policy

                 Research, 1976.

            Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission, A Solid waste

                 Strategy and A Park Proposal, 1975.

            Havens and Emerson, Ltd., Report on Refuse Collection and Disposal

                 for Monmouth Shore Refuse Disposal Committee, March 1970.

            Kaczorski, Al, Bureau of Solid Waste Management, Department of

                 Environmental Protection, Trenton, New Jersey, Interview

                 June 25, 1976o

            Middlesex County Planning Board, Middlesex County Solid Waste

                 Management Program, Vol. 1, New Brunswick: Middlesex County

                 Planning Board, 1975.

            New Jersey, P.L. 1975, Chapter 326, approved February 23, 1976.

            New Jersey, Rules of the Bureau of Solid Waste Management, N.J.A.C.

                 7:26-1 et seq. (1974).

                                          -66-

           Pereira, Lino, Bureau of Solid Waste Management, Department of
                 EnvironImental Protection, Trenton, New Jersey, Interview,

                 June 23, 1976.

           Solid Waste Management: Analysis of Problems and Recommendations

                 for*Possible Solutions. Princeton University. June 1972.

           U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Decision-Makers Guide

                 in Solid Waste Management, Washington, D.C.: U. S. Envi-

                 ronmental Protection Agency, 1976.

           Williams, R. E. and B. Bocciarelli, The Plan for Solid Waste

                 Management in Burlington County, N.J., Moorestown, New Jersey:

                 Applied Information Industries, 1972.

                                          -67-

                                                                             COASTAL ZONE
                                                                             INFORMATION CENTER

                                                                                                                 DATE DUE

                                                                                             GAYLORbINO. 2333                                   PfUNTED 114 U.S.A.

                                                                                                          3 6668 14106 7779