nationalviewpoint

Information to share? Send your contribution:

Cumberland Landfill Information Web Site

Community Development through informed citizen involvement.

"...let Facts be submitted to a candid world." --The Declaration of Independence

State Waste Empowerment and Enforcement Provision Act of 2007 - Amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act to authorize a state to limit, place restrictions on, or otherwise regulate out-of-state municipal solid waste received or disposed of annually at each landfill or incinerator in the state, except, until two years after enactment of this Act, to the extent that a host community agreement (between an owner or operator of a landfill or incinerator and an affected local government) specifically authorizes such receipt.

Solid Waste Interstate Transportation Act of 2007 - Amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act to prohibit a landfill or incinerator (facility) from receiving out-of-state municipal solid waste (MSW) for disposal or incineration unless the waste is received pursuant to a new or existing host community agreement or an exemption from this prohibition (which may be limited by the state). Establishes conditions for exemptions.

Authorizes states to establish limits on the amount of out-of-state MSW received annually for disposal at each facility. Sets the limitation amount for any facility that began receiving documented out-of-state waste before enactment of this Act at the amount received during 1993 (or first subsequent year of documentation). Prohibits state limits from conflicting with permits or host community agreements.

Authorizes states to require that a permit for a new or expanded facility include an annual limitation of not less than 20% on the total quantity of out-of-state MSW relative to the total waste received by the facility. Requires percentage limitations to be uniform and not discriminate against out-of-state MSW according to state of origin.

Allows states to limit the amount of out-of-state MSW received annually at each facility to the amount received during 1995 if the state has a comprehensive, statewide recycling program. Prohibits discrimination against shipments of such waste on the basis of state of origin.

Authorizes states to require inspectors to be onsite during operation of a facility that receives out-of-state MSW.

H.R.274Title: To impose certain limitations on the receipt of out-of-State municipal solid waste, and for other purposes.Sponsor: Rep Davis, Jo Ann [VA-1] (introduced 1/5/2007) Cosponsors (2)Latest Major Action: 1/5/2007 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Landfills can be a help to poor counties, but North Carolina must take a stronger hand in regulating them

North Carolinians are used to the state appearing on Top Five lists. Whether it's the quality of life hereabouts or our barbecue, beaches and basketball, we're tempted to regard such frequent accolades as our rightful due.

But when we're faced with being on the Top Five list of garbage-importing states, it's time to do more than pat ourselves on the back. It's time for some serious study, hard questions and thoughtful answers.

Thankfully, the moratorium on large landfills enacted by the legislature last year provided all three. It gave state environmental regulators the time needed to create proposed landfill rules that at first glance appear to place sensible controls on an industry that may be necessary but is rarely welcomed.

Last year, privately operated landfills were proposed for six eastern and southern Piedmont counties. The largest, headed for Camden County in the far northeast, would bring in 3 million tons of garbage a year from out of state. Eventually, the mountain of garbage there would tower an estimated 270 feet, or roughly the height of some of Raleigh's downtown skyscrapers.

Landfills were also proposed for Hyde, Columbus, Brunswick, Richmond and Scotland counties. Officials in those counties for the most part welcomed the jobs and investment the garbage would bring.

Such open arms, as well as the availability of cheap land and an eager work force, is why the companies chose the areas for garbage to be shipped in by truck, train and barge from as far away as New York. The legislature, to its credit, had the wisdom to see that North Carolina had best proceed carefully before allowing itself to become the garbage capital of the East Coast.

The proposed regulations were presented last week to a legislative committee. They would toughen financial requirements for landfill operators, require state and not just local approval for large landfills, and impose fees to clean up landfills that might be abandoned in the future. Also a hefty surcharge would be added on garbage coming in from out of state, and environmental standards and monitoring rules would be tightened. The proposals are wide-ranging, in-depth and deserve serious consideration by lawmakers.

Giant landfills may be attractive to officials in rural counties struggling to create jobs for their residents. And the state certainly should consider local economic needs when making decisions on landfill applications. But with the potential environmental and societal impacts posed by a mountain of garbage rising from the fragile flat lands of Eastern North Carolina, the final decision must rest with those free to take a wider view.

A poorly run landfill can affect the environment many miles away. It would not be in the best interest of the state as a whole for counties to be free to develop a patchwork of landfill regulations.

Hard-pressed counties also should be spared the temptation to weaken landfill requirements in order to draw jobs. North Carolina has already faced unsettling accusations of environmental racism that ring true when landfills always seem to find their way to poor regions.

The fees proposed by state regulators seem reasonable. The Easley administration last year suggested the state collect $2 per ton of imported garbage, a surcharge expected to net $22 million a year. Thirty-one states have such surcharges with the money most often going to clean up abandoned dumps.

North Carolina has had relatively good luck with large landfills. State regulators say leaks have been detected at only four landfills that used plastic liners. And private landfill operators say they can run landfills that are at worst environmentally neutral.

Such reassurances, however sincere, are not enough. The state would be smart to also require landfill operators to post sizable bonds to provide a pool of money in the event, however unlikely, that a high-tech landfill springs a leak. The potential for environmental damage, particularly in coastal areas with high water tables, is too great to take chances. The Camden site, for instance, is near the Great Dismal Swamp.

Garbage is a fact of life in the 21st century. Disposing of it in a safe way is a challenge. Whether or not this is a Top Five list the state wants to brag about is very much an open question. The work of the state Department of Environment and Natural Resources has at least offered guideposts to find the answer.

In the face of all-out pressure from waste industry lobbyists, the North Carolina General Assembly listened instead to community activists and passed a one-year moratorium on new landfills in the state Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League members and their allies maintained constant pressure on their elected representatives with phonecalls ,e-mails, and personal visits to Raleigh to demand a trash time-out. Overwhelming bi-partisan support for the moratorium demonstrated the effectiveness of this citizen campaign.

The legislation imposed a moratorium until August 1,2007 on the consideration of permit applications or issuance of new permits for municipal solid waste, construction and demolition, or industrial solid waste landfills Exceptions allow existing landfills to modify their permits or expand within their permitted boundaries.

During the 12-month period of the moratorium two study commissions will examine the many issues raised by the prospect of new mega-dumps in North Carolina. One study will be done by the Environmental Review Commission.

The second study commission is the Joint Select Committee on Environmental Justice.

This commission will be composed of eight members from the General Assembly plus

Association of County Commissioners,and the League of Municipalities. Their issues

The location of current landfills relative to demographics of race and poverty Impacts to health, environment and economic development

The role of statutes, rules and policies by state and local government in land fills

Reports and recommendations from these commissions will be due in January 2007 for

Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League chapters in Camden, Brunswick, Columbus,

Scotland, Richmond, Person, Duplin, Greenand Forsyth worked together to make the

moratorium happen. BREDL chapters with local campaigns to stop landfills in their

community can now expand those efforts. The campaign to replace a state policy that

Jan. 18, 2007--North Carolinians and their communities should be better protected from the environmental hazards of large landfills, state environmental regulators told a panel of lawmakers Wednesday.

They proposed tighter regulations, including tougher financial requirements for landfill owners, state approval of larger landfills, broader environmental studies and fees to clean up old landfills.

"We believe there need to be improvements made," Robin Smith, assistant secretary of the state Department of Environment and Natural Resources, told the Environmental Review Commission, a panel of legislators.

Lawmakers are reviewing the state's regulation of garbage disposal sites after putting permits for new landfills on hold for a year. They did so because of concerns that six privately owned regional landfills proposed in rural eastern and Piedmont counties could transform the state into one of the nation's top five importers of garbage and debris.

The largest, proposed in Camden County by Raleigh-based Waste Industries, would bury up to 3 million tons of trash a year -- creating a mountain of trash 270 feet high. Landfills are also proposed in Hyde, Columbus, Brunswick, Richmond and Scotland counties. Much of the garbage would be shipped in by truck, train or barge from states as far away as New York.

Representatives for solid-waste companies said the state's existing regulations work well to protect the public. They also noted that modern landfills with plastic liners have fewer problems.

Paul Crissman, chief of the solid-waste section for the Division of Waste Management, said there have been four instances over the years of leaks from lined landfills in the state, typically associated with the pipes or collection systems that handle liquid from the landfill. Groundwater monitors detected the leaks, and the problems were fixed, Crissman said.

"We think we need to move ahead and improve our regulations to stay ahead of the curve in the future," Crissman said.

Currently, the first step in locating a private landfill in North Carolina is getting a local government to approve a franchise agreement for a solid-waste company. Smith suggested that the approval process for big landfills should become the state's business instead because garbage would be imported from a large number of counties or states.

"Many large landfills have impacts that extend beyond the service area of the local government," Smith said. "For very large landfills with the potential for regional or statewide impacts, we need to look at requiring statewide franchises."

Smith said landfill operators also should post financial assurances to cover the cost of potential releases. That is not currently required, she said.

"We believe it's very important that there be financial assurances from the beginning," she said.

Smith said a statewide surcharge on garbage sent to landfills was needed, and the money should pay for cleaning up contamination at abandoned dumps. Thirty-one states have surcharges.

Last year the Easley administration proposed a $2 per ton surcharge that would generate an estimated $22 million a year. Nearby states have fees ranging from 65 cents per ton in Georgia to $1.75 a ton in Kentucky and $8.75 in West Virginia. South Carolina, Virginia and Florida have no fees.

David Barnes, a lawyer representing the Carolinas chapter of the National Solid Wastes Management Association, an industry group, said solid-waste companies objected to the existing moratorium but wanted to be involved in developing new regulations.

Barnes said the state's current regulations work well and protect the public and the environment. He said the industry objects to a surcharge on garbage collection.

"If we are building facilities in accordance with regulations, we believe we are being careful with the environment," Barnes said.

For reprints, email [email protected], call 800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303, Glenview, IL 60025, USA.

North Carolina communities with significant minority populations are more than twice as likely to be located near landfills than overwhelmingly white areas, according to a study presented on Oct. 16 to the Joint Select Committee on Environmental Justice, a panel created this year to evaluate the impact of present and future landfills on minority groups and the poor.

The committee was created by a law that placed a one-year moratorium on permitting new landfills in North Carolina.

By February, the panel is expected to recommend how to ensure that human health concerns and citizen equity are protected when landfills are considered.

The study by UNC Chapel Hill examined Division of Waste Management permits for 419 solid waste landfills from the 1970s through 2003. It looked at US Census Bureau figures in the areas surrounding the sites on racial and ethnic makeup and average home values; a measurement of a community's wealth.

Adjusting for population density, the report found solid waste facilities were 2.1 times more likely to be located in a community where more than 10 percent of residents were minorities, compared to areas where less than 10 percent of residents were minorities.

On August 14, North Carolina Governor Easley signed into law a moratorium on new landfills for the state. The moratorium is in response to six proposed landfills in Brunswick, Columbus, Camden, Scotland, Richmond and Hyde Counties. The moratorium provides time to consider the concentrated benefits that will accrue to the counties, while also accounting for the diffuse costs to the state. The landfill dilemma should raise even bigger questions, especially about our rural counties: Why are rural communities faced with such limited choices? more