1. Alternative Daily Cover (ADC) Investigation Report

2. Report Presentation Overview  REQUIREMENTS  FACILITY SELECTION  METHODOLOGY  FINDINGS  NEXT STEPS

3. CalRecycle Requirements for ADC California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 14 and 27 Disposal Reporting System (DRS) Annual Reporting 14 CCR § 18810.9 Landfill Record Keeping 27 CCR § 20510 (g) ADC Application State Minimum Standards 27 CCR § 20690 (a)(1)

4. Facility Selection Highest Ratios Reported to DRS in 2012  Top 10 Sites with Highest Total ADC to Waste Disposed Ratios  ADC to disposal ranges: 494% to 16.7%  Highest Processed Green Material ADC to Waste Ratios  8 of 15 sites used processed green material  ADC to disposal ranges: 363.9% to 4.9%  Top 5 with highest ADC to waste ratio  ADC to disposal ranges > 25%

5. Facility Selection - Range of Percentages

6. Facility Selection - List Azusa Land Reclamation Co. Landfill Calabasas Sanitary Landfill City of Watsonville Landfill Clover Flat Landfill L and D Landfill Olinda Alpha Sanitary Landfill Pebbly Beach (Avalon) Disposal Site Top 5 Processed Green Material ADC to Waste Disposed Ratio Potrero Hills Landfill Pumice Valley Landfill Rock Creek Landfill Scholl Canyon Landfill Simi Valley Landfill & Recycling Center Vasco Road Sanitary Landfill Walker Landfill Zanker Material Processing Facility

7. Investigation Methodology - Record Review  Review of DRS Reports  Selection of Sites  Review of Board of Equalization Reports  Reviewing Permit Documents  Solid Waste Facility Permit  Report of Disposal Site Information (RDSI)/ Joint Technical Documents (JTD)  ADC Demonstration Projects  Previous Inspection Reports

8. Investigation Methodology - Facility Review  Facility Inspections  Landfill record review  Site observation of ADC use  Test hole digging  Interviewing Facility Operators  Interviewing LEAs

9. Findings - Facility Variables  Density of ADC material  Types of ADC Use  Frequency of ADC Use  Amount of waste disposed  Size and Shape of Working/Active Face  Waste in Place Density

10. Findings  2 Facilities Likely Over Used ADC  8 Facilities Mis-reported to DRS  6 Over-reported ADC: No indications of over-use  2 Over-used could not be determined  5 Facilities had No Errors  No record keeping or DRS reporting errors were found  No indications of over use

11. Findings – Nature of Mis-reporting  Reporting ADC Accepted as ADC Used  Combining ADC Material with Another Recycled Material  Reporting Beneficial Reuse as ADC  Reporting Intermediate Cover as ADC  Including Soil as ADC  Using the Incorrect Conversion Factor (tons to cubic yards)  Appyling Unapproved ADC.

12. Next Steps  Education and Outreach  LEAs & Operators Training – Fall 2014 State Minimum Standards Training  Development of DRS Outreach Materials  New DRS Reports and Tools on the CalRecycle Website  Enhanced Focus on ADC Use and Record Keeping during CalRecycle’s future 18-month Inspections

13. Thanks to the Investigation Team!