Editors Note: The CMRA’s Illinois Chapter provided testimony at a hearing convened by an Illinois state senator on the issue of counting ADC made from C&D fines as waste so local governments could collect host fees on its use or landfills could apply under the state’s recently develop beneficial use program for an exemption from the waste laws. Below is the testimony of Kristina Kaar, the chapter’s spokesperson. The Beneficial Use Determination (BUD) law provides an official mechanism for the IEPA to approve the management of materials delivered to landfills for the purpose of alternate daily cover (ADC) and road building products. The term beneficial use acknowledges that a material has some intrinsic value that warrants its application in place of another product. The processing of construction and demolition debris yields a product that can be used for alternate daily cover and for road material. This mixture has proven to be a desirable product as a replacement for virgin mined gravel or soil that would otherwise be required at landfills. The ability of landfills to use this portion of the materials recovered in the construction materials recovery process as ADC and roads rather than having to purchase and transport mined gravel or soil is a mutually beneficial use.
Construction materials recyclers have operated in Illinois for approximately 15 years. Should the beneficial use determination be eliminated, these companies would be unable to continue to operate as construction and demolition facilities under Sec. 22.38 of the Illinois Environ-mental Protection Act. The permit issued by the IEPA requires at least 75% of material collected and processed is recovered. Approximately 25% of the materials processed yields the product taken to landfills for use as ADC and road building. No more than 25% of material taken to construction materials recyclers is unrecoverable waste, which is delivered to landfills as waste and a tipping fee is charged
for disposal. This is not a new arrangement, but has been a standard of operation for years.
If the designation of ADC were to be changed, these companies would be forced to cease operations and result in the loss in excess of 500 jobs in the five-county area, primarily in labor, trades and equipment operation. This loss of jobs and industry would go beyond construction materials recyclers. The cascading effect of losing this portion of the recycling and recovery industry would also affect scrap metal recyclers, cardboard and paper mills, asphalt shingle recyclers, plastics recyclers, mulch and animal bedding markets, concrete, bricks and aggregate industries that rely upon construction materials recyclers as a source for materials. The trucking industry, which relies upon all of these industries, would also be affected. 
Should the use of processed construction materials be rejected for ADC and road building purposes and relegated to be disposed as waste in the landfill, Illinois will be the only state to do so. This would have an impact on building and construction activities in Illinois.
Construction materials recyclers’ clients include builders and developers pursuing LEED certification. Builders and building owners pursuing LEED certification attempt to take advantage of every possible point value to attain their goal. One of the potential strategies identified for one to two credits in LEED certification specifically states, “Construction debris processed into a recycled content commodity that has an open market value (e.g., wood derived fuel, alternative daily cover material, etc.), may be applied to the construction waste calculator.” The impact on these projects could be to lose their desired certification and would be a blow to green building in Illinois.
Local solid waste agencies have argued that the use of processed construction materials for ADC and road building allows materials to be brought to the landfill while circumventing tipping fees. However, landfills do not collect tipping fees for materials required to operate their landfill, such as gravel or soil designated for ADC or to build access roads on the landfill site. The economy of using processed construction materials saves both the cost and energy of mining gravel or soil, and the energy and emissions to transport the gravel or soil to the landfill. If these materials were not allowed to be used as a viable option, there is no other market at this time that would divert this material from the landfill. When there is no market for a material, whether paper, plastic containers or recovered construction materials, unfortunately it will go to a landfill. How counter-productive can it be to disregard the value of using a processed, recovered material in lieu of new or mined natural resources?
A further argument offered is that this is a loss of state and local fees, which support recycling programs and environmental education. The dilemma we face is that we are being asked to designate enough waste to generate revenue to encourage recycling and waste reduction.
The Illinois State legislature recently passed a valuable, applauded law that will enable food waste to be recovered and composted. We hope that the recovery of food waste will be encouraged, even though this will also significantly reduce the amount of waste now going to landfills. We encourage further consideration of the most cost effective way to deliver recycling programs to the citizens of the state and identify funding mechanisms that don’t rely on waste generation.
The ability to recycle and recover construction materials offers great potential. A recent waste generation and composition study funded through the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity estimated that the State of Illinois generates over 4 million tons of construction and demolition debris each year. This constitutes approximately 23% of the total waste generated in the state and is the second largest category of material disposed.
Construction materials recyclers encourage greater recycling and re-use of materials to utilize resources that would otherwise be disposed as waste. We have invested millions of dollars in equipment and infrastructure to recover scrap metals, concrete, asphalt shingles, wood, plastic and other building materials for end markets. Everything that can be recovered for economic benefit is targeted. The search for more efficient sorting technologies and end products continues.
We encourage the Senate Environment Committee to consider retaining the Beneficial Use Determination as it was unanimously passed into law. We ask that the IEPA and all the affected parties work toward further opportunities to conserve natural resources and develop new recovery technologies.