Senate passes bill with solid waste mandates for municipalities

On June 28, the Senate unanimously passed a bill that would impose solid waste performance standards on communities and institute new reporting requirements.
 
The MMA has expressed strong concerns about the legislation (S. 2389), particularly its unfunded mandates. The bill has been forwarded to the House for consideration.
 
The bill would have the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection establish performance standards for the reduction of municipal solid waste. The legislation requires that the standards reduce solid waste to no more than 600 pounds per capita by July 1, 2018, and to no more than 450 per capita by July 1, 2022. Communities that do not administer trash and recycling collection would be exempted from the standards.
 
Cities and towns would be required to report to the DEP the total weight of solid waste disposed annually. Many communities do report on total weight of solid waste in applications for Sustainable Materials Recovery Program grants, but not all communities report this information.
 
Communities that are not able to meet the legislation’s performance standards would be required to submit a report explaining why and detailing a plan to meet the standards by 2022.
 
An estimated 75 percent of communities currently exceed the 2022 performance standard.
 
The bill would have the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs develop a municipal solid waste standards action plan that includes information on recycling programs and incentives, along with any recommendations.
 
The Senate passed an amendment to the bill that would establish a solid waste reduction assistance fund, but the MMA expressed concerns that the fund lacks a meaningful revenue stream. The fund would be dependent on appropriations authorized by the Legislature and penalties assessed to solid waste haulers for violations of waste bans. The DEP would allocate funding to municipal and other recycling programs, composting programs, composting and recycling public education programs, and zero waste programs. Funding could also provide grants to solid waste haulers and generators.
 
In a July 6 letter to House leaders, the MMA urged the House to oppose the bill and focus on legislation that would reduce the volume of solid waste by encouraging producer responsibility at the source and support technical assistance for cities and towns rather than mandates.
 
“Municipalities have made enormous progress in reducing solid waste and increasing recycling programs throughout the state, but the new requirements in S. 2389 would impose a costly new mandate on cities and towns,” the MMA wrote. “Removing materials at the beginning of the use cycle is far more effective than mandating that taxpayers deal with the problem at end of the waste stream.”
 
The MMA’s Policy Committee on Energy and the Environment will continue to discuss solid waste and recycling issues and review positions for the next legislative session. At its meeting in May, the committee delved into solid waste and recycling policy, focusing on H. 646, a bill that would repeal the 5-cent bottle deposit law and instead institute a 1-cent fee on the sale of beverage containers by a distributer or wholesaler. The fee would be in effect for three years and revenue would go to a Municipal Recycling Enhancement Fund. The committee heard presentations from both proponents and opponents of the bill.