Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment Landfill Methane topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County staff warn Regulation 31 could force landfill gas controls after monitoring shows methane rates above state off‑ramp
Summary
County landfill staff reported an unofficial monitoring run showing an average methane generation rate of about 35.7%, above the 30% off‑ramp in Colorado's Regulation 31, making a future gas collection/control system likely and prompting calls to budget for design and monitoring over the three‑year implementation window.
Deb Viscus, a county landfill official, and Bentley Henderson, consultant, briefed the Garfield County Board of County Commissioners on Colorado's new Regulation 31 on methane from landfills and what it means for the county landfill.
Viscus said the adopted regulation includes an important three‑year planning window but warned that an off‑ramp in the rule applies only when methane generation rates are below 30 percent. "Even if you average them all together to get, an overall landfill, we're still at 35.7," she said, summarizing sampling from passive vents at the site.
Henderson reviewed the rulemaking history, tracing the requirement to state climate legislation and subsequent CDPHE rulemaking. He said stakeholders secured several changes in an errata, including a three‑year grace period for implementation, relaxed monitoring thresholds and procedural off‑ramps — but that the regulation remains likely to require gas control if local monitoring exceeds thresholds.
County staff said they ran an unofficial surface emissions monitoring event last fall and sampled passive vents, producing the 35.7% figure. Viscus said that given that result, a Tier 2 evaluation would be unlikely to avoid controls, and that the county should plan for the capital and program impacts of a gas collection and control system. "Estimated off the cuff budgetary numbers are 30 to 40,000" for some monitoring steps and, for a full gas collection/control system, the county has previously discussed multi‑hundred‑thousand to potentially multi‑million dollar costs, depending on system scope and future rule details.
Commissioners and staff discussed mitigation steps that could reduce measured emissions or delay capital installation: capping and adding additional soil cover to vents, targeted repairs to areas with grid threshold exceedances, temporary monitoring and operational fixes, and longer‑term strategies such as waste diversion or composting programs. Viscus noted compost and other bio‑cover options exist but cautioned sufficient compost supply is limited and that diversion/composting itself is a multi‑year, permit‑driven undertaking.
County staff recommended three immediate steps: continue frequent unofficial monitoring to understand trends before official 2029 quarterly monitoring begins; budget and shelf a professional design for a gas collection system so a permit submission can proceed quickly if required; and consider targeted landfill cover improvements and operational fixes to reduce surface emissions.
The board asked staff to return with cost estimates and a work plan for monitoring, design budgeting and potential fiscal impacts, and to remain engaged in any legislative or rule conversations that could affect the county's compliance obligations.
The county referenced Regulation 31 and the enabling state legislation during the briefing and will continue technical work in 2026 to refine projected costs and schedule.
