2021-06-22 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Environment, Natural Resources & Agriculture
2021-06-22 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Environment, Natural Resources & Agriculture
(Part 2 of 2)
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Okay. Mr Adam Gourlay.
Mr Dooley.
Okay. Um Senator tim lt the floor is yours share our shared a common members of the committee. Thank you very much. It's great to see you all today, even if it's virtual. Uh
[SEN TIMILTY:] [SB622] Thank you very much. I am here to testify today on behalf of Senate Bill 622 which is an act relative to waste removal and transfer stations, It is a refile, Chair Rausch and Chair Dykema. This legislation will mandate that proposed waste removal stations be required to have both an Environment Act report in a waste remains committed to approval by the Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs. Prior to EEA, any particular removal stations permit. As such, this bill will allow, amongst other things for budding communities of future projects of this nature comments and that the full impact that these facilities could have on the surrounding community doesn't clear out. Chair Rausch and Chair Dykema, I respectfully request that this bill be reported favourably by your committee. I am happy to answer any questions as87 always that any member may have and thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thanks for uh questions from the committee.
Seeing that thank you sir for your testimony. Thank you to her house. And she had come on
okay. Uh moving to Mr Bill Rennie followed by Sharon casita please.
Uh Yeah, me, we can. Great, thank you.
[BILL RENNIE(RETAILERS ASSOCIATION OF MASSACHUSETTS):] Chair Rausch, Chair Dykema and member of the committee. My name is Bill Rennie, the vice president of the retailer's Association of Massachusetts. We are a statewide trade association with just over 4000 members statewide representing the full broad spectrum of the134 retail industry. The majority of our members would be between 10 to 15 employees in small locally owned owner-operated retail stores and restaurants all the way up to the larger national retail chains. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, I did submit written comments, I think maybe in about 15 bills, so I'll hold my oral comments just to touch upon160 a couple of topics.
The first one is plastic bags. To start, you know, our members wholeheartedly support the intent of those bills to reduce the amount of paper and plastic bags that we use today, you know, given that we have over 140 municipalities now that have acted on bands, ordinances, fees that are now in place. You know, we we do think it is time we reached a tipping point, maybe189 time for a statewide approach. And, you know, one of the things that we've been working on with our members over the years is what, what does that statewide approach look like? You know, and we met back in early 2019 with a number of stakeholders, some other folks in the, from the food industry and from some environmental groups to try and sort of hash out some points around that, and, you know, I'll just give you what, what our members had expressed to us, and, you know, the opinions vary greatly on what statewide standards should look like, and it depends on sort of how big you are and how many bags you use.
A fee-based approach clearly has shown this evidence around the country that it does work to reduce bag usage. For our members who, you know, do support that, you know, it's seen as a way to help238 reduce their increased bad costs. The majority of our members, I would say, remember as a split on it, if you use a lot of bags, if you're a large volume bag user, a big larger retailer, you support the fee is a255 way to reduce your increased bag costs. That will come from, you know, the increase in paper usage. However, a lot of our members expressed wariness about charging consumers you know, tomorrow for a service that they provided for them for free269 today.
So yes, back in 2019, we surveyed our members uh presented them with the possibility of a mandatory checkout bag fee, 79%276 of those responding were in favour of allowing low volume bag users. Stores like clothing, gift or jewellery sellers,282 have the ability to opt-out of charging the fee. I'm not talking about the plastic bag ban altogether, but just the290 fee. I think I have a sound there, and in full respect to the three minutes, I'll defer to the rest of my written comments and thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much. Thank you. Mr Rennie questions the committee.
Seeing none. Thank you, sir. Again for your testimony. Uh Miss Sharon casita followed by Tanya Cable please? Yes. Hi,
[SHARON BYRNE KISHIDA(MASS DEP):] [HB938] Thank you, Madam chairs and the joint committee for the privilege to speak to you today. My name is Sharon Burn casita. I have spent almost 30 years working on municipal waste reduction in Massachusetts. I retired four months ago from Mass DEPs Municipal Waste Prevention Bureau, where I served 23 years as the Municipal Assistance Coordinator for the Northeast District two representing 39 Cities and Towns North of Boston. Before that, I was the first and last342 Essex County recycling coordinator, where I initiated and ran a regional hazardous waste collection procurement that lasted 20 years and was utilized annually by 30-plus communities. Much has been written over the last three-plus years about the global recycling crisis and the very high cost of our contaminated361 recycling stream.
As we have heard, we have a trash disposal crisis as well in Massachusetts. Disposal capacity in Massachusetts has been shrinking for years, landfills are closing and no new disposal facilities are coming online and sufficient waste reduction is not on pace with this. I know firsthand the devastating financial impact that both these crises have had on Massachusetts cities and towns. So I want to use my newly liberated voice to talk about the need for extended producer responsibility legislation or EP.R. We need to shift from the current end of the smokestack model. EPR places the burden of a product's life management on405 the manufacturer. Manufacturers are thus incentivized to design sustainable products and packaging. We can no longer hand the bill for recycling and waste management to municipalities that have no control over products in the marketplace and what their residents purchase.
That said, I want to use my remaining time to strongly advocate for our house bill 938 for paint recycling. All of our butter states431 except Massachusetts have passed paint stewardship laws. Connecticut, Maine, Rhode Island, Vermont as well as new york, have passed and successfully implemented the same paint recycling law as House Bill 938 holds paint manufacturers responsible for collecting and managing leftover paint, both latex and oil-based paint. This is an industry-supported initiative with a successful infrastructure and track record. The American Coatings Association supports this law. The paint stewardship organization funds paint collection programs from a small eco fee added to the retail price of the new paint.
Paint care coordinates and manages the collection of unwanted paint by partnering478 with paint retailers and municipalities on a voluntary basis to collect unused paint. This bill also covers legacy paint, the old paint sitting in all of our basements and garages. I have heard the arguments522 about increased pricing and losing paint sales to new Hampshire but will new Hampshire pick up the bill for management of our unused unwanted paint? Bill H 938 would establish the much-needed paint care program seen in our neighbouring states. What are we waiting for? Thank you for consideration of House Bill 938 and thanks for your time today. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Miss casita and thank you for your extended public service and congratulations on your retirement. Um, Any questions from the committee.
Seeing none. Thank you and congratulations again. Thank you so much. Absolutely Miss Tanya565 Cable followed by laura tomorrow.
Yes. Hi, can you hear me? Ok? We can. Yes, thank you. All right,
[TANYA ??? (IPRA):] Thank you, Madam Chair and the joint committee for the opportunity to provide testimony today on H 938, an act relating to painting recycling. My testimony supports this bill from the perspective of the paint recycling industry. I'm wearing two hats here today; one is a local company representative, an original founder of recolouring paints. It's a Massachusetts women's business enterprise that's been recycling and manufacturing paint since about 2009. And another is a founding member of IPRA, which is an international paint recycling association founded about two years ago by the recycled paint608 manufacturers of North609 America to increase the recycling of paint.
Recolour paints as a company is a local company comprised of about 15 employees part-time seasonal. To date, we've collected and processed hundreds of thousands of pounds of latex paint from towns, businesses and homes in the state of Massachusetts. It's estimated, however, that there's about close to 1.6 as you've heard already today with about 1.6 million gallons of paint left over each year in this state and appropriate appropriately managing all this through household hazardous waste programs and the like639 going to cost more than $15 million a year with increased recycling costs that we're seeing in burdens being placed on our local municipalities. It's been difficult for recolour to collect enough waste paint, believe it or not, not within our state to meet demand currently.
In order to facilitate growth, we've had to look to other states or our feedstock and waste paint and in some cases, these are neighbouring paint care states or states where this legislation has already been enacted. I think, as you know, a667 lot of the states surrounding Massachusetts have enacted this legislation already. We're even currently looking at the pros and cons of processing waste paint in New York State, given paint care just passed there and now exists and that will be rolling out in 2022. If an organized paint collection structure, uh, was managed and paid for by the paint industry existed in our state today proposed by this bill, our company wouldn't need to do this, would need to look for other states to obtain waste paint into processes.
And it substantially reduced the amount of paint wasted landfilled and incinerated in our state of Massachusetts, not702 to mention significantly reducing current costs associated with its management. This legislation has been proven in other states and being from the industry. I see it firsthand. In the past decade, paint care has recycled more than 48 million gallons of paint and saved local governments, $240 million in transportation and processing costs nationally. Bottom line is, that we're lucky here in our state that we already have a local paint recycler processor, recolour paints and that's not always the case.
Furthermore, one that's actively looking for more pain to recycle. The only missing piece here is the collection and infrastructure, um, and management provided if enacted by this legislation, that would be provided. We strongly are in support of this legislation and for the want of a better word, it's truly a no brainer after the state of Massachusetts. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for the 0.3 minutes. Well done. Um, any questions from the committee?
[SEN RAUSCH:] I have one quick question actually. If we advance this bill and pass it, would you expect additional businesses such as yours to have joined the industry and join the marketplace and what769 kind of expansion if you might hypothesize it?
[TANYA:] Absolutely, and you know the paint recycling industry has grown quite rapidly. So there are other opportunities, not just the paint to paint recycling, the recolour does to paint to other products. So yes, I think it would really support growth in the industry and just further, you know, increase the amount of waste paint we can take out of the way string. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Okay, thank you very much appreciate your testimony. Um moving to799 uh Lana's tomorrow from the League800 of Women voters, followed by Alex vie. Mhm. Okay. Um yes,
[KATHY LEONARDS(LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS):] [HB878] [SB517] [SB610] My name is Kathy Leonards and I'm standing in for Lana who had a family emergency today. So we represent the league of women voters in Massachusetts. Thank you to Chair Rausch, Chair Dykema and the Joint committee for the hearing today. The League of Women Voters of Massachusetts823 supports H 878, S 517 and S 610, an act to save recycling costs in the commonwealth. We're drowning in waste with material for recycling and disposal piling up beyond profitability to process and our disposable capacity.
Recycling cause across Massachusetts have increased significantly over the past three years and these costs do not even include the related costs of the health impacts on all residents that disproportionately fall on already overburdened populations and environmental justice communities where incinerators and waste processing facilities are generally found. The current system is unsustainable. First, recycling alone cannot address this growing problem, reducing our waste generation at the very start of the pipeline is needed. Second, the extended producer responsibility laws already exist in 33 states that require producers to care for end of life management888 of their products, including electronics, paint, pharmaceuticals, mattresses and carpets.
Lost covering packaging already exists in Canada Europe and Israel. Lastly, the emissions from hauling disposing and processing waste and recycling are inconsistent with the emissions reduction targets described in the new Climate Law, an act creating the next generation roadmap from Massachusetts Climate Policy. The experiences and other jurisdictions demonstrate that producers can produce more eco-friendly, non-toxic and more920 readily recyclable or reusable products and packaging than currently used. Such changes would result in less pollution, less burden on waste and recycling facilities and less cost to municipalities and residents. The new climate law calls for all agencies to hold environmental and admissions impact at the forefront of policies and regulations in their respective areas. It's time to get our waste system in line with this critical goal. The League of Women Voters urges you to favourably report these bills as an act to save recycling costs in the commonwealth. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony. And I hope Miss tomorrow's family is okay. Thank you. Of course. Questions from the967 committee.
Mhm. Seeing none. Thank you again for the league's testimony. Uh Mr Alex Vie, followed by Andrew Hackman. Hello, am I coming through? Okay? You are. Yes. All right. Excellent.
[ALEX VAI(SURFRIDER MASSACHUSETTS CHAPTER):] [HB878] [SB610] Chair Dykema, Chair Rausch and members of the committee. My name is Alex Vai, and I'm the volunteer campaigns coordinator for the Surfrider Foundation in Massachusetts and also a longtime resident of Sudbury MA. I'm here to testify in support of house 878 and Senate 610, an act to save recycling costs in the commonwealth. When it comes to producing pollution from unnecessary plastic items, cities and towns in Massachusetts are leading1023 the way. I, my organization and many of the voices in this hearing are proud to be part of a growing movement that has now passed over 200 local plastic pollution reduction laws in our commonwealth.
With each year, we learn more about which policies work best, and what pitfalls exist and I encourage this committee to draw heavily on the very best our state has to offer when considering the many pollution reduction bills before it. And that's because we are fast running into the limits of what municipalities can do on their own. So my1055 town can go out onto the field that Lincoln Sudbury Regional High School for town meeting in the middle of a global pandemic, listen to the facts from the high school environmental club no less, and then overwhelmingly vote to ban polystyrene and disposable plastic straws and petition the Legislature for a minimum charge on checkout bags in town, important steps, but we all know that solving our enormous waste and recycling problem requires more than the action of individual municipalities.
By itself, my town cannot establish a system where the polluter pays to make sure that brand owners and not residents are legally responsible for fully funding recycling in proportion to the number of covered materials that they use, sell and most importantly, profit from. Even if we want to, my town cannot make sure that companies have skin in the game to make them accountable for whether the solutions they talk about actually improve recycling and reduce waste. And even if we recognize the fundamental fact that waste is a design flaw, my town cannot create a fee structure so that the harmful externalities of waste, like marine debris and toxic materials and profound environmental injustices are measured in dollars and cents.
The metrics that businesses understand best and our most motivated to act upon. The structural problems of waste management in Massachusetts need statewide structural solutions to make sure producers have a plan for the end of life, just like they do for every other part of the product life cycle and to mitigate waste at its source before it becomes a problem that the rest of society has to solve. And so even among many similar bills now under consideration in other states, an act to save recycling costs in1153 the commonwealth stands out as an excellent piece of legislation that will accomplish these goals and more and we urge you to report out favourably on it. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much for your testimony questions from the committee.
Seeing none. Thank you very much. Mr by uh, Mr Andrew Hackman followed by brie uh deeply deadly. I'm not quite sure how to pronounce that, but I apologize for the mispronunciation. Um and I look forward to your testimony. Mr Hackman,
[ANDREW HACKMAN(AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR PACKAGING):] [HB879] [HB876] [HB878] [SB610] [SB517] Chair Rausch, Chair Dykema and members of the Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture Committee. My name is Andy Hackman, testifying today on behalf of the American Institute for Packaging and the Environment. These are the companies that both produce packaging components, the consumer brands, that package goods in those packaging components and we also have members of the waste management industry that manage materials at the end of the life cycle. There are a number of bills that we could speak to1211 today that we think are positive, specifically, House Bill 879, 876 that look at finding markets for materials and expanding access to recycling. I'll leave those two are written testimony, but I do want to speak specifically about extended producer responsibility for packaging and printed material.
It's been referenced a number of times in the hearing today, but want to1231 speak specifically to American principles on extended producer responsibility and packaging. We will reference those in the written testimony. Over the last year and a half or so. We have worked on trying to articulate items and issues that we believe need to be enshrined. If extended producer responsibility legislation is going to move forward. We do want to note specific concerns today with House Bill 878, Senate Bill 610, and Senate Bill 517 that are based upon practical experience with these programs in other jurisdictions and specifically the text of the legislation. We want to highlight his concerns.
One very specifically these bills reference disposal costs and having producers pay for disposal and we think that is1273 something that could be counterproductive in a system where we're trying to encourage recycling, incentivize recycling and structure a program that drives more materials to a positive closed-loop life cycle and paying for disposal costs, which is referenced in the bill is something that we think could have a negative incentive on perhaps driving more material into that outcome. Secondarily, as you look at producer responsibility programs and other jurisdictions, it is an effort that's developed in collaboration with a number of stakeholders and submitted on behalf of the producers.
All of these pieces of legislation look at Mass DEP being1310 the central decision-maker in the process of setting rates, setting fees, and establishing reimbursements for municipalities and collectors. Third, a major point we'd like to make is the lack of a needs assessment in the structure of this legislation. We believe that that's something that's necessary. A number of different reports that have taken place over the last several1332 years, including the Solid Waste Management report, note that we need better data and to establish what the baselines are here and particularly if we look at an extended producer responsibility program. We need to set the budget.
We need to know how much we're paying if we're going to establish and completely revamp the recycling system in the commonwealth. We'd like to note that the collection costs are also included in what the producer would have to1357 pay. That's something that the producers have the least amount of control over and the local governments make certain commitments to their consumers and their constituents around collection costs and it's something we would like to have a balanced and shared responsibility. The final point I'd like to make is around the definition of what's considered readily recyclable. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
and all three for three minutes. Is this what you submit this in written testimony? Certainly, we'll do and can answer any questions the committee may have. Thank you very much. Mr Hackman. Questions from the committee Madam Chair.
[REP CAREY:] Thank you, Madam Chair,1391 and thank you Mr. Hackman for your presentation. I1395 appreciate the principles that's very helpful kind of coming into this to understand the framework through which the industry is thinking about it. Your first principle you mentioned is having producers not pay to support these types of recycling programs. So presumably you think it's better to have whether it be the consumer or the retail or I guess pay for those in lieu of the industry. And then in one of your subsequent principles, you had mentioned having control, right, and how producers, it's important for them to have control, or at least understand what the costs are for recycling the products. It would seem to me that those two are a little bit in conflict and obviously the greatest1438 degree of control that the industry could have would be to pay for it and run a program that it believes is the most efficient and effective possible. Can you maybe just clarify those principles a little bit?
[HACKMAN:] Absolutely. I think there may have been some misunderstanding around whether or not we would pay or not. Our concern was in the fact that the bill enshrines pain for disposal or paying for landfilling of packaging. We want to pay for recycling that's enshrined in our principles, industry and producers would pay for recycling would pay for productive activities that helped close the loop on packaging materials. It's it was a major step forward to getting the industry to come together around those principles over the last year and a half or so to reach that point, but it's not a fee that would be part of a direct1481 consumer-facing fee at that point. So it's something that we propose to say, look, the industry wants to have a role in funding recycling. So that may have been a misunderstanding, but we do not want to pay for disposal, or landfilling. We think that that activity is counterproductive to getting more materials into recycling. Perhaps maybe you can help me with the second question again, I mean, I think I got bored with the first point, and if you can remind me of the second question.
[CAREY:] I think your response responded to both of my questions and if you could, you may already be contemplating this but submit those principles in writing so we could have them. That would be very helpful. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
yep. They are linked in our testimony. Thank you. Thank you, madam. Chair, thank you for the additional questions from the committee.
Okay, thank you. Mr Hackman uh moving to breed deeply followed by Lizza Casella.
Uh
[???(AMERICAN BEVERAGE ASSOCIATION):] [HB878] [SB517] [SB610] [HB996] Thank you, Chair Rausch and Chair Dykema, I appreciate the opportunity to testify. My name is ???, I'm the principal of North Bridge Environmental in Westford. I'm a resident of Somerville and I'm testifying today on behalf of the American Beverage Association, ABA represents the refreshment beverage industry and its members in Massachusetts. We1552 are speaking about House bill 878 and Senate Bill 517 S 610 which would provide for extended producer responsibility for packaging and printed paper as an industry. We support programs and we have been actively involved with a wide range of stakeholders over the past1570 several years in drafting and developing EPR language that's consistent with our industries principles and with improving the circular economy.
I have attached set up our principles in my testimony to my written testimony and I do want to be1584 clear that we are very interested in working with the sponsor and have already met with him at various times to talk about those principles and in particular to highlight how the legislation comes up short in several areas. Mr. Hackman referenced some of those from our perspective, we believe in full producer responsibility for paying for recycling systems, for packaging and printed paper, but we recognize that with full responsibility, comes to consume ability of control. Heard a lot of conversation today about transferring costs to producers, but what really has to happen is a function of transferring that cost is improving the system.
And if producers are willing to be held to account for accountability for better performance of that system, that's what we need. We need a better collection of materials, we need better processing and we need better circularity1632 back into new products. In order to meet high-performance standards and improve the level of performance of the system, producers need to have control over the system to the extent that they can make changes that will improve that system. Investing a significant amount of authority in DEP and independent boards as this legislation does not guarantee an improvement in performance. And we can prove that based on our experience with dozens of EPR programs around the world.
I do want to also call out the fact that the legislation does not in any way deal with the deposit system. We believe that products should not be subject is double jeopardy if you will of paying under both the deposit system and the EPR system. So the products that are subject to the deposit system, which could be seen as a producer responsibility scheme in itself, should not also be paying for a collection system in which it does not participate. I'd like to1683 wrap up just by referencing quickly, House Bill 996, which would impose mandatory recycled content standards on our plastic bottles. We do support minimum content legislation, have been active in discussing and negotiating successful legislation in Washington, California and Maine, and soon New Jersey, we do support that legislation,1698 but again, with certain principles and guidelines, and we've laid out some of the issues that we have with the legislation as it stands in our written testimony.
So we're supportive of the concept of these two bills, but I would like to have the opportunity to sit down with stakeholders and work through some of the details so that we can hopefully get them to actually function and work and improve the system, not just transfer money around from one pocket to another. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony.1740 Any questions from the committee?
Seeing none. Thank you again for your testimony. Uh Eliza Casella followed by Sarah bloom quist. Good afternoon. Can you hear me okay?1756 We can yes, faintly, but we can hear you okay And
[LIZA CASELLA(CASELLA WASTE SYSTEMS):] [HB878] [SB517] [SB610] Chairwoman Rausch, Dykema and members of the committee. My name is Liza Casella and I'm representing Casella waste Systems. Thanks for having me here today. Tons of excitement and energy today on the call around some really important issues and I appreciate the opportunity to provide some perspective from Casella with regard to House Bill 878 Senate Bill 517 Senate Bill 610 all titled an act to save recycling costs in the commonwealth. Casella,1792 our commitment to sustainability and sustainable materials management is part of our DNA. It dates back over four decades from when we built the state of Vermont's first1802 recycling facility to today as one of the Northeast's largest recyclers.
Our mission is to protect the environment and strengthen our local communities, and grow our business by creating value from society's wasted materials. Here in the commonwealth, Casella has been at the forefront of recycling of material innovation, from opening the first single-stream recycling facility in Auburn and continually investing millions of dollars in advanced recycling technology at our morphs, to our joint venture in building the state's first farm-based anaerobic digester and to building custom resource management programs that help major businesses and organizations across the commonwealth reach zero waste. I share these brief vignettes with you because it's important that you understand our commitment to evolving collaboratively the infrastructure and policy required to reach new heights on our collective sustainability journey.
We need change but a change in materials management models must be collaborative, data-driven and non-biased to be equitable to all. Because of our unique investment in both the infrastructure that exists today, as well as that of the future, Casellas, neither for nor against the three packaging bills, the EPR packaging bills presented today, recognizing that there are practical and impractical components and elements to each of them. As the concept of EPR for packaging becomes more accepted in mainstream society, Casella has closely monitored programs, development and implementation throughout the country. We have worked diligently to develop a set of guiding principles that we believe1893 to be strong elements of successful EPR programs.
We have previously spoken with Representative Day and the Mass Municipal Association and others that are very interested in this piece of legislation regarding our general support for considering EPR related bill. That said, we do have some concerns with aspects of the bill that we believe threaten the recycling industry and have unintended consequences for existing infrastructure that has been in place for decades to help the commonwealth reach its recycling and diversion efforts. This legislation could undermine the ability of collection companies and recyclers to effectively and efficiently handle the commonwealth's recyclable materials. Other states across the region such as New York and Vermont have also considered1938 EPR bills this legislative session.
One key difference as Andrew spoke about is that those bills included needs assessment as you've heard today. There are a lot of different components to these bills, a lot of different stakeholders involved and we really need1952 to understand upfront what all of the dynamics are. We need to have a baseline of the recycling practices throughout the state. The intention of a needs assessment is to fully understand the mechanics of the current system at all levels, including curbside recycling, drop off, and1966 transfer station recycling facilities. So with that, I will definitely provide written testimony as well and I very much appreciate the opportunity to share our perspective with you today and hope to work with you all in the future. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, Miss Casella. Questions from the committee,
seeing none. Thank you for your testimony. Um Moving1986 to Sarah bloom quist followed by Ben Hellerstein,
[SARAH BLOOMQUIST(TOMRA SYSTEMS):] [HB878] [HB996] [SB568] Good afternoon, Madam chairs and members of the joint committee. My name's Sarah Bloomquist, I'm the director of government affairs for recycling and circular economy at TOMRA Systems. TOMRA provides advanced technology to help collect and sort recyclables including reverse vending machines for beverage containers, and optical sorters at material recovery facilities known as Murph2010 and other solutions that promote a circular economy. We operate in over 30 regions around the world that already have extended producer responsibility for packaging programs in place and in every major state or country with the deposit recycling system, including all 10 US deposit states.
In Massachusetts, we partner with parallel products to operate a facility in New Bedford that processes most of the beverage containers that are collected in the state's deposit program. Our advanced optical sorting technology enables curbside recycling operations to produce a material of a higher quality and market value, increasing the quantity of what actually gets recycled. I come before you today in support of two bills and in opposition to one bill, all related to recycling. I'll briefly outline our key positions and would like to direct the committee to our written testimonies for more detailed comments. TOMRA is in support of House Bill 878, an act2062 to save recycling costs in the commonwealth from Rep Day, which would implement EPR for packaging in Massachusetts.
EPR for packaging as a proven solution to improve Massachusetts recycling performance. We've clearly seen that recycling isn't trending in the right direction and new solutions are needed. EPR, which includes meaningful recycling targets and proper enforcement mechanisms, will drive an increase in both the quality and the number of recycled materials throughout the system. EPR would also ensure that access to recycling is improved and that adequate solutions are in place to properly recycled materials, thereby decreasing dependence2091 on landfills and improving the circularity of packaging.2093 Second, TAMRO is also in support of House Bill 996, an act to improve plastic bottles in the recycling from Rep Rogers, which requires plastic beverage containers to use a certain amount of recycled material.
The proposed recycled content targets have both environmental and economic benefits and that they reduce greenhouse gas emissions from virgin plastic production and stimulate investment in recycling infrastructure by creating certainty in the market. TAMRO supports recycled content mandates and plastic beverage containers and further recommends aligning with targets recently established in California and Washington to deliver a stronger climate impact. Third, we are testifying in opposition to Senate Bill 568 to resolve to provide for an investigation and study of enhancing statewide recycling programs.
The Massachusetts container deposit program or bottle bills is more commonly known as one of the state's most successful waste diversion and litter reduction programs. It also creates a total economic value of up to $72 million dollars annually and supports over 1600 jobs statewide. Again, for more detailed comments on each of these bills, please refer to our written testimony. Thank you for hearing my testimony and for the work you're doing on this topic and we commend the committee for considering creative ways to improve the state's solid waste and recycling2172 challenges. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much. two seconds remaining uh
questions from the committee.
Seeing none. Thank you. Miss bloom quist. Ben Hellerstein, followed by Andrea Donlan, please.
Mr Hellerstein.
Okay, MS Donlan
Andrea Donlan from the Connecticut river Conservancy. Yeah, I'm here.2224 Can you hear me and see me? Okay? Yes, thank you very much scrambled since gun wasn't down here. Um, Good afternoon.
[ANDREA DONLON(CONNECTICUT RIVER CONSERVANCY):] [HB869] [SB579] Thank you, Chair Rausch, Dykema and the rest of the members of the committee. My name is Andrea Donlon and I'm here today representing the Connecticut River Conservancy. I'm here to support the passage of several bills and in fact, there are2248 lots of bills discussed today that we would support. I'll provide more specific language in my written testimony, but we'll speak more generally about the background issue. The reason I'm testifying today is that my organization puts together a volunteer-led watershed-wide trash cleanup event along rivers and streams in our four states.
In Massachusetts last year, we were able to still hold the event during the pandemic. We had 419 volunteers, including several legislators. Thank you very much and those volunteers collected £54,000 of trash along 181 miles of River and Shoreline in Massachusetts. I've got specific numbers, but we've found thousands of beverage containers, food wrappers, takeout containers, single-use lids, straws, stirs, cutlery plastic bags, plastic and foam cups and plates, plastic bottles that are non-beverage bottles, plastic and foam pieces. We also found tires, mattresses, electronics, and lots of items described in bills today and we really found2319 pretty much everything and none of these belongs in our rivers.
Based on our findings from last year, in prior years, we feel strongly that there's a waste problem in this state and the region and the country. We're2336 now organizing our 25th cleanup and we don't want to keep doing this forever. The sheer number of bills being heard today indicates a high level of interest in addressing the issue of plastics in the environment and in our bodies and bodies of wildlife as well as our ties to waste, climate change and our future. Bills in previous sessions had lots of public support and then they somehow have not followed through to become law. It's2367 time to move forward just as you have done so well with a large climate change bill in January.
So I would urge the legislature to work aggressively to pass bills that will create incentives for waste reduction, recycling and recycled product and also shipped cost burdens to the producers and away from municipalities and consumers. Specifically, I would testify in support of H 869, S 579 an Act to reduce single-use plastics from the environment. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
. We're doing single use plastics and um. Mhm.
You made a one S 452.
Thank you for your testimony. MS Donlan. Any questions from the committee?
Seeing none. Thank you again for your testimony. Representative Rogers. I believe you've gotten a break2426 from house activity and can join us. I have and thank you. Can you hear me? We can Yes. Okay I'm actually doing this over my iphone so I apologize. The audio or video is sub-optimal.
[REP ROGERS:] [HB998] [HB997] [HB996] [HB871] Well thank you very much for this opportunity. Chair Rausch, Chair Dykema.2448 I have several bills that are on the docket today. I'll try to cover them all quickly. I know you've been at this for a while now, so thanks for the opportunity I'll keep it pretty brief but then we look forward to following up with you and your staff. The first bill I want to testify on is H 998, an Act restricting the distribution of plastic straws. Basically, I would say to restaurants and other places, you just don't sort of giving them out unless folks ask. When we originally drafted it, we were going to2490 just ban them completely but then we talked to some people in the disability community who said certain people because of challenges were swallowing may need straws.
So rather than an outright ban, it just says that um restaurants and other places like that will only give them on request. We think by doing that will reduce plastic straw use by 90% or more and plastic straws are hard to recycle. Scientists estimate that the amount of plastic straw pollution on our shorelines in our oceans is almost unfathomable. When you read the data in the statistics, it's a huge percentage, it ends up in our fish in our waterways, so I hope that bill will get a good look. The2540 next bill I want to talk about is H 997, that's an act to incentivize the reduction of residential waste disposal.2548 What it does is it requires municipalities to report their waste disposal if the disposal is over £500 per capita, municipalities are asked to adopt a zero-waste international alliance client or a similar program to reduce that waste, and then it has a series of additional reporting requirements.
Ultimately, if cumulatively across the state communities cannot meet that standard. Then regulations will be promulgated for statewide adoption of the standard. Again, consistent with the zero waste International Alliance, which is sort of considered the marquis2586 standard for reducing place. The next bill is2591 H 996, which is an2594 act to improve plastic bottles2596 and their recycling.2598 It mandates that the plastic bottles are designed in a way that2605 the cap stays attacked and that's because2608 what we're finding all across the commonwealth, you probably see them if you just go for a walk in many neighbourhoods, is that more than 80% of bottle caps found again along shorelines of water weight are from consumer drinks and so often the bottle is getting recycled, but the cap is not and it can also, the caps sometimes are made from a different type of plastic, which makes them hard to recycle. I've even heard the machines themselves, the way the caps move through the machines, they fall2641 off the machines and do not get recycled.
So that's another bill. I also have a2646 Bill H 871, an act to reduce packaging waste that's filed jointly with Rep Connolly. It would require foodservice products to take out packaging and utensils to simply be recyclable and compostable. So a huge amount of our waste is from food packaging and so that's another innovation that I think is important. We're seeing the kind of packaging now, the innovations that manufacturers are coming up with, and there are many good alternatives that don't cost a lot. 6, 7, 10 years ago, the alternatives weren't very good. So I think the pushback from food manufacturers is we don't have good alternatives.
That's not really true anymore and so, I'm hoping we can2693 move this bill. I2708 know you're hearing a lot today on plastics and I think we've done a good job, look at the road map bill that we just passed and other environmental initiatives. I think we have a pretty good track record as a legislature, but I think the next frontier and it's, you know, so important that the work that your committee is going to do this term for that reason, the next frontier in climate change and environmental protection are these kinds of issues about reducing waste protecting, you know, stopping that our landfills are so clogged, reducing plastic waste in our oceans. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
So thank you so much for listening, thanks for fitting me in and I'd look forward to following up and working with you. I think the Conservation Law Foundation is going to be testifying, maybe they already did on some of these same bills. So thank you so much, I really appreciate the opportunity.
Thank you. Representative. Any questions from the committee.
Seeing none. Thank you again for your testimony.
Um moving to an picture from women working for oceans will give you a couple extra minutes. I realized I did not give you a heads up that you would be on deck followed by nancy downs uh, and peter hi, can you hear me? Yes, I can hear you okay.
[ANABEL PEICHER (W20 WOMEN):] [HB869] [SB579] [HB878] Good afternoon. I'm Anabel Peicher, a board member of W20 Women, women working for oceans, an environmental group that works to educate and promote action around ocean sustainability. I'm also a trustee at the New England aquarium that support scientific research across New England and around the world to protect our Blue planet but really, I'm here as a resident of Massachusetts. Thank you for the2811 opportunity to testify in support of the single-use plastics Bill House 869 and S 579 and also House Bill 878. Remember the Lorax and how he speaks for the trees? Well, I want to speak for the oceans.
Living in Boston, I so often walk along our harbour and look at that beautiful deep water and then I looked down and I see plastic bags and water bottles floating on top. Think of the turtles who mistake those plastic bags for jellyfish and the birds who eat the bits of microplastic and straws that fill their stomachs with our plastic pollution and the marine mammals that swallow balloons and end up filled with plastic instead of food. An estimated 300 million plastic bags end up in the Atlantic Ocean alone in just one year. We've all heard that there will be more plastic in the ocean than fish by the year 2050. That's in our lifetime. And certainly our children's. This was all pre-pandemic. We now have a growing plastic pandemic.
We're seeing an avalanche of plastic gloves, masks, and protective gear end up in our beautiful waterways. They are clogging storm drains and recycling systems. A mask with elastic straps can further entangle2881 fish and birds and other wildlife. Basically, cities and towns, are too expensive to collect and recycle. They are not recyclable. So we have created a further problem for our communities that are ill-equipped to handle more strain on the financial system. I wrote a citizen's petition to ban plastic bags in Western, it passed with overwhelming support at a town meeting in 2017, one of more than 140 communities that have passed plastic bank bills.
Living in Boston, I now attend city council meetings and have urged city council members to do the same. But instead2916 with COVID-19, I've seen this slide back to more single-use plastics. Now we have a chance to make a sweeping change with this omnibus bill rather than the slow trickle we have seen across the state, community by community. The citizen's support is there and the financial strain is real. We need to honor every citizen of Massachusetts with a healthy, clean landscape and a vibrant, clean ocean. By passing this legislation, you can speak for the oceans too. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your test. Any questions from the committee?
Seeing none. Thank you very much. Uh, nancy downs followed by matt Harvey Venkatesan.
Thank you. Can you hear me? We can, yes. Great.
[NANCY DOWNES(OCEANA):] [HB869] Thank you committee members for the opportunity to testify on H 869, an act to reduce single use plastics from the environment. My name's Nancy Downes, Massachusetts. We are the largest international advocacy organization dedicated solely to ocean conservation. We work toward science-based policies that will restore the ocean abundance and biodiversity of the ocean. Plastic pollution is a growing threat to the world's oceans, as well as our food, health and climate. Each year, an estimated £33 billion pounds of plastic enters the marine environment. It's roughly equivalent to two garbage trucks full of plastic being dumped into the ocean every minute.
Single-use plastics are, they're profoundly flawed by the design of grocery bags, expanded polystyrene foam, single sort of plastic water bottles, toiletries, balloon straws, black plastic wipes, nips and utensils, all of which are addressed in this bill, are designed to be used for only a few moments before being disposed3017 of and yet they're made of a material created to last forever. Smaller pieces can look like food to3022 fish, turtles, marine mammals and birds. We're seeing increasing reports of dead3025 whales beached with bellies full of plastic debris. Tens of thousands of individual marine animals have been observed suffering from entanglement or ingestion of plastic permeating our marine environment.
Meanwhile, production continues to increase at a rapid rate. Global production of plastics is now projected to quadruple between 2014 and 2050. As plastic production increases, so will the amount of plastic entering our oceans. Recycling is not enough to solve the plastic pollution crisis. Waste management solutions have not adequately dealt with plastic pollution in the past and cannot keep up with the rising rates of plastic production. Only 9% of all waste ever produced has been recycled, the rest ends up in an incinerator, landfill or environment. Policies governing the production and use of single-use plastic are the most effective way to address this crisis, and these policies are becoming more common around the world.
While multiple countries have taken national action, the United States has failed to implement a nationwide policy that comprehensively addresses plastic pollution. Instead, our cities, counties and states have been leading the way. In Massachusetts, over 140 communities have passed bag legislation, and nearly 50 have passed polystyrene foam laws. Chelmsford band Polystyrene in food establishments in 2018, citing that styrene is a carcinogen and can leach into food from polystyrene, food and beverage containers. The state of Massachusetts has a duty to protect the health of its citizens and the natural environment. H3111 869 would build on the proven success of local legislation across our state targeting and preventing some of the most pervasive single-use plastic items from plaguing our environment. Now is the time to take swift, powerful action to reduce plastic pollution in Massachusetts.
We urge you to prioritize this critically important policy and look forward to continuing to work with you to protect our communities, waterways and coast. My last personal tidbit, I live in Millis, it's been paper all year and just last week, these ridiculous things just ended up in the checkout. It's thicker plastic and there's no way that people are going to use this 125 times. So3151 it's a step backwards. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Miss Downes any questions from the committee.
3156 Seeing3156 none. Thank you again for your testimony. Uh, Matt Harvey Venkatesan please followed by Lauren Fernandez,
Professor van Kadison.
Okay, Lauren Fernandez filed followed. Excuse me by Maya Burgess.
Hi, good afternoon. Can you hear me? We can. Yes please. Great, thank you.
[LAUREN FERNANDEZ(CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION):] [HB930] [HB931] [HB932] Good afternoon everyone. My name is Lauren Fernandez, I work for the Conservation Law Foundation and I'm speaking on behalf of the Alliance of Health and Environment, a coalition of Saugus linen revere residents, local environmental advocacy organizations and public officials. I'm also a full-time mother. So my son is here in the background, you can't see him, but you may hear him. So I apologize in advance. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I speak in support today of House Bill 930, 931, and 932 sponsored by Representative Giannino. As many have said today, we must think about the root of why we have ended up with so many landfills and incinerators in the first place.
When we allow single-use materials, especially plastics, to be produced without companies being held responsible for the ways that they are producing, the cities and towns must deal with the cost and all of it ends up being burned, including our air, our waters and harming people, harming our communities. There's no better example of this today than the wheel of greater incinerator and landfill in Saugus as you've already heard about today and that this is located in an area of critical environmental concern. This is the oldest incinerator in the country. Residents nearby fear for their safety and health due to fire and hazardous health impacts, including exposure to toxic ash, heavy metals and high rates of cancer as you heard devastating testimony today.
Real-life people have been impacted and are having to live with that lifelong3289 grief as a result of the impact of this incinerator on their3292 community. There are no groundwater monitoring wells around the landfills as well, which is an additional layer of health and environmental concern. The whale Liberator is so old, that it had to buy pollution credits from other facilities to keep it open because it could not keep up with the federal government's new standards. The Alliance for Health and Environment supports all of these bills and as you've heard today, that 930 would prevent any new landfills from being built near an area of critical environmental concern and would prevent any existing landfills that are already near the area of critical environmental concern3327 to be expanded in any3329 capacity. H 931, the Board of Health of a city or town that's within a half mile of the facility, will have the authority to enforce public health measures around noise, smoke and odours and permits them to give citations as needed.
H 932 which shut down the wheel of the Liberator facility. This leads us back to the extent of producer responsibility and omnibus single-use plastic bills we've been discussing today,3354 we need to stop producing this waste in the first place. We have so many other sustainable alternatives we can move towards and move away from our dependency on landfills and incinerators, which both of these bills would allow us to do. The best way to protect the public health of all communities, but especially environmental justice communities like Saugus, Revere and Lynn and the commonwealth is to shut down the wheel Liberator landfill and to stop producing so much needless waste in the first place. So many environmental justice communities have already had too many burdens unjustly placed on them and it is time to stand with them and we can do that by supporting all these bills that I spoke about today. Thank you for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony. Any questions from the committee.
Seeing none. Thank you again, Miss Fernandez.
Uh Maya Burgess, followed by Clint Richmond, please,
Maya Burgess.
Okay, Mr Clint Richmond please, followed by Zachary Taylor.
[CLINT RICHMOND(MASS SIERRA CLUB):] [HB869] [SB759] [HB871] [SB503] Thank you, madam Chair. Clint Richmond speaking from the Massachusetts Sierra Club and its 100,000 members and supporters. We urge you, like others to embrace the sustainability goals of preventing other forms of pollution and toxic exposure. Before you today are a wide range of bills that address plastics. One new bill this session is very inspiring because it is quite comprehensive and moves beyond recycling as a solution. I'm speaking of H 869 S 759, an act to reduce single-use plastics. Note that this includes a strong plastic bag regulation which the Sierra Club is working on it for more than a decade. Several states have now banned plastic bags or polystyrene, including New York and Maine.
This bill expands upon Vermont's landmark three-part bill, which went into effect last year and other states are considering similar. There are other narrow bills that have been refiled, such as H 871 and S 503. Rep Rodgers spoke about an act to reduce packaging waste. This bill defines sustainability as either reusable3485 locally recyclable compostable or biodegradable. Many of you might assume that this was the case already for packaging. Unfortunately, there are many single-use products that do not meet these common-sense requirements. Products that are not recyclable or compostable include containers made of black plastic or polystyrene, utensils and straws made of fossil fuel.
This four-part bill could be augmented with straws on request bill, again from Rep Rogers and others. All of these bills have had parts implemented locally in the commonwealth. In some cases for many years, some food establishments are already moving in this direction voluntarily. While we have lost the opportunity to be the first state to pass the plastics reduction3530 bill, we could3531 still join the vanguard. As a coastal state, we should be more concerned about addressing the ever-growing plastics crisis. These bills will move us a step closer to zero waste, which will save municipalities money, benefit environmental injustice, communities where plastic is produced and disposed of and reduce litter. The Sierra Club urges you to favourably act on one or more of3551 these important bills. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony. Mr Richmond questions the committee. Mhm.
Seeing none. Thank you again for your testimony. Zachary Taylor was followed by Juli Rome.
[ZACHARY TAYLOR(AMERICAN RECYCLED PLASTIC BAG ALLIANCE):] Good afternoon, Madam Chair. Thank you very much for the time to speak this afternoon on behalf of the American recycled plastic bag Alliance, which represents the US manufacturers, and recyclers of plastic carrier bags. We look forward to participating in the3600 discussion around statewide policy on carryout bags. To be clear, like communities across the commonwealth, ARPBAs members share a commitment to sustainability, recycling and waste reduction for our members, sustainability is at the forefront of everything we do, and the driving reason why America's plastic bag manufacturers are also pioneers in the plastic film recycling field.
We understand and recognize the desire to do something about plastic products, improve recycling efficiency and efficacy and limit litter waste, marine debris and emissions. As the3627 committee evaluates the best approach to addressing values, it's our hope that any policy incorporates several of the following considerations, ensuring that any legislation can deliver on the sustainability concerns underpinning this effort. First, we hope that any policy would apply uniformly across Massachusetts while respecting the decisions that3644 many communities have previously made. For example, of the more than 1453649 different local bag warrants in effect, more than half allow for 100% recyclable, American made recyclable plastic film bags are an option for consumers who wish to transition to reasonable bags.
Second, we strongly urge Massachusetts to reject any product or material-specific bands. In some cases, mandating reasonable bags with certain features like stitched handles or excessive thicknesses can increase plastic consumption. In comparing the environmental impacts of bags, life cycle assessments have consistently found that reasonable bags often prioritized by carrying out bag proposals require more3678 reuses to offset their greater emissions than the proxy intended to replace. Finally, a policy designed to encourage a transition to reasonable carryout bags should prioritize products that can be recycled at the end of their lifespan. Like plastic carrier bags, most reusable bags that are available for a dollar at checkout counters are made from plastics like polypropylene, polyester and nylon, but these bags cannot be recycled in the United States, unlike3700 100% recyclable American, made reasonable plastic film bags that ARPBA member produces.
It is our hope that Massachusetts continues to evaluate an approach to bag policy that we can serve as a resource to help answer questions and work as a partner to develop an effective policy. Thank you for your time and consideration and I've included more details on our position of viewpoints of the written testimony submitted to the committee. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony, questions from the committee,
seeing none. Thank you again for your comments. Uh, Julie Rome followed by Tristan, Michael Savage. Okay, thank you. And hello. Good.
[JULIE RAYMOND(PARTY CITY HOLDINGS INC):] [HB869] [SB579] Hi, my name is Julie Raymond, I'm the chief experience officer at Party City Holdings inc. I'm a former resident of Massachusetts and actually have a son attending Emerson College. I'd like to express Party City's opposition to House Bill 869 and Senate Bill 579 specifically Chapter 131 and the provisions relating to the ban on the sale and distribution of helium-filled balloons as a longtime retailer in Massachusetts with 21 retail locations in the state. Party City exists to inspire joy by making it easy to create unforgettable memories and we're committed to doing so in a responsible and sustainable way are competently Kurt.
Our company currently has 305 employees in Massachusetts, not including the hundreds of seasonal employees, over 820 total, we take on to help us manage peak selling periods like Halloween. At the beginning of the pandemic last March, we had 280 employees in3788 Massachusetts, of whom were temporarily furloughed thankfully. We've been able to bring them all back during this challenging time. We closed all stores and had to make adjustments to the way we did business. In spite of that, customers continue to purchase balloons because they represented hope and a way to socially and emotionally connect. Customers purchased balloons to celebrate birthdays, graduations and other accomplishments as a way to bring joy during difficult times.
The vast majority of balloons are properly handled and disposed of. Now, as the commonwealth and nation are recovering, celebration products like balloons will continue to be critical for retailers, restaurants and others as they work hard to bring back business and keep employees in their jobs. In fact, the economic impacts of banning the sale of helium-filled balloons are best selling balloon-type would be devastating to retail businesses, amounting to a loss of 45 to $60 million in sales. The indirect impacts to Massachusetts would be larger still, with over $300 million dollars lost in tax revenue, sales of ancillary products and jobs and banning the sale of helium-filled balloons3846 would put 4-500 independent companies in Massachusetts, like party stores, decorators and gift shops out of business and put 4-5,000 jobs at risk.
While Party City actively supports laws that limit the intentional release of balloons, we also believe there are reasonable and practical measures to allow people to continue to responsibly enjoy balloons without necessitating a ban on their sale. To support this effort, we have a comprehensive consumer education program, including online and storefront education, distributing balloon care cards, labelling balloons with guidance not to release them and providing a point of sale information to customers on responsible balloon usage and disposal. We also provide free balloon weights with the purchase of helium-filled balloons and are pushing for helium balloons to be sold with weights and other retailers as well. We're piloting user-friendly ways for the public to recycle their deflated foil balloons and reuse them by returning them to our stores and further encouraging keeping them out of the environment.
Respectfully, we ask that you not support a ban on the sale and distribution of helium-filled balloons and instead join us in exploring alternatives to a ban on the sale of helium balloons by promoting the education for responsible balloon enjoyment to protect and preserve the environment. Thank you, Chair Dykema, Chair Rausch and the other members of the committee for your time and consideration. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony right on the dot uh questions from the committee.
Seeing none. Thank you. Mr M for your testimony. Uh, Justin Michael Savage followed by Regina Fields,
Trust and Savage.
Okay. Regina Fields followed by Melissa Bertrand.
Regina Fields.
Okay, Melissa Bertrand followed by Bill JIA Nasca.
3940 Melissa3940 Bertrand.
Mhm. Okay. Bill JIA Nasca followed by Adam peer
[BILL GIANNASCA(RAINBOW BALLONS INC):] [HB869] [SB579] Good afternoon. My name is Bill Giannasca, I would like to thank the co chairs for allowing me to speak and be against the opposition of H 869 S 579 especially chapter 131 Section 119 banding balloons. I am the founder and ceo of a balloon wholesale company in Massachusetts North of Boston. I started the company 30 years ago and we have 30 full-time employees that we provide full insurance benefits to both them and their families. Passing this would cause financial and emotional distress for many4015 months and years to come not to mention the loss of full-time benefits to the family. Passing this bill would also probably put my company out of business and would4027 leave many loyal and dedicated employees devastated and forced to enter the unemployment pool.
A larger economic loss would also occur as our payroll4042 taxes will no longer flow through the Massachusetts economy. Now, that's a little bit about my company and how it would affect my 30 employees. I'm gonna build on Julie's Massachusetts balloon effect if this bill passes. She mentioned we're gonna have 4-500 independent retail businesses that will go out of business, including party stores, and balloon decorators in the loss of possibly 45 million to 60 million retail dollars. Also at risk, there are about 5000 jobs, most of them belonging to minorities and the impact as Julie also mentioned would be about $300 million dollars of lost tax revenue uh to Massachusetts.
Getting away from the economic but more of the emotion, over the last in recent years, especially during the pandemic, we have noticed that people with restricted social opportunities have seen balloons as a symbol of hope and a means of celebrating in a way to connect while still socially maintaining distance. Also, it's very important to point out it's a component of celebrations and the vast majority of balloons are properly handled and disposed of. Many times, I've gone to political events and I've seen balloons many many, many times there. I respectfully ask that you guys do not support the ban4171 on the sale and distribution of balloons. Thank you very much for4174 your time and consideration. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony. Any questions from the committee?
I did have a quick question and comment, madam Chair uh
[CAREY:] Mr. Giannasca, I just want to thank you for your testimony. Your passion for the business that you have built with your family is evident and we appreciate you taking the time to be here. We know with Covid that many, if not all of our small businesses in particular have been very stressed, to say the least through Covid and so the fact that you've taken the time here really speaks falling because I think so. The question I have for you is around the education piece and I'm wondering about the previous comment or had4215 made some comments about education and I'm wondering what kinds of education are you seeing that are sort of effective at getting to the proper disposal question and4225 really helping consumers understand that it's important to treat these balloons and their disposal sensitively.
[GIANNASCA:] Very, very good question. I will touch upon a little bit, but there is a study and there's some information that I can get from4242 the balloon council4243 that we will present to you. But as Julie mentioned, this signage at store level, some stores main mandate that there's a weight on the balloon, so it's not released. There's a lot of education at school levels. So I can get the balloon council to provide information so we can send it over to you but it's been extensive, studies have been done in education because um we've had to deal with this in other states. Good question and we will provide that information. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you appreciate that. Thank you, madam. Chair, of course. Thank you madam. Chair. Additional questions from the committee.
Okay, seeing then thank you for your testimony and we look forward to those additional submissions. Thank you. Um Adam peer followed by Jacob Cassidy.
Hey,
[ADAM PEER(AMERICAN CHEMISTRY COUNCIL):] Good afternoon, everybody. My name is Adam Peer and I'm a4295 senior director at the American Chemistry Council. As of last night, I am a student in Massachusetts, so it's a very special honor to be here today. I have submitted written testimony in a number of proposals but I just wanted to leave you with three really quick thoughts as you are considering legislation. I'd ask you to consider4317 three things; first of all, recognize advanced recycling as a part of the recycling hierarchy. When you're looking at producer responsibility, make sure that you do the feasibility first and make sure that you make the producer responsibility programs flexible, so feasibility and flexibility. Lastly, really look for ways to support a circular economy over plastic bans.
So with advanced recycling, advanced recycling, really look to complement mechanical recycling and reduce the number of useful materials that otherwise be sent to landfills. A couple4349 of things to note; advanced recycling is not an incineration process that doesn't use oxygen and advanced recycling technologies, not combusted plastics but rather heats plastics, melts them and then vaporizes them to turn them. The gas papers that are relatively brought back to the basic building blocks of plastics that can be turned into new products with feasibility and flexibility, I think are very, very important. Before embarking on a large producer responsibility system is to make sure that you have all the data and facts and that's really what should lead to goal setting minimum recycled content and other things. Lastly supporting the circular economy over plastic bans. I think there's a mistaken belief that alternative products will have a less environmental impact than plastic products, that's not always the case.
As a part of my written testimony, I have an extensive literature review that shows things quite to the contrary. And instead of looking at those things, I would look at things like enhancing your procurement, and recycling policies.4419 Do things like increasing your green body issuance,4423 consider things like secular assault, consider creating things like market development centres, waste audit policies, uniform recycling guidelines and of course engaging industry. So I'm here to serve as a resource for all of you and look forward to looking with all of you, we are hard at work increasing recycling throughout the United4445 States, but wanted to draw your attention to the fact in the Northeast, we're working a secondary certification audit that supports not only mechanical recycling but supports all materials. Lastly, as we work together, I hope you'll ask me about my ice cream project. I appreciate your time and I am happy to answer any questions. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Well, we are partial to ice cream Massachusetts apparently eats more ice cream per capita than any other state in the nation, which is funny given our location. Um, but thank you for your testimony. Any questions from the committee.
Where are you in school Sir? I am taking environmental justice at the Harvard extension school as part of the sustainability degree. Fantastic, congratulations. Good luck and thank you for your testimony. Uh, Jacob Cassidy followed by Katie Riley.
[JACOB CASSADY(ASSOCIATION OF HOME APPLIANCES MANUFACTURERS):] [HB878] [SB517] [SB610] [HB869] [HB579] Good afternoon Chairs Dykema, Rausch and members of the joint committee. My name is Jacob Cassady. I'm the director of government relations at the Association of Home appliance Manufacturers. AHAM represents over 150 companies that manufacture major portable and floor care appliances as well as the suppliers to the industry. Overall about 90% of all appliances shipped for sale in the US are4523 produced by our members. I'll be really brief since you've heard a lot today and you have a few more to go but I just a couple of quick points, I'll refer you to the testimony we submitted, which includes the principles we operate under. When we consider these types of packaging proposals. The home appliance industry supports the goal to increase recycling and reduce unsightly waste and litter, especially plastics.
This challenge requires solutions, which is why AHAM supported legislation in California targeting plastic packaging waste and are working with other states as they consider the issue at this time. The bills have been written that I'll identify in just a moment. Do not offer a workable solution, so AHAM opposes H 878, S 517 S 610 and we're also concerned with H869 and 5794577 and how these bills would impact polystyrene, which is used to protect not only the major appliances in a warehouse but also the workers that are employed in those facilities. So one of the major concerns that we haven't quite heard much about today is how they would impact institutional commercial4601 and industrial waste streams when appliances are installed, the company delivering the appliance removes the packaging and takes it away for recycling. This does include polystyrene. This form of packaging is not4614 in the residential recycling or waste stream and should not be treated as such. Thank you for your time and consideration of these comments. AHAM is willing to work with the committee on unproven solutions to effectively work on this problem. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony. Any questions from the committee?
Okay, seeing none. Thank you again, Katie Riley, followed by matt C Home.
[KATIE REILLY(CONSUMER TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION):] [HB878] [SB517] [SB610] [HB979] Thank you, Chairs Dykema, Rausch and members of the Joint Committee for the Record. My name is Katie Reilly and I'm the director of environmental and sustainability policy at the Consumer Technology Association. We go by the acronym CTA and I'll be testifying today on House Bill 979 related to producing a responsibility program for electronics and also House Bill 878 Senate Bill 517 and Senate Bill 610 collectively establishing a producer responsibility program for packaging. Very brief on CTA, we are North America's largest technology trade association representing the world's leading innovators that support more than 18 million American jobs.
Our members include the producers of computers, TVs, printers, gaming4687 devices and other electronics included under House Bill 979 as well as all of the consumer technology products that ship and deliver the product or producers that ship and deliver products and packaging subject to H 878 S 517 and S 619. Regarding H 979, the EPR program for Electronics, this proposal has been around for more than a4710 decade in the commonwealth. When it was first proposed, electronics were the fastest-growing part of the municipal solid waste stream. With all due respect to Representative Owens the statistics he referenced as justification for the bill or not US specific.
Per US EPA's latest data, electronics are the fastest declining product in the municipal solid waste stream. Additionally, research conducted by the Rochester Institute of Technology and the Yale Center for industrial ecology estimate that US airways generation peaked in 2015 and has been declining ever since. So it's not quite the time bomb that was referred to earlier in today's hearing. No state has passed a law like H 979 since 2010 a result of the industry's ongoing recycling efforts, which top well over £3 billion of electronics recycled in the US through responsible certified recyclers and the declining weight of electronics in the municipal solid waste stream.
Additionally, and again with respect to the sponsor, we've not seen any EPR program for electronics in the US result in the redesign of electronics that was alluded to occur under these types of programs. Now is not the time for this type of law in the commonwealth, the time for this type of law in the commonwealth has passed and we request the committee to oppose H 979 regarding the producer responsibility for packaging laws. There are a lot of different ways you can slice and dice EPR. There's no one set model for packaging EPR and CTA has several concerns with these proposals, primarily that if an EPR system is pursued packaging, producer funding should be utilized to make strategic improvements and infrastructure investments4819 to the collection and recycling system, determined by a producer responsibility organization of where producer funding should be directed should be based upon a needs assessment and that you've heard several folks refer to that's conducted by that producer responsibility organization.
From our perspective, the goal of any packaging EPR proposal should be the strategic use of producer funds to make improvements towards the establishment of a healthy recycling system, not merely transferring the cost of a challenge system from one entity to the next, which is what we see in these proposals. I'll be submitting written testimony by this evening and thank you for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, Miss Riley. I'm and when you submit those written materials please include the data that you referenced
questions from4866 the committee.
Yeah.
[CAREY:] Just a quick question, Madam Chair, if I might. Thank you Miss Reilly for your testimony, I appreciate that. I would be very interested in the statistics that you have in terms of the amount4882 of product recycled. I'm wondering if it sounded like you think that there's a pretty good system in place now to recycle these products. I don't want to put words in your mouth but it sounded4896 like that's what you were saying and if not, is there a proposal I guess that the industry would put on the table that would appropriately take care of these products that would meet the principles that you support?
[REILLY:] Sure. So we can work on gathering statistics around the data we have regarding the number of electronic products that have been recycled by our members throughout the US. Yes, our members both because they're legislatively required to as well as voluntarily throughout the US support collection and recycling programs and infrastructure. You heard others refer to say the Best buy program. You have the reconnect program. You have a large number of electronics manufacturers that have4932 voluntary programs in place that provide4934 those4935 collection opportunities for electronics to consumers.
[CAREY:] So just to clarify, do you think that the current voluntary program to the extent that it exists is sufficient to manage the amount of your waste that is currently produced?
[REILLY:] Correct.
[CAREY:] Thank you for clarifying, I appreciate it. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, madam. Chair. Thank you. Additional questions from the committee.
Seeing none. Thank you, Miss Riley.
Uh Matt C Home followed by Stephen Green, please.
[MATT SEAHOLM(PLASTICS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION):] Good afternoon, Chair Rausch, Chair Dykema and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Matt4972 Seaholm, I'm the Vice president, of Government Affairs for the Plastics Industry Association. We represent companies across the supply chain of the plastics manufacturing sector, which now employs more than one million workers here in the United States. With so many plastics related topics being discussed today and limited time, I won't try to address specifics on each of the bills or4996 repeat things that have already been said today, but instead, I'd like to offer our perspective on the importance of sustainability and the key components of any plan to achieve what I think our shared goals and objectives.
First, we recognize the need for the industry to play a role in any funding mechanism like extended producer responsibility for the improvements and modernization of recycling infrastructure in this country. For decades, our nation's waste management strategy, especially5018 on recyclables, was largely to send them overseas. While China was building its recycling infrastructure, you know, we were helping them to do it. So now we really need to play catch up. There are billions of dollars being poured into innovation to recover and recycle more material, but we agree more needs to be done and the industry is ready to work with this committee to enact an achievable fair and equitable approach to the funding and recycling infrastructure in the commonwealth.
So then there is a need for greater end markets for the recycled material. A couple of bills talk about end markets that are on the docket today, but because, you know, after all, what good is collecting the material if it doesn't ultimately have a place to go. Our member companies work every day with their customers to find ways to include more recycled plastic into the products that their manufacture and because of that, more5073 recycled material will be used tomorrow than was used yesterday. But again, we know we have a long way to go, and that's why we look forward to working with the committee. But the way we see it combined, larger end markets and more economical ways to recycle plastic will get us closer to that5089 circular economy that we're all striving to achieve.
But it's important to note the best way is through innovation and not elimination. While it may feel like the easy way, and yes, you can certainly ban a product and it's going to go away, the cost to use an alternative will almost certainly outweigh the benefits both environmentally and economically. So I want to applaud the committee for its attention to sustainability and offer our team and the insights of our members as resources, as you deliberate the best ways to advance important public policy that's before you. We'll be sure to submit additional written information on a number of the bills, but very much appreciate the time today. Would be happy to answer any questions that you may have. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony, questions from the committee.
Seeing none. Thank you. Mr C Home, thank you. Uh steven Green, followed by Abigail stein
steven Green.
Okay. Abigail stein followed by Elizabeth dipole dipole. Perhaps. I'm sorry if I'm mispronouncing your last name.
Abigail stein.
Ah, there you are. See you.
Hi there uh mute button a few too many times, don't worry.
[ABIGAIL STEIN(AMERICAN FOREST AND PAPER ASSOCIATION):] Good afternoon. Thank you for allowing me the time to speak today. My name is Abigail Stein and I'm with the American Forest and Paper Association. I'd like to address some of our concerns with legislation related to EPR and two governing bags under consideration by the committee today. AFPA is the National Trade Association representing the paper and wood products manufacturing industry. In Massachusetts, the forest products industry operates 116 manufacturing facilities and employs more than 11,500 individuals with an annual payroll of over $865 million. The forest products industry has a demonstrated measurable record of success in making paper and paper-based packaging more circular and sustainable through market-based approaches.
According to the most recent US EPA data in 2018, more paper by weight is recovered for recycling for municipal solid waste streams than plastic, glass, steel and aluminium combined. The paper recovery rate in the US was 66.2% in 2019. For 2020 and an unprecedented year of shutdowns, business changes and5256 temporary recycling halts, the recovery rate only decreased half a point to 65.7%. This speaks to the strength and resilience of paper and paper-based packaging recovery. More specifically on the bills to ban plastic bags and place a 10 cent fee on paper. While some groups are seeking a statewide law on bags in order to decrease the burden of exists of the existing5283 patchwork of local ordinances, a fee on paper bags does5286 not need to be a part of the solution.
Retail stores have the5291 option to charge for carryout bags or any other in-store service without needing permission from the state. Of the over 140 municipalities in Massachusetts that have passed a ban on plastic bags, less than 10 also have a fee on paper.5304 It's not what the public is looking for. Robust investment in end-market use for recovered paper is an essential pillar of the industry's success. In fact, between 2019 and 2023, the US packaging and pulp producers committed to investing more than $4.2 billion dollars in new manufacturing capacity specifically designed to use over seven million additional tons of recovered paper per year. Meanwhile, EPR Programs would serve as a cost-shifting mechanism that does not create added value or develop markets for5337 recyclable materials.
Paper recycling is already at a high level and approaching the maximum levels that are practically achievable. EPR5343 is unlikely to improve the recycling rates, but will certainly increase costs5348 for producers and therefore consumers. We support increased participation in community recycling programs and other best practices in addition to focusing on hard to recycle materials where there may not yet be a well-developed collection infrastructure or good recovery results. I look forward to continuing this conversation with the committee and I thank you for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much. Mr stein questions from the committee,
5374 seeing5374 none, thank you very much for your testimony. Uh Moving on to Elizabeth Dupuy. I'm sorry again if I'm mispronouncing your last name, Director of global partnerships at M. I. T. Followed by Christie Petchey from the Conservation Law Foundation
Elizabeth soupy.
Mhm.
Okay Kirsty Petchey.
Good afternoon did you hear me? We can go for it. Okay we're the last guy standing I think at this point um how people
[KIRSTY PEACHEY(CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION):] [HB878] [HB869] So there5418 were a bunch of questions over the course of the day. I watched the whole hearing. Thank you so much for moving around. So moving forward, Chair Rausch and Chair Dykema, there are a bunch of questions that I can answer afterwards but I didn't want to just make a brief statement about two bills H 869 which is the plastic on of a single-use bill5439 that Rep Ciccolo and Senator Lewis proposed and then the EPR Bill, H 878. Of course, I have lots to say about a lot of the bills but I'm going to restrict myself to those two for now. The waste problem in Massachusetts is not about not having a place to send it, it's not about landfills closing, what it's about is that we're just creating way too much waste and it's not designed to be reused, composted or recycled.
So for about 5.6 million tons of waste that5469 we're disposing of, we're only putting in curbside recycling about 690,000 tons of waste. So less than 10% of what we're producing is actually going into a curbside recycling program. Most of that is not getting recycled. The glass isn't getting recycled in the system we have now,5486 the plastic is largely unremarkable, filmy plastics. Little plastics, only numbers one and two are actually recycled. So all those other plastics are not recyclable to get down-cycled or they get burned and buried. So what we really need to do to deal with this problem is to ban the things that we don't need to use, we need to ban those materials where we can replace them with reusable, which is much better for the economy, which is much better for jobs and we'll cut these recycling and disposal costs.
Then also we need to put producer responsibility programs in place like the bottle bill, which deals with containers, the containers, the bottle bill deals with are recycled, redeemed and recycled at about5526 a 50% rate. So that is still one of the best ways to handle these materials is to set up a system, whether it's from mattresses, electronics, packaging or paint in which we make sure that we are in charge. The agencies, the legislature, and municipalities are in charge of the system in which we make sure that we set fees that actually encourage as we talked about already echoing modulation, which means5549 it's more expensive, if you're producing more waste, it's more expensive.
You're producing more toxic5555 waste and yes, you have to deal as a producer with the end life of those materials, whether it's disposable or recyclable to incentivize it being more recyclable or more reusable. Just to clarify a few points that were heard, as I said, most plastic is not recyclable, advanced recycling or chemical recycling is just breaking it down and then burning it. There's only one facility in the whole country that can actually make plastic from materials. It's a total red herring regarding electronics. We disposed of 56,000 tons of electronics in our trash in Massachusetts last year, in 2019. So I don't know exactly how the recycling system could be considered good enough.
Then also, just to make sure we're clear on this, we want to make sure that the program is efficient, but mostly that the pro program actually works when we're talking about EPR of any sort. It has to be effective, not just efficient for the producers. They want to do small, cheap programs that don't cover everything. We need to make sure that we're really hitting the whole gamut of materials and only then can we save costs. For instance, in the town of the medium, they're recycling costs in 2017 were 35,000. In 2020, it was 180,000 and that's just for recycling. So we have a real broken system here that we need to fix. The last point I know that you probably noticed this, but I found it kind of amazing if you sell something and you make something, you don't want oversight and I understand that But unfortunately, that leaves all of us, all the taxpayers of residents in the municipality holding the bag for cost. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Apache. You are over time. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Questions from the I'm sorry I think that was breaking up. I'm sorry I didn't realize that time was up. That's okay. Uh Miss questions from the committee.
I will just ask you to send in those statistics. You sent, you mentioned about Needham in writing so that I can review them. A resident of Needham myself. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Um
Jaimie Goodwin, followed by Wendy stall. Vis
Jaimie Goodwin.
What? Fine comma.
Still watching? Uh I'm sorry can someone
never mind. I've found the person. Um Jaimie Goodwin, last call.
Okay Wendy stall followed by Cindy erin's please. Hi, can you hear me weekend?
[WENDY ??? (CONCERNED CITIZEN):] [HB869] [HB878] I'm Wendy. I am so thankful. Our democracy works this way5750 where you have to listen to me before deciding on any of these bills. I am a mother. I have a five-year-old daughter and a three-year-old son and I want the world to be a beautiful and healthy place for them. The other day I was at the park with my son and after I took a seat in the shade, he immediately ran onto5769 the grassy field to play. He found a large branch with a bunch of leaves on the end of it and he heaved it over his shoulder to fly it around. He swung it this way and I think he was pretending it was a kite, I'm not really sure but he was running around with abandon toting his leafy branch and then his attention was caught by something new.
He stopped running, lowered his branch and stared with rapture at this wonderful item floating in the breeze. It was a plastic sandwich baggy travelling up and down and swirling around with the wind. It didn't take him long to figure out he could use his branch as a broom and sweep that baggy all around the field. I5810 was looking at him, smiling to myself at the great fun he was having with his own imagination and a few play items he found in nature until it occurred to me how absurd it was that a plastic bag became my child's toy. I've grown almost immune to the amount of trash that floats around our state and you might have to, it's on our streets, in our ocean and even in our placentas that grow our babies, plastic is so bad for our world and recycling, whether mechanical or advanced is disappointingly not the answer. The only real answer is to transition to reusable.
Do we really need to send our kids to school with a brand new bag in closing their sandwich every day? That day at the park was a wake-up call for me. Our planet is drowning in our trash. The big question is, what can we do about it? Well, I know when my children make some sort of creation in my house, inevitably, there's a huge mess afterwards. I make them help clean it up because that's what responsible people do. The packaging manufacturers need to clean up their own mess better yet, they need to stop making the mess in the first place. You guys today have the awesome potential to be some of the leaders in this country with these reforms and we truly need big, bold measures. I am supporting packaging EPR with House Bill 878 as an important first step towards managing our race and banning single-use and non-recyclable plastics. H 869 is the plastic omnibus bill, it's a no brainer. I want to end by quoting the ancient proverb," If not now, when." SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
it's not me. No, thank you. Thank you. Mr. All for your testimony. Questions from the committee.
Seeing none. Thank you again for your5917 testimony.5917 And as a one mom to another. I know about that mess. Uh huh. Uh Cindy erin's followed by Alison Rogers.
[CINDY ERINS(CONCERNED CITIZEN):] Thank you to the joint committee for allowing me the time to give testimony. My name is Cindy errands. I'm a resident of Lexington, a town meeting member, a member of the Sustainable Lexington Committee, a member of the Lexington Green teams and an advisor to the Lexington Zero Waste collaborative. I'm speaking today on behalf of myself. I'm also a parent of two young people who are very worried about their and our future. This is going to be somewhat repetitive, but this is important. We are not only in a climate crisis, we're also in a waste crisis. In our culture of convenience, unnecessary single-use plastic items are ubiquitous. The majority of single-use items have very economical reusable alternatives.
The single-use items are not easily recyclable and they're filling up our landfills, causing toxic emissions from incinerators and littering oceans, damaging the environment and damaging human health. As you've heard from residents of Lynn, Saugus and Revere,5992 this is also a public health crisis. I am so thankful for my Representative Ciccolo and for Senator Jason Lewis, co-chairs of the Zero Waste Caucus for bringing forward the single-use plastics omnibus bill House 869 Senate 579. The provisions in this bill would significantly reduce the number of single-use plastics used, and remove them from our race string. The most efficient way to reduce plastic pollution is to prevent it from being made and used in the first place. I fully support House 869 S 579 and I implore you to report favourably on it.
However, even if the legislature passed the legislature, passed a strong single-use plastics, omnibus bill are recycling system would still be in trouble. Over the past 106045 years, more and more hard to recycle plastic packaging has poured into our communities, while more and more plastic recyclers6051 domestically and around6052 the world have turned away are contaminated recycling. In other words, trash is a faulty recycling system that has been exposed, costing towns and cities tremendous amounts of money. Senate Bill 610, House 878, an act to save recycling costs in the commonwealth would put the responsibility back on packaging producers lift costs from taxpayers and reduce plastic waste. A true extended producer responsibility like Senate 610 House 878 that requires companies making plastic packaging to reimburse towns and cities for the recycling costs is something that I strongly support. And again, implore the committee to report favourably on it. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you for your testimony. Any questions from the committee?
Seeing none. Thank you again. Miss errands. Alison Rogers followed by an coals. Hi there. Uh,
[ALISON ROGERS(USEFUL):] Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Alison Rogers and I'm the founder of Useful, a tech-enabled returnable to-go cup and container system where a circular solution focused on eliminating plastics. By now in the day it's late in the day you've learned about just how terrible plastics are for you in terms of health as well as the fact that we are all wish cycling when we put plastics out on the curb for recycling and yet we live in a convenience culture where we need things now and we need them to be easy. So the question is how do we solve this problem? And we really need to focus on circular solutions useful is a Boston based example of a circular solution. Again, we're a tech-enabled returnable to-go cup and container system.
We partner with colleges, corporate and communities in an effort to go zero6169 waste. We have designed custom stainless steel, inventory, double-wall vacuum sealed and a proprietary app to enable our system. What we've learned so far is that returnable solutions save organizations and communities hundreds of thousands of dollars annually, both in terms of packaging costs and end of life costs and that's perhaps why there are so many people on the call today. There is demand for ubiquity in returnable solutions and our community here in Massachusetts is ready for change. So I implore the members of this caucus to be leaders to push Massachusetts forward toward a circular returnable future, a future free of meatless single-use packaging.
For that6215 reason, I express my support of an act to reduce single-use plastics from the environment, the extended producer responsibility and an act to6225 strengthen, reuse, repurpose and recycle. Since I have just a minute left, I'll share what keeps me going day to day and why I am so passionate about eliminating plastics from our world. It6240 all stems back to opportunities I've had to sail offshore miles and miles, days and days away from land and here where you're really immersed in the environment, we still find single-use packaging. Can't tell you the number of balloons I've seen out there, potato chip bags, coffee cups and plastic clamshells and that is the reason that I'm on this mission to reduce single-use packaging and I implore the members of this caucus to be leaders. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, Mr, Rogers for your testimony. Any questions from the6270 committee?
Seeing none. Thank you again for your comments. Um an cole's followed by Corinne Van
and coles.
Okay, Corinne Van followed by James Roddy.
Corinne Van.
Okay, James Roddy, followed by suma Gonna puffy.
Hello, can you hear me? Yes, we can,6327 awesome.
[JAMES RODDY(SEASIDE SUSTAINABILITY):] [HB878] [HB869] My name is James Roddy, 21 years old and a college student currently interning on the legislation team for seaside sustainability. I'm actually submitting this testimony on behalf of the seaside. Seaside is an ocean conservation-focused NGO based in Gloucester Massachusetts. At Seaside, we are dedicated to the preservation and restoration of the world's oceans by promoting awareness, advocacy and action. So I'm gonna be talking about Bill H 869 and H 878 today. I care very deeply on a personal level about these issues and I feel they have incredible stakes in the matter as a young person in a climate affected the world and that I have a unique perspective to offer as a young college student committed to meeting these challenges.
With that said, I want to emphasize a couple of points about these two bills. So I'll start off with an act to reduce single-use plastics from the environment. So, I like everyone else has seen the plastics pile up in our community and in our oceans across the world. It was disturbing, to say the least, but one statistic I6383 saw while researching this bill stuck out to me immensely, and I believe it says a lot about the state of things. That statistic is that plastic water bottles are the incredibly third-largest source of plastic pollution in the6393 ocean, which is just remarkably hard-hitting for me considering the seriousness of the problem in the frivolous nature of the cause. It's just a simple shift to move to reusable water bottles and with extremely doable transitions to sustainable alternative water bottles.
I feel this specific example really highlights the nature of single-use plastics as a whole. As so many single-use plastics have their own sustainable alternative options already on the market. I feel like we need a catalyst to push us to make this transition away from single-use plastics and abandoning this nature is a great first step. Now with the shift to activity recycling costs in the commonwealth single-stream recycling and our way of doing things as they stand as a problem. In fact, 25% of single-stream recyclables are too contaminated to recycle with nowhere to go with the landfill. We need multi-stream recycling and we need to find a way to fund it without overburdening our community.
I feel like this bill is that solution has well-defined funding mechanisms and plans and an admirable emphasis on community investment. Common function, I have to take the burden for materials that we do not create. We have to force companies to take some responsibility well for their own good and for ours. I'm so passionate about these things because of how much I care for the community and preserving the unique beauty of the area. But even more so what hope do the rest of the US and the rest of the world have for taking these crucial steps? If somewhere as environmentally progressive and friendly as Massachusetts cannot, we6474 need to take the lead on this issue to show companies in the public that we care about our community here and to show the rest of the world how bright their future can be as well. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Mr Rowdy for your testimony. Any questions from the committee?
Seeing none. Thank you again for your comments. Uh Sumida Ganapathy
followed by steven buck buck sanski. Excuse me,
Dr Ganapathy.
Okay steven buck sanski followed by Eileen Ryan.
Hi there. Hello
madam. Chair chair
[STEVE BOKSANSKI(MASSACHUSETTS BEVERAGE ASSOCIATION):] [HB881] [HB907] Chairwoman Rausch, Chairwoman Dykema.6511 I know it's a long day, I'm gonna be real brief. I just wanna introduce myself Steve Boksanski, executive director of the Massachusetts beverage association. The Mass Beverage Association represents distributors of non-alcoholic beverages. So all those great refreshing soft drinks and waters that people like so much from the national brands that everyone knows too. Town favourite polar out in Western Massachusetts. I want to speak just briefly6554 in support of House 881, an act relative to public space recycling. We think public space recycling is part of an overall comprehensive strategy.
That is the key to success in terms of taking care of all our waste and recyclable material. In 2012, we started the Massachusetts recycling challenge and that's a small program to help cities and towns uh increase their public space recycling capacity. So we've worked with over a dozen communities on placing recycling bins in high6585 traffic areas and places where people like to congregate. There are a number of we're launching and I kept cards to encourage more people to recycle their bottles and cans specifically. So if any of the committee members think they have a good spot for this type of program please please let me know and we'd like to look at it.
Secondarily, House 907, regarding this legislation, we are specifically that prohibits the dispenser called single-use disposable bottles containing water or soda. We don't think our bottles are single-use. They're banned from being disposed of by the DEP through their waste ban regulations. It's important to note that these beverage containers are made from PET and are not designed to be 100% recyclable that which was done on purpose. It wasn't by accident including the cap. So the bottles are made and designed intended not to be singly used. He reused and made it into something else, including new bottles. I'm going to jump right down the national at the national level.
The American beverage association6671 is working with the World Wildlife Fund, the recycling partnership and closed-loop partners on a program called every bottle back. Very simple, decrease the use of new plastic and increase the collection of plastic bottles so those can be made into new bottles. Our members support that here in Massachusetts. We'd be happy to work with the committee on this legislation. They want to be a part of the solution. The final point I'll make is that all the big bottlers have recycled content goals as, the only is better capture and recycling of our containers. I'll stop there. Thank you very much, Madam Chair and members of the committee. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Mr back sanski questions from the committee.
Seeing none. Thank you again for your testimony. Uh Eileen Ryan, followed by Elizabeth McKay.
Hi,
[EILEEN RYAN(CONCERNED CITIZEN):] [SB610] [HB878] [HB869] [SB579] This is Eileen Ryan. I live in Watertown Massachusetts and I am here to support the extended producer responsibility bill Senate number 610 and House number 878. This bill places the responsibility to safely dispose of plastic waste directly on the producers of toxic and non-recyclable plastic products, in Massachusetts. Cities and towns are facing an economic crisis trying to dispose of excessive and unnecessary plastic products. Only 8.5% of all plastic ever produced has been recycled. The idea of recycling plastic is a corporate marketing6771 strategy of the fossil fuel-based in plastic industry.
It is time to place the burden of plastic waste disposal directly on the producers of the waste and not on the citizens of Massachusetts from Williamstown to Provincetown. We need to reduce the cost of municipalities' waste disposal. Extended producer responsibility is one way to begin.6794 I also support the omnibus single-use plastic bill, an act to reduce single-use plastics in the environment, House Bill 869 and Senate Bill 579. Plastic production is a public health and environmental crisis. Single-use plastics are polluting the land and waterways of Massachusetts from the Berkshires to our coastal islands. Plastic waste pollutes our natural environments.
Over 140 towns in Massachusetts have passed single-use plastic bag bands. Some cities and towns have passed polystyrene bands, Nip bottle bands, plastic straw bands, plastic water Bland's balloon release bands, the list goes on. It is time for one statewide law that outlaws all of these impossible to recycle plastics that are contaminating single-stream recycling programs. The production and disposal of plastic is an environmental justice issue, toxic petrochemical plants that produce plastics, as well as incinerators and landfills. Where plastic waste usually ends up are located in environmental justice communities where people of colour live. Please support the omnibus single-use plastic bill for the health of all Massachusetts residents and for the health of our6871 environment.
Other states such as Vermont, have already passed similar bills, let us be on the side of justice and be leaders in the struggle to reduce plastic pollution. I support many of the other bills and thank you so much for your time and for this amazing hearing, I've learned so much. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much. Any questions from the committee?
Okay, thank you Miss Ryan Elizabeth McKay and that is the last name on my list. We have made it all the way to the end, so thank you for sticking with us.
Hi,
[ELIZABETH MCKAY(CONCERNED CITIZEN):] [HB878] [HB869] My name is Elizabeth McKay and I'm the mother of two daughters ages 13 and 15. I am speaking today to express my support for the single-use plastic ban. In particular, I'm speaking of my seventh-grade daughter who was particularly concerned about plastics. This year, she completed a project about plastic pollution and learned that plastics were clogging our oceans, hurting marine life, it eats some of this plastic when it breaks down into little pieces and ultimately hurts humans who eat some of that marine life. I was really struck to find out that the average lifespan of a single-use plastic bag is only 12 minutes but it may last hundreds, even thousands of years.
According to a recent article in the journal Waste Management, there are several different approaches that governments can use to reduce single-use plastic, but a ban banning6959 single-use plastic is6960 the most effective approach, according to this article, and it's easy to enforce. When consumers are charged a fee for a non-ban bag, they are more likely to use reusable bags. I wanted to show you a bag of trash here, it was recently collect collected in Brookline along a single block in a single day. Ending single-use plastics will work to reduce litter such as this. Please support H 869, the ban on Single-use plastics, please also support H 878, the extended producer responsibility bill. In both economic and moral terms, packaging producers should be responsible for the costs related to recycling their products. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much for your testimony and I want to encourage your daughter if she is interested to7006 submit some written materials as well. I look forward to reading those, uh, questions from the committee,
seeing none. Okay, we have now reached the end of the first pass through the list of people who signed up to testify. So I am now going to go back and go through the list a second time for anyone who did not respond earlier when I called their names.
If you are here, uh, a mute, a mute and identify when I call your name please. Uh,
Lester no last name from Saugus,
Maureen, Doyle
Neil, Ryan,
jennifer, Peterson,
robert, Goguen. I'm here. Fantastic.
[ROBERT GOGUEN(CONCERNED CITIZEN):] [HB938] [HB878] Thank you madam chair. I really appreciate the second chance. I retired this fall from 30 years of service to Harvard University like Sharon Casita. I'm an old-timer and I've seen it all, the good, the bad and the ugly but I'm really excited that we have the opportunity here in Massachusetts to make some significant progress. For example, H 938, is an act relative to paint recycling. Paint is a confusing product. You know, even at Harvard, people aren't smart enough to figure out the difference between alculate or latex water-based oil, basically, the bottom line is they just put it in the closet and then the students move out and the drama club leaves it behind and I have to deal with it and it can be pretty expensive for us.
It really burns me to that my colleagues at Yale, in Connecticut and Brown in Rhode island and Stanford in California can recycle paint coherently cheaply and easily. Especially since all the students understand it's paint, it's recyclable, so we7158 love to paint here. Also regarding mattresses, Harvard donates about 1000 mattresses a year. I would love to see the American mattress council also help us To get some of these reusable mattresses to all of the summer7179 camps, uh detox centres and all the other places that call us for donations. Would love some help in the7188 expensive process costs $100,000 to recycle those other 2000 mattresses. Finally H 878, the PPP.
If the producers were responsible for recovering recycling all of this packaging, they put more effort into making its recyclable materials and could save our institution $1 million dollars a year. So in conclusion, bring Harvard to the level playing field so we can catch up to Yale7221 and Brown and Stanford. Thank you again for7226 the second chance today. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
of course. And thank you for your testimony. Any questions from the committee.
Seeing none. Thank you again. Mr Grogan, I'm going to proceed now with the list. The second run through the list, Felix, Nevaeh's
Adam, Gourlay
Ben Hellerstein
Mad have even Catterson
maya burgess,
trust and savage.
Regina fields,
melissa Bertrand,
steven, green,
Elizabeth, deploy
jaimie, Goodwin
and coles
korean van7300
sumi again. Apathy.
Okay, that's my whole list. Is there anyone else present who would like to testify on any of the bills on today's docket?
Going once, going twice. Okay. I believe we have reached the end of our hearing.7326 I want to thank everyone for us, especially those of you are still with us in teams um And particular thanks of course to my house co chair uh represented Caroline dick. Comma appreciate everyone's testimony today and I'll entertain a motion to adjourn So move Madam Chair, 2nd Madam Chair. Thank you everyone have a wonderful evening. We are adjourned
© InstaTrac 2025