Drywall scrap

Tobie: Your instincts are right-on but for now, MRc2 still allows gyp and other materials as “alternate daily cover” which counts towards diverted landfill material. I understand that you have a C&S v2009 question and that public CIRs do not apply to v2009 projects, however, this position on alternate daily cover is still the rule for v2009 as I understand it. LEED 2012 will likely change that to disallow ADC which I for one will be happy to see go. If you want to be absolutely sure this still applies to your v2009 project you can always submit a CIR. Refer to USGBC CIR 8/2/08 below: 8/2/2008 - Ruling The project is inquiring whether the intent of MRc2 is met when project materials are used as alternative daily cover (ADC) at a landfill. Any construction debris processed into a recycled content commodity which has an open market value – e.g. alternative daily cover material, etc. – may be applied to the construction waste calculation.

Valerie, Can you perhaps be persuaded to take another look at ADC and what the options might be? Keep in mind, EPA requires landfills to cover their garbage with 6 inches of some kind of cover every night. Prior to ADC this cover was uncontaminated soil, which, by the mere fact that it was applied to the landfill, immediately became contaminated. We run a MRF where we are able to use screens to catch the fines and small bits of detritus that would indeed go to the landfill anyway. The difference is that they would go as garbage with no useful purpose except to fill space. As ADC they fulfill a Federal Requirement, designed to guard against odor and vermin. Here in Oregon, we are regulated very tightly by the state Department of Environment Quality who require the generator of the material to submit samples of the proposed ADC, and then they monitor a 12 month test with the landfill operator before they give full authority to continue using the material. Each ADC has to be approved as to the generator and the recipient and is not transferable. Please don't punish a legitimate use of an otherwise scrap material just because of anecdotal stories about poor operators. How about a specification and definition for legitimate use of the product? I am sure that there are plenty of examples that could be looked at.

Eric, it sounds like with your interest in this topic you might want to consider getting more involved at a committee level with USGBC. No need to worry about my views on ADC. We are only 1 member company and vote with USGBC regarding future rating system changes.