Statement of Senator Arlen Specter

Committee on Environment and Public Works

Interstate Waste Hearing

Wednesday, March 20, 2002, 10:00 a.m.

406 Dirksen Senate Office Building

March 20, 2002

Mr. Chairman, I thank you for agreeing to hold this hearing today. The interstate shipment of solid waste and the inability of localities to use flow control authority are problems of national significance and are top priorities for millions of Pennsylvanians and for me. Thirty-seven states imported municipal solid waste in recent years, including thirteen states represented on this Committee: Pennsylvania, Virginia, Ohio, Oregon, New Jersey, Nevada, New York, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Missouri, Montana, Idaho, and California.

My legislation, The Solid Waste Interstate Transportation and Local Authority Act of 2001, (S.1194) would allow these states and their local communities to have a voice in determining how much trash can be imported without threatening the environment. My bill has been referred to this Committee and it is a very high priority of mine to see it considered by the Committee in a markup at the earliest possible date after this hearing and scheduled for consideration by the full Senate promptly.

Congressional action is imperative because of rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court on the issue of trash shipments. Beginning in 1978 with the Philadelphia v. New Jersey decision, in which the Court stipulated that New Jersey could not close its borders to trash from Pennsylvania, and in subsequent decisions, the Court has struck down State laws restricting the importation of solid waste from other jurisdictions under the Interstate Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The only remaining solution is for Congress to enact legislation conferring such authority on the States, which would then be Constitutional.

Congress came very close to enacting legislation to address this issue in 1994, and the Senate passed interstate waste and flow control legislation in May 1995 by an overwhelming 94-6 margin, only to see it die in the House of Representatives.

It is time that the largest trash exporting States bite the bullet and take substantial steps towards self-sufficiency for waste disposal. The legislation passed by the Senate in the 103rd and 104th Congresses would have provided much-needed relief to Pennsylvania, which is by far the largest importer of out-of-State waste in the nation. According to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, 3.9 million tons of out-of-State municipal solid waste entered Pennsylvania in 1993, rising to 4.3 million tons in 1994, 5.2 million in 1995, 6.3 million tons in 1996 and 1997, 7.2 million tons in 1998, and a record 9.8 million tons in 2000, which are the most recent statistics available.

According to the Congressional Research Service, twenty states had increased imports of municipal waste in 2000, with the largest increases occurring in Pennsylvania and Michigan. The increases in these two states, 2.6 million and 1.1 million tons respectively, total more than the entire increase nationally. Fully 52% of total municipal waste imports are disposed in just three states: Pennsylvania, Virginia and Michigan and Pennsylvania remains the largest waste importer by far with out-of-State waste accounting for half of my State’s trash disposal and 30% of the national total for interstate shipments.

Most of the trash imported into Pennsylvania came from New York and New Jersey, with New York responsible for 48% and New Jersey responsible for 40% of the municipal solid waste imported into Pennsylvania in 2000.

This is not a problem limited to one small corner of my State. Millions of tons of trash generated in other States find their final resting place in more than 50 landfills throughout Pennsylvania. Now, more than ever, we need legislation which will go a long way toward resolving the landfill problems facing Pennsylvania, Virginia, Michigan and similar waste importing States.

I have met with county officials, environmental groups, and other Pennsylvanians to discuss the solid waste issue specifically, and it often comes up in the public open house town meetings I conduct in all of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties. I came away from those meetings impressed by the deep concerns expressed by the residents of communities which host a landfill rapidly filling up with the refuse from States that have failed to adequately manage the waste they generate.

This issue was highlighted for me in 1988 when I was traveling near Scranton, Pennsylvania and noticed a large waste truck on the side of the road emitting a terrible odor. I found out that the truck was bringing waste from outside the state. Upon my return to Washington, I discussed the problem with my late colleague, Senator John Heinz, and in 1989 we introduced legislation to address the issue. Subsequently, I joined former Senator Dan Coats along with cosponsors from both sides of the aisle to introduce legislation which would have authorized States to restrict the disposal of out-of-State municipal waste in any landfill or incinerator within its jurisdiction. I was pleased when many of the concepts in our legislation were incorporated in the Environment and Public Works Committee’s reported bills in the 103rd and 104th Congresses, and I supported these measures during floor consideration.

During the 103rd Congress, we encountered a new issue with respect to municipal solid waste -- the issue of waste flow control authority. On May 16, 1994, the Supreme Court held (6-3) in Carbone v. Clarkstown that a flow control ordinance, which requires all solid waste to be processed at a designated waste management facility, violates the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. In striking down the Clarkstown ordinance, the Court stated that the ordinance discriminated against interstate commerce by allowing only the favored operator to process waste that is within the town's limits. As a result of the Court's decision, flow control ordinances in Pennsylvania and other States are considered unconstitutional.

I have met with county commissioners who have made clear that this issue is vitally important to the local governments in Pennsylvania and my office has, over the past years received numerous phone calls and letters from Pennsylvania counties and municipal solid waste authorities that support waste flow control legislation. Since 1988, flow control has been the primary tool used by Pennsylvania counties to enforce solid waste plans and meet waste reduction and recycling goals or mandates. Many Pennsylvania jurisdictions have spent a considerable amount of public funds on disposal facilities, including upgraded sanitary landfills, state-of-the-art resource recovery facilities, and co-composting facilities. In the absence of flow control authority, I am advised that many of these worthwhile projects could be jeopardized and that there has been a fiscal impact on some communities where there are debt service obligations.

In order to fix these problems, my legislation would provide a presumptive ban on all out-of-state municipal solid waste, including construction and demolition debris, unless a landfill obtains the agreement of the local government to allow for the importation of waste. An exemption to the ban would exist if the facility already has a host community agreement; or for the amount of out-of-State waste specified in standing contracts, for the life of the contract or the period ending 3 years after the date of enactment. Further, my bill would provide State governments the authority to place a limit on the amount of out-of-state waste received annually. It would also provide a ratchet authority to allow a State to gradually reduce the amount of out-of-state municipal waste that may be received at facilities.

These provisions will provide a concrete incentive for the largest exporting states to get a handle on their solid waste management immediately. Additionally, to address the problem of flow control, my bill would provide local governments the authority to direct that their waste be disposed of in designated facilities. This would be a narrow fix for only those localities that constructed facilities before the 1994 Supreme Court ruling and who relied on their ability to regulate the flow of garbage to pay for their municipal bonds and address their stranded costs.

In conclusion, the two most popular words of any speech, I would like to welcome David Hess, Secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, who will be testifying today. He will likely address many of the issues I have raised with more particularity. His presence here emphasizes the importance of this issue to Pennsylvania. This is an issue that affects many states, and I urge my colleagues to support this very important legislation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.