2023-06-14 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources
2023-06-14 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Speak
SPEAKER2 - 5th hearing of the joint committee on the environment, natural resources. I am state senator Becca Rauch, co chair of the committee, and I will be cheering today's hearing. I'm joined by my dear friend and colleague, our house chair, Dan Cahill, and we are joined by several of our colleagues. On the senate side, the members of the committee, I'm joined by Voice Chair, Jamie Eldridge, Senators Ed Kennedy, Mike Moore, Mike Rush, and our minority leader, Bruce Tarr. Mr. Chair, would you like to intro the house member?
SPEAKER1 - I'm going to
SPEAKER3 - try to introduce everybody because I see some folks also online. We have our vice chair, Dylan Fernandez, representative. How are you? We also have representative Harry, I believe, representative Secollos here with us today online. We have representative Gentille. We have Jessica representative Giannino. We have representative Casner, and we748 also have representative oral. And we have, I see, leader peak is with us. and we have representative Pat Had Dad. And I think that's it, except for one761 more person who has a very special day to day.763 That's right. We have representative Jenny Armini. It happens to be
SPEAKER4 - your birthday today. And you know what
SPEAKER3 - we do with people on their birthday?
SPEAKER5 - We sting.
SPEAKER2 - Oh, yeah. It's happening. Happy birthday.
SPEAKER1 - Little first session here and got a little little rapid ass in you.
SPEAKER3 - So let's
SPEAKER6 - chairman.
SPEAKER7 - Alright. Oh, well, I see representative
SPEAKER3 - of Scarsdale's as well as here on virtual, and804 we have some members in the crowd who are going to be testifying.806 Right? So, folks, if you're testifying, I'm808 not going to introduce you that way because you can deduce yourselves. I think that's it.
SPEAKER2 - Okay. Terrific. Great to start off with a song. That is a joyous occurrence. Okay. A few administrative and housekeeping things that we'll try to get through fairly quickly. As you can see, we have a lot of folks here are interested in today's subject matter, plastics, and waste management, So we're going to move as quickly as we can. This is a hybrid hearing that is being live streamed on the state legislature's website. We have individuals both physically present in the room and also joining us838 remotely. If you are joining us remotely, please840 remember to keep yourselves muted unless you are speaking. Also, please note that the chat in our team's remote login is for committee business only. Please do not enter anything substantive into the chat. It will not be saved or considered. Huge thanks to LIS who make this hybrid situation possible and functioning. Yes. I hear somebody clapping for them. I totally agree with that. Several people who wanted to testify, signed up in advance. We will also take test869 from anyone who has signed up in person today. I will endeavor to announce the queue of speakers a couple in advance so that you can anticipate when testimony will be heard. Testimony is limited to three minutes per person. Let me say that again. three minutes per person. I am going to hold you to it because we have a lot of890 people. We have close to a hundred people signed up to testify today. So if we If we don't move it along,897 we're going to be here until midnight. So we're going to move it along.
You are903 welcome to read prepared remarks. But please refrain from reading any written testimony that you've already sent us in writing or something that you're about to send us in writing. We read it, promise, But if you914 have something prepared that's different for today and you want to read it, great. Again, anyone who is testifying is going to have three minutes So if you are testifying on multiple pieces of legislation, you still get three minutes. Okay? Just three minutes. to testify on all the bills on which you would like to speak today. After testimony concludes, questions may be asked by members of the committee, and only members of the committee. Any committee members participating remotely, please use the raise hand function, non committee members who may be joining us by teams, raise their hands will not be considered. For panels, anyone coming up in a panel, we will hear the testimony from all of the panelists and then take questions afterward.
just a friendly reminder that cheering, clapping, yelling, and various other direct disruptions now that we've already cleared the birthday singing portion of today's hearing. will be out of order and are not permitted.
Today, we are going to take testimony both by topic area and by bill. depending on on978 which section of the hearing we're in, so stay tuned for more on that. And as is customary, we will take testimony984 from legislators and other elected officials at the outset. And since I have a bill up today, we are going to go first to get that done. And then so I'm going to996 turn996 this over to my dear friends. Going to take my chair hat off. I'll bring it over this way.
SPEAKER3 - Who would like to testify?
It's numbered.
SPEAKER2 - Okay. It's stuck to the table. Oh, there we go. Okay. Great.
SEN RAUSCH - SB 570 - HB 882 - SB 567 - Hello, friends. Good afternoon. Thanks for taking my testimony, our testimony on churn today. I am testifying here on of our bills. one is senate 570 and the House counterpart, House 882, an act to reduce plastics in the second, is senate 567, an act maintaining a statewide car seat recycling program, which is also included in the first bill. I think we all know by now, the science is pretty clear. Plastics are harmful. Plastics are smothering our planet. There's a lot statistics that I'm going to skip in the interest of time, and also we're going to hear from many experts today who are going to go through this. But the one thing that keeps standing out in my mind as we've been talking plastics in particular over the last couple of weeks.
Is that a single plastic fork, one fork takes up to 200 years to disintegrate. And then once it disintegrates, it probably becomes microplastics and then becomes you know, some sort of other harmful pollutant either in the air or the water or the food stream or our own bloodstream. This bill, and I want to add that we cannot recycle our way out of our plastic problem. That is not a reality. 32% of our plastics end up in our environment. 40% sits in the landfill. 14% is incinerated, producing microplastics, toxic smoke, and fly ash. So this is and many others are why we have filed this bill, the plastics reduction act, and it does several big things that I'll try to1129 run through quickly, and I know Mr. Chair that we will have1131 many more conversations about this as the session1133 continues .
he first thing is it creates a uniform plastic bag band for the entire state. Plastic bags are significant single use plastic bags are a significant portion of our plastic pollution. This component of the bill would ban plastic bags at stores and charge a 10 cents fee. for each recycled paper bag or reusable bag. Businesses would get to keep half that, and the other 5% would be deposited into a fund that I'm going to talk about in a few minutes, but in a minute. second piece is it would limit plastic food service wear. Right? Forks, knives, spoons,1171 etcetera. Again, 200 years per item. That's a wild figure to me. Even my kids won't see that. and they're both still in elementary school. So this provision would help to make the shift to eco friendly biodegradable compostable products.
We did build in an exception for straws, plastic straws upon request1193 in recognition of the need for some people with disabilities who need a plastic straw. Another provision of the bill. 3rd one is the bill would prohibit the sale or provision of plastic water bottles, single use plastic water bottles of leader in volume or less. Right? We can fill it in a station, we can fill it in the bubblers in our office. We can use a glass jar, which is what I'm using today and have shifted away from plastics. Right? It can take up to a 1000 years for plastic bottles to degrade. We can't wait that long. The bill would also prohibit the sale or provision of plastic nips. We see these littered all over the place. I found some at my kids1234 base literally Baseball fields last1236 week or the week before.
Right? This is only plastic, not glass. So I want to make sure that that distinction is clear. DEP actually says that these bottles are too small to recycle, so that is we have to get we have to get them at the production phase at the sale phase. because we're certainly not going to get them at the recycling phase. Again, the bill would create a permanent car seat recycling program. This is something that We actually passed through the budget last year as a pilot, and so this bill and the standalone bill on this would take care of that program as well and make it permanent. And then finally, this bill would create the Environmental Protection Trust Fund to support our small businesses.
And our environmental justice population in the transition to eco friendly products.The language of the bill directs DEP to create a plan to establish comprehensive public accessible statewide composting as well and creates a special legislative commission to make recommendations on EPRs. about which we are certainly going to hear later. So it's a it's sort of a mini omnibus bill that addresses a variety of pieces of plastic pollution, while also providing a timeline and on ramp for1308 our small businesses that are all1310 still recovering from COVID to give them more time to1314 make the shift from plastics more eco friendly products. So I thank you for considering testimony, and I'm very happy to pass it to my friend and colleague, representative Phillips.
REP PHILIPS - SB 570 - HB 882 - HB 881 - Thank you very much, Chair Cahill, Chair Rausch, members of the committee. You heard about all the great things that are in this bill. I would just add a couple of points I believe that we've reached a tipping point with the plastic bag ban. two thirds of Massachusetts residents are already living under municipal bans, and I believe it's time to standardize that practice across the Commonwealth. nip bottles as you've heard are absolutely a scourge across our communities. They1347 are everywhere. This bill is a good first step to cutting down on that litter. And finally, single use plastic water bottles. Yes. They absolutely are convenient,1354 but my parents in previous generation somehow made do without them growing up. They can certainly do so again. We have far better solutions and reusable options now than we did in the 19 fifties, which is why I hope you will consider and give this bill a favorable report. Thanks so much. It's SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER3 - Wait. Oh, questions. Any questions from the committee?
REP ARMINI - I just have 1one quick question. Does it include baggies? sandwich bags, snack bags?
RAUSCH - It does not as drafted cover sandwich bags. Right? It covers the like, the larger plastic bag that you get from a grocery store or drug stores. I'm like, SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - got it. Thank you. Right. Thank you.
SPEAKER3 - The question is saying them. Thank you very much. I'll relinquish the chair. I got
SPEAKER8 - another bill. Representative.
SPEAKER1 - Alright.
SPEAKER2 - Nice to see you.
PHILIPS - Thank you so much, for taking me out of turn. It's a privilege to also talk to you about house bill 881, an act to establish a mattress recycling program in the Commonwealth. In our efforts to our in an effort to success of current programs in California, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, this bill creates a statewide mattress stewardship program that provides convenient and accessible she needs to properly recycle discarded mattresses rather than their common destiny of landfill or worse, the side of a road. Under its provisions, manufacturer, renovator, retailer, or distributor that operates in state would register with a mattress recycling council, and entities that sell mattresses.
To a consumer or ultimate end user in Massachusetts would add a mattress stewardship fee to the purchase price that would fund the recycling of that mattress. This fee would apply to any entity that sells a mattress in or into the state, including both brick and mortar retail locations and online purchases. We do applaud DEPs work in this sphere implementing a landfill ban for mattresses and working with towns to stand up programs, but believe that there is a better way do this using existing industry infrastructure in a way that keeps recycling costs down for consumers and frees up state grant money to be spent on1479 other priorities. So with that, I would Answer any questions you might1482 have. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions from the committee.
Thank you very much.
SPEAKER8 - Thank you.
SPEAKER2 - Senator Lewis. I'm going to testify before we go to perhaps answer the call. If that's okay? Sure. Thank you.
REP CICCOLO - HB 766 - HB 767 - HB 768 - Chair Rausch, Chair Cahill members of the committee. It is wonderful to be1516 here this afternoon, and I am thrilled to see so many people in the audience today1520 that really speaks to the urgency of this issue that we're covering today. And wonderful, but you scheduled it so early in the session. I'm not going1530 to get into any detail about my three bills. I will submit my testimony in writing. Save the time for all of our guests who are here who want to speak But I did want to just say, as co-chair of the zero waste caucus, I just wanted to frame the urgency a bit more by describing that we have 55 members now. It's bicameral, bipartisan, and has been a very active caucus since 2020 when Senator Lewis and I established it.
There are all kinds of statistic you will hear today about how bad microplastics are in our bodies, how toxic they are in the environment in terms of PFAS, into our soils, into our water, into our air, anything that we burn over a ton, a year of plastic that is produced is very dangerous. And we've come to the point where we really need to do something about it. So my hope is that together, this committee can put together some of the best bills and the best ideas. You will hear from a lot of our colleagues and as I said, there are 55 members of the Zero-Waste Caucus, and we did a process earlier in the session to prioritize our bills. We did the same thing last year as well. For the past two sessions, our priority has been the single use plastics reduction bill.
And act to reduce single use plastics from the environment. Senator Lewis and I have that bill But we recognize that each one of our members comes out these bills with different ideas, and we want to take the best of all the language1621 and combine them into one fantastic bill, which is what your job is as chairs of the committee and our job as committee members. So three of my bills are on today, and I'm not going to get into any detail, but the one of the others is H.766, an act to skip the stuff. that is essentially to ask restaurants to require that condiments and silverware be requested instead of just automatically thrown into the takeout bag and they can charge a fee and save that fee if they wish to. And then one that isn't mentioned as often.
But I think very important and is a companion to an updated bottle bill potentially, is H.768. Which is an act to ensure plastic bottle recycling. Right now, we don't have any requirements that post consumer plastics be used in our new bottles that are produced for consumption. So this phases in over time a requirement that that plastic be incorporated that is post consumer. So actual recycled plastic, not from the cutting room floor, from a manufacturing site, for instance. and that that plastic would then be incorporated at after two years, 15%, after five years, 25%, and then eight years, 50% of the of the new1697 bottles that we would be buying would have actual recycled content in them. So I think1701 that's one of the ideas that could be included and any good plastics bill.
As well as if we are able to update the bottle bill. This committee is not hearing the bottle bill. That is the other one of our priorities that has been our running priority as a for two years straight. The third one this year is a food labeling bill. But we also embrace and continue to support the EPR bills that you're seeing that we supported as our priority last year and continue to be sort of in our 4th spot for priority. So when that comes up later on before this committee, we will speak to that again. So with that, I thank you for the time. I thank all the people who are here today who care about this issue deeply, and I hope that people will continue to be engaged help us push this across the finish line this session.
SEN LEWIS - Well, good afternoon. Chairs Rausch and Cahill members of the committee. I'm Senator Jason Lewis. I'm proud to be the other cofounder and co-chair of the legislature, zero Waste Caucus. You know, I've worked on a lot of different issues since I've been in the legislature over a decade now. I care about a lot of different issues, but I have to tell you that addressing our plastics crisis and I really think it's an existential crisis is has moved right to the top of my list. We are we're really leaving a planet, you know, for our children, grandchildren, future generations that will not be fit to inhabit. I'm very proud of the fact that Massachusetts has been a leader when it comes to addressing climate change and we've done a lot, of course, to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and to invest in clean energy.
But, you know, we've done very little to deal with our waste crisis and especially plastics. you know, and they're range of very serious issues as a result of plastics. Right? Both the1807 mining of the fossil fuels1809 and transport of those plastics and the manufacturing of them is a huge source of greenhouse gas emissions and other toxins as chair Rausch mentioned over 90% of1820 plastics are not recycled, so they get buried, they1824 get burned, and they end up in our environment. and a lot of that ends up in our oceans. The Great Pacific garbage patch is now twice the size of Texas, twice the size of Texas. And the majority of it is plastics. And as was mentioned previously, a lot of that plastic breaks down over time into microplastics, which have been found everywhere on our planet, including in all of our own human bodies.
So this is a major health issue as well. We have to tackle our plastics crisis. There is an effort underway at the global level to develop an international treaty. I believe they just actually had their second meeting last week. It's looking promising that we will achieve some kind of global treaty on plastics. I don't want Massachusetts to be dragged to respond because of a global treaty, and we are behind the curve.1877 We should be ahead of the curve, as we have been on many other issues. So what my message to the committee is I'm1884 not here to speak in favor of any1886 specific bill. I'm proud of the bill that Rep Ciccolo and I have filed and re filed the session. I think the bill that chair Rausch, and representative Phillips have filed is terrific.
I think many members have filed bills on individual types of plastic, right, whether that's bags or nips or balloons. I want to encourage you, I want to plead with you to release favorably the strongest, boldest possible, single use reduction plastics bill that you can put together. I can assure you that I, and representative Ciccolo and I suspect the vast majority of our colleagues will stand with you in this committee in fighting for that bill to come to the floor of this session of the House and Senate, and I'm confident Governor Healey would sign that bill into law. We know it's not easy, but we can get this done. We have to get this done. So thank you for your work, and please work to report the strongest possible bill boldest possible bill that we can to reduce single use plastics from our environment. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you. Questions from the committee?
k. Thank you both. Thank you.
SPEAKER5 - Leader Peak. Joining us remotely. Thank
REP PEAKE - HB 875 - Thank you. Chair people for taking me out of order, and I will respect your three minute limit I'm just here to briefly speak in favor of house 875 an act relative to helium balloons. Last session, this committee exec the bill out with an ought to pass. It was later in the session, and actually after I worked with committee staff on a on a rewrite of it, We have amended it this year rather than banning the sale of helium balloons to change the language to ban the intentional release of balloons. You may ask, why would1992 the rep from Provlestown, Funtown USA, want to ban people's good time? Well, there's plenty of other ways to ban good times, plenty of other ways to have a good time other than with.
And in fact, my town of2008 Provinstown, well over a decade ago, banned the sale of helium balloons and for those naysayers who say you need them for a party, I would invite you to come down any day in July August and see the party that we have without the environmental risk of the release of helium balloons. So what we're doing is we're looking to ban the intentional release of them. You may ask why they are a major part of pollution in our oceans and in basements, in particular, but certainly throughout the Woodlands and forests as well. The center for coastal studies does a coastal sweep of the beaches on the outer and lower cap.
So stretching from Chatham up to province town and down on the bayside all2057 the way to Brewster. Last2059 year, they and they keep track of everything they collect. Last year, they collected 1311 helium balloons and strings. This year, year to date, and we're only in the middle of June. They have collected off of our beaches, and these just the beaches in my district, not statewide 980 helium balloons that have found their way there. They are confused with jellyfish, sea turtles, who try to eat them, and then, of course, that causes their death or ill, you know, illness. You may remember there was an article in the globe last year about a sea turtle that was rescued.
And it had to string from a helium balloon wound throughout its entire digestive system, miraculously, and thanks to the veterinarians at the New England aquarium, That turtle didn't perish, but that I think brought out for all of us what the real risks of these are. So since the committee exacted out with a favorable recommendation last session, I would ask for your favorable and expedited review of the bill this session. so that I'll have time to move it along through ways and means and all of those other stops along the legislative pipeline. And with that, I would be happy to answer any2136 questions you might have. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions from the committee.
Thank you very much, madam leader. Always nice to see you.
SPEAKER12 - Thank you. Good to see everybody.
SPEAKER5 - Sending her Moran.
SEN MORAN SB 542 - Thank you, madam chair. Nice to see all the members, Mr. Chair. Today I am here to speak on senate 542, an act establishing safe paint stewardship. Over the past several decades paint manufacturers have created more environmentally conscious and sustainable products but leftover paint is still one of the largest volume products collected by municipal hazardous waste programs. An estimated 10% of the more than 800 million gallons of architectural paint sold each year in the United States goes unused. The vast majority of this pain is latex based which is considered non hazardous and can be recycled, but when picked up by municipal programs is treated as hazardous waste and is disposed of.
2207 With2207 the right programs we can divert this paint from landfills and reuse a2211 recycler to reduce waste. I want to mention that this dose files alongside one with Rep Haddad the house. The bill would create such a program in Massachusetts. The program is called PaintCare. It was developed by the American Coatings Association, which represents paint manufacturers, and it's been successfully implemented in 10 other states and the district of Columbia. The way it works is simple. Paint manufacturers selling product in Massachusetts would establish a collection program so that paint retailers that volunteer would become take back locations for unused paint to be returned to manufacturers.
Most of the paint ends up being recycled into new paint while some is recycled into different products. This program is funded by an added fee to the cost of the pay, but the average2265 amount added to say a $40 gallon of pay is only about2269 75 cents in the other states in which this has been implemented, this has not had any negative impact on paint sales. Recycling paint through safe stewardship programs is not only popular with paint manufacturers, but with cities, towns, waste management companies, hazardous waste transporters, and environmental groups. PaintCare takes a huge chunk out of the municipal waste system saving money and time for2295 our cities and towns and paint care is straightforward, cost effective, and incredibly useful in diverting unused paint from landfills.
Tens of millions of gallons of unused pain have already been collected and repurposed in the states that have implemented the program. Additionally, implementation would be easy. The American Coatings Association established paint care as a non profit organization with the sole purpose of implementing paid recycling programs throughout the country and providing guidance. I strongly urge a favorable support for this bill and I welcome any questions from the committee on the2332 details and I just want to point out there's a very informative web site of paintcare.org. If on an ongoing basis, the media is curious about one thing or another. and I appreciate the crowded young people. This is a good sign for a state of Massachusetts and care for its community. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you. Questions from the committee. Okay. Thank you, senator. Thank you so much. Representative for dad.
Seems like a nice transition.
REP HADDAD - HB 823 - SB 542 - SB 551 - Thank you. So I'm here obviously to speak on H.823, but I also want to give strong support to S.542 and S.551. So I won't repeat the details that Senator Moran just gave you. I do hope they have made an impression. What I want to talk about is the big picture. I happen to have served on natural resources my very first term in the house. We've been talking about these things since then. The dangers of things that are going into our landfills, and the necessity to really look at them. So that's point one. Point two I want to take up is that People look at this as a2414 tax. It's not a tax. It is an opportunity for2418 cities and towns to save money by the consumer pain just a little bit more.
And third, the point that will be made, I'm sure, by the opponent,2429 that this will cause many other things like tires and mattresses to be recycled and have to have a special circumstance. Well, that's a good thing. We have so many things that we are putting into landfills that are hurting us You're going to hear that throughout your day, whether it be plastics and paint paint and other things. To echo the senator, we need to be very proactive. Because if we don't, We're still going to be talking about this in 20 years. And my2466 grandchildren are going to be left with the2468 burden. So I would hope that there would be. a very comprehensive bill come out of this committee.
You have a fabulous opportunity to make some real changes. And I would, you know, I will be there to support you should you have the opportunity to do this. But in the meantime, the naysayers I want I hope that someone would ask them, what's their idea? If recycling or putting a small deposit on these items is not the answer. Then what is the answer? Because we can't continue with any of these products. to just push it down the road, push it down the road. So thank you everyone. It was it's wonderful appearing before the new natural resources committee and a I'm happy to answer any questions. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions from the committee.
SPEAKER5 - Okay. Thank you very much, representative.
SPEAKER14 - Thank you. Have a wonderful day.
SPEAKER2 - You two as Chairman Roy here.
Okay, we'll circle back.
SPEAKER5 - Representative Owens.
SPEAKER15 - things on here. So I am here.
REP OWENS - HB 871 - Chair Cahill Chair Rausch, thank you so much. Members of the committee. Thank you for your time. I'm here. in favor of H.871, which is an act to require producer responsibility for collection, reuse and recycling of discarded electronic products. I want to put in a good word for all the plastic bills that are before us as well. I hope that the committee will do something on plastics this session. And while you're doing that, I hope that you'll consider doing something on e waste as well The purpose of this bill, like all the EPR bills, is to shift the burden for collection recycling of computer products from local governments to the electronics2583 manufacturers. E-waste is the world's fastest growing domestic waste stream.
It's fueled by higher consumption rates of electric and electronic equipment. which have short2595 life cycles. The projections I gave I had a similar bill last session. We put We worked with the Product stewardship2603 Institute to refresh that2605 bill, and that's the bill you have before us before you today. I will be happy to work with the committee on any potential suggestions or changes you might have, but I think that we are really after the pandemic, I mean, after in air quotes, we have seen the explosion of remote work. We have seen schools with digital platforms and devices. We've seen this. The pandemic really created a looming tidal wave of not just future e waste, but current e waste. Here's an example from US Public In Interest Research Group.
Schools all across the country purchased large amounts of Google Chromebook for remote learning over the pandemic. About 31,million of them were sold globally. In just in that 1st year, and currently, only one third of the Chromebook parts are recycled, and the rest is all in landfills as e waste. The recent reports from US PERG, it warned that they may those Chromebooks only have a lifespan of about four years, Google can actually shut them down, stop servicing them, and then your children will not be able to get into they'll need that where to get into the system. So that report claims that the increasing the lifespan of the Chromebook could cut CO2 emissions,
By 4.6 million that's the embodied carbon of the c o of the of the Chromebooks. I could save taxpayers of almost $2 billion about 17.4% of e waste is collected and recycled. And at present, there are about 25 states that have electronics recycling laws, As I said, we updated this2705 bill since last session to incorporate some of those best practices and lesson learned throughout the experience from those juris diction. I won't go too far into it because I know you have a you have a long day today, so I'm happy to ask answer any questions that you might have. also happy to offline work with the committee on including this in any sort of EPR or waste bill that you do over the course of the session. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - you. Questions from the committee. k. Thank you, representative. Alright.
SPEAKER15 - Thank you so much. Take care.
SPEAKER2 - Representative Vargas.
SPEAKER5 - By all means, come on up everybody.
Hi, folks.
SPEAKER16 - I will be brief and let the folks from UTEC guys say it better than I can.
REP VARGAS - HB 916 - SB 513 - Chair Cahill, chair Rausch, members of the committee. Thank you for having us. I'm here to testify on h 916, and its senate companion s 513. and act to assess the future of mattress recycling in the Commonwealth. I'm going to defer my testimony to the folks here at UTEC. But one thing that I want you all to take away from this is that there's a really important social enterprise component to mattress recycling that I'm hoping that this committee can bolster and uplift and strengthen for the years to come. I've visited and I know that senator Rausch.
But we visited together the UTEC mattress recycling program, which is doing an amazing job of dealing with the environmental issues associated with matches recycling, but also providing jobs and skills and the training that's necessary for young people in the Meramec Valley. So we talk about having an impact and hitting multiple birds with one stone. This organization is doing it. The social enterprise component of mattress recycling is really important, and I hope this legislation that comes out relative to mattress2810 recycling can really uplift that that.2812 So With that, I will turn it over to the folks over at UTEC.
MEG - UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY - HB 916 - SB 513 - My name is Meg's. I'm stepping in for my friend Marcos Esteves who cannot be here this morning, and I'm currently one of the young adults in organizing at UTEC. I'm here with2831 you all testifying on support of HD.3462/ SD2108, for an act establishing a mattress stewardship plan by Rep Vargas and Senator Kennedy. I started UTEC when I was roughly, like, 17 due to making some wrong life choices. I was jumping around from programs to program. And, eventually,2855 that landed me into DBS. Because I was getting in so much trouble, the judge had eventually mandated me to start going to UTeC. And just due to my past in history.
I never really had good experiences of group homes or just programs in general. So that's not something I was really late. Positive in going into I had a very negative mindset2874 when I came into UTEC, but with the right2876 support and patience, I'm finally on a better path now. Because I was always on the run from group homes. I have very little to no work experience in UTEC transitional beginnings program was able to give me a foot in the door working in the mattress recycling facility. I want to add that this was not just a job for me with the mattress recycling program. I learned new leadership skills, time management, accountability, safety, and job.
And most importantly, I felt like I was doing something good for the environment and going green when it seems like so many of the people and friends I had around me just didn't care. So when you think about supporting social enterprises like a mattress recycling program at UTEC, you are helping not only support just young adults like me who are similar situations, but also showing us the support we need to make sure we are taking care of our communities, communities through taking care of our environment. so that I can2925 take care of us. And I'm a2926 firm believer that if you take2927 care of the planner, she'll take care of you. So thank you.2931 I ask that you please favorably move HD34/ SD2108 out of committee. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you very much. So do you want to talk as well? Just move the microphone so that we can hear you. I don't want to say anything you can.
JAY - UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY - HB 916 - SB 513 - I'm Jay. I've been in UTEC well, I'm a know UTEC organizer. I've been in UTEC for, like, five to six years on and off. at the beginning, it was really hard for me because I was kind of, like, bouncing back and forth. Like, it was kind of like her story. It was it wasn't in a good mindset. then I kind of came into UTEC, and the way I kind of got into it was, like, a little different, but kind of, like, came out in incarceration, and then there was a reentry program that they ended up helping me meet with.
Then I got into mattress per opera second program, and then from there, it's kind of, like, took off, and I'm pretty I appreciate everything that they were doing. Honestly, it's really essential because I seem like a lot of the I2990 come from, like, Lowell, and I've been around Lawrence in April. There's, like, a lot of2994 mattresses and a lot of stuff that's going out that everybody's been talking about, and I feel like that's know, we can start there kind of, like, getting the mattresses going and recycle them and kind of, like, break it down and get that, like, out of the way. Just one good stuff. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you.
SPEAKER20 - Thank you so much for your time.
SPEAKER2 - Appreciate it. Okay. Questions?
Dennis.
ARMINI - I'm interested in in your day when you're working at UTEC. Could you just share a little bit about what you're doing and what it's like being there?
JAY - So, kind of, to break it down. Me currently, so I, like, never completed school. So, therefore, they also allowed me to get the opportunity to complete school. They put me in a program, so I'm also doing organizing in the morning. I'm also doing high setting in the afternoon. And for organizing, we usually just we kind of like, kind of go over problems that we already, like, community problems, and one of the things that we do like to do is, like, once a month, kind of, like, go out and help the homeless go, like, give them food, give them, like, things that they need, kind of help them go by.
And Like, my regular day is, like, we go we go to the help to homeless. And then after, like, the first half of the day, I end up going into a high set and kind of, like, into my school and stuff like that. Oh, I'm sorry. So mattress cycling so it is at the beginning of the stage. So we have stages of where to get to to get to, like, the hub. And the beginning stage is to go to the mattress warehouse,3099 kind of get you the fundamentals to kind of how, like, understand workspaces and kind of, like, get the feel of how to, like, be in a workplace and kind of, like, have the patience and stuff. And then we kind of, like, learn the fundamentals of how, like, how it's important to the community and how it's affecting us.
And, like, you can actually see what is going into. Like, you don't we didn't realize Well, I didn't realize that a lot of the stuff that are in mattresses can get used for other stuff. and that's what we're doing. So we're like, the metals that are inside, we scrap it up, put it, like, put it together, and we3129 send it off to, like, another foundation or, I think, if another foundation, then the cloth that's inside, we also do, like, recycle that. We try to recycle everything that we can. because, you know, I don't think everybody can go to waste because everything can be reused, you know. So yeah. And let me see anything.
VARGAS - And I just wanted to share that. You know, Senator Kennedy has been an incredible partner to us. We know he's virtually right now, but it's been a huge champion on the Senate side, and we thank him for his leadership big takeaway is that, you know, this is a budding industry. It's in other states, unfortunately, has been cannibalized by big corporations that have come to do this work, and we want to make sure that that doesn't happen in Massachusetts and that nonprofits that are doing this work can have a piece of the pie to continue doing the work that they're doing to support young people and preserve our environment. So we appreciate the committee's due diligence.
RAUSCH - Thank you very much. I will also vow for Senator Kennedy's deep advocacy on this issue. We've had many conversations about3188 mattresses, and we will hear his testimony shortly. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Any additional questions from the committee?3192 Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you so much. Senator Kennedy, you'll be up. You're on deck, but first we're going to go to chair DOM because she also has some visitors with her.
SPEAKER16 - And her leadership with me.
REP DOMB - HB 784 - HB 916 - Thank you so much. Chair Rausch3220 Chair3220 Rausch,3220 members3220 of3220 the committee. Always wonderful to see you, your teams, your staff. Today, I have an incredible, pleasurable on privilege and moment of professional pride because I'm going to be sitting on a panel with two experts what to do about sending. We use3237 plastic bags, who I'll introduce shortly. I'm not going to go more than my three minutes. I am here to support my3245 bill on a plastic bag ban throughout the state, but I'm also here to show support for Rep Varga’s bill H.916. on mattress recycling. And I just thought I'd take a moment just to talk a little bit about that, Bill. As I was listening to the UTEC you who are involved in that, I recognize that it's not only a social enterprise, it's not only use leadership, it's also workforce development.
Because the UTEC program is actually building the workforce for a mattress recycling for the future. It doesn't take away from the professional stewardship piece that has to happen. This bill actually looks at both. It creates a hybrid system. of looking at mattress recycling that has an industry component that has strong oversight by DEP, and a social enterprise piece. So it sort of carves out and says, as Massachusetts moves forward, with mattress recycling, we're going to carve out a piece for social enterprise and recognize the value. And, again, that's workforce development. And I you know, the UTC program is amazing. We toured it last year.
It's really quite something to behold but the third piece of this legislation I think is really important is the needs assessment. Massachusetts has a ban on disposal of mattresses since November, but we really haven't quite figured out what do we need to be able to make sure that all of this gets recycled and that we don't burden municipalities. So that third piece of the needs assessment is really critical. Enough about me. Now about them. So I'm here to introduce Nina Hirshberg and Bailey Millay 10 and 11 years old from Crocker Farm Elementary School in Amherst. If I may, I learned about their efforts when I visited Crocker Farm and heard that they had organized their school to ban the use of plastic bags in their food service area.
This meant they created petition. They educated. They organized. They talked with the food service folks. They found out why the3363 food service folks weren't doing it at the time3365 it was because it took too long to open up the paper bags. They organize students to give up time for their recess every day to open up the paper bags so that they could not use plastic. So I feel like this is I'm felling. That's an order that I got you. It means, like, I'm actively proud. I have a my I'm always proud of my district, but these two constituents They make me very hopeful. So Nina and Bailey, whatever you'd like to say, it's your turn.
BAILEY MILLAY & NINA HIRSHBERG - CROCKER FARM ELEMENTARY SCHOOL - HB 784 - I’m Bailey Millay and Nina Hirshberg. We want to start by thanking Chair Roush and Chair Cahill. and all of the distinguished members of the committee for the opportunity to share our thoughts with you. We care about the environment So we want you to help our community go green by voting yes to bill H.784, an act relative to plastic bag reduction.
MILLAY - Plastic bags hurt the environment in many ways. Soon the ocean will look more fresh than sea creatures.
HIRSHBERG - Many creatures including sea turtles and squid like to eat jellyfish, and they often mistake plastic bags floating in the water for their favorite snack. Many sea creatures mistake plastic and other ocean transfer food. and that leads to them choking and dying.
MILLAY - Every day, 8,million pieces of plastic alone, that's 8 million too much, Make their money into our ocean.
HIRSHBERG - Right now, 5.25 trillion macro and micro pieces of just plastic, not including other ocean trash are floating in our precious oceans..
MILLAY - Every day, 150 stages of plants and animals go extinct because of global warming.
HIRSHBERG - To wrap this portion up, there should not be any trash in to see it all. because humans are the ones that are trashing our oceans, and animals do not have to suffer from it. Think about if you went outside to find that the gases in your air were poisoned by a dolphin. That is what we are doing to animals.
MILLAY - Our second reason why we should reduce plastic use is because plastic contributes to global warming and global warming is hurting humans and other ants. In case you are wondering, why plastic contributes to global warming? The answer is that when people are making plastic, they use lots of fossil fuels, which are horrible for the environment. As well as that when you throw away plastic, it sits in a landfill as it slowly decomposes, which can take up to one thousand years. The plastic release is greenhouse gases which are also causing global warming.
HIRSHBERG - Global warming is very bad for animals. There is less food for animals because crops are suffering. The crops are dying because of the extreme droughts and floods that are being caused mainly by global warming. Fans need sun and water to grow. when they have too much, it is harmful for them and causes them to pass away. Also, animals' climates are changing and it is getting too hot for them. Iceperks and glaciers are melting, and animals are losing their homes because of it. We need to help.
MILLAY - Climate change is also very bad for humans. If you are curious about what will happen because of climate change in the future. We have an answer. If we don't do anything to stop global warming, the amount of wildfires can highly increase. More crowds for longer periods of time will occur. There will be a lot more floods The wind intensity will increase, and there will be more tropical hurricanes. These are the dangers that will occur if we don't take action. One thing we can do to reduce the danger of climate change is reducing the use of plastic bags.
HIRSHBERG - We need to do everything we can tell slow down and possibly eliminate glow warming and save our planet because there's no planet b.
MILLAY - Just so you know, if all your thinking do you use are plastic paper bags are also an option. Paper bags are better for the environment in many ways. one way is that they are biodegradable. Another reason is that they don't kill animals like plastic does. The last reason we should use them is because when factories are making them it uses less energy, and therefore, the factory burns less fast.
HIRSHBERG & MILLAY - In closing, we respectfully ask for you to advance3611 this bill favorably. This3613 is a way that you can take action to help save our planet. We really appreciate you for taking the time out of your day to read and consider our essay. Remember, the thing that's killing the urge is the thought that someone else will save it. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Well done, ladies. Great job. Questions or comments from the committee?
SPEAKER24 - I have one phone sometimes.
SPEAKER3 - Yes. Sure. You may have revolutionized the getting testimony. If everyone
at
SPEAKER25 - the same time, if you Good question. Appreciate
3644 SPEAKER13644 -3644 it,3644 listen.
SPEAKER26 - Very nice.
3650 SPEAKER253650 -3650 I3650 mean,
SPEAKER2 - maybe we should just stop the hearing now.3652 I mean, I think we heard it all.
SPEAKER26 - Interesting for you.
SPEAKER21 - can I also say, I think we should start every during
SPEAKER2 - With this song. I agree. I agree. I also representative want to credit you for your work on mattresses. Then mattresses, like, like, last session when we were chairing this committee together. It's a
SPEAKER1 - --
SPEAKER21 - Thank you very much.
SPEAKER1 - --
SPEAKER2 - a testament to your work. Thank you. Congratulations to you both. Great job. Thank you very much.
SPEAKER21 - Thank you so much.
SPEAKER2 - Okay. Senator Kennedy, tough act to follow. Good luck.
SPEAKER27 - It doesn't very tough follow. It's I'm not going to be able to match representative Dom's Pain on for sure. But, anyways,
SEN KENNEDY - SB 509 - SB 510 - SB 511 - SB 512 - SB 513 - Good afternoon. Chair Rausch, Chair of Cahill, and my fellow members of the joint committee on the environment and natural resources. I have five bills before the committee today, and I've submitted written3701 testimony on senate 509 and senate 510 for you to review. I'm going to use my time today to focus on three bills, two of which are closely linked. Senate bill, 512 which is a resolve providing for an investigation and study by a special commission relative to mattress recycling. And Senate Bill 513 and act to assess the future of mattress recycling in the Commonwealth. I also wanted to say a few words about Senate Bill 511.
An act relative to the liability for release of hazardous materials. Senate 513 is a bill modeled off the legislation that was reported favorably this committee in the last session and is focused on the long term sustainability of the mattress recycling industry in Massachusetts. As you know, on November 1st last year, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection officially implemented its long discussed ban on the disposal of mattresses in landfills. This is an important essential step in order to meet the important goals outlined in the 2030 solid waste master plan and has provided new opportunities and also challenges for the mattress recycling sector.
Mattresses are a difficult material to manage at solid waste facilities. And in the past, had taken up a large amount space in landfills. More than 75% of mattresses can be effectively separated and recycled, including metal, wood, fabric, and padding. social enterprise businesses have been proven to have a direct community impact. They give young adults a clean slate as often as they need to gain work experience and develop essential job and life skills. It's been proven that every dollar spent in a social enterprise creates $2.23 in social returns. As the landfill ban, has necessitated more mattresses being recycled throughout the state, my bill ensures that social enterprise programs will remain competitive.
In the field through a preferred procurement program administered by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. Other states, have faced the product stewardship of mattresses in numerous different ways and here in Massachusetts, we have an opportunity to make a unique program that truly makes a difference, not only in the environment, but also in the lives of an entire sector of work On a related note, Senate Bill 512 also approaches the issue of Mattress Cycling by proposing a special commission be established to further study these issues. senate3867 511 seeks to address liability issues for constituents related to the release of hazardous materials.
And at any proper and not previously identify at any property not previously identified by the Department of Environmental Protection as a disposal site. one key feature of the 1998 Brown Fields Act is its liability relief for new owners of cleaned up properties. This relief provision has envisioned as a way to attract was envisioned as a way to attract new investment in contaminated properties while continuing to ensure that the Commonwealth's environmental standards are met. This provision on the Massachusetts general laws section 21E Section 5C is entitled exemption from liability for release of oil or hazardous material at a site for which a permanent solution or remedial operation status exists.
This process should be straightforward. If DEP3928 has signed off on the previously contaminated site at the time of the purchase, a buyer should reasonably expect that they will not be held responsible for any existing contamination that was caused by previous owners. In practice, however, Mass DEP is not always honoring section 5C or even the spirit of exemption. This clarification to the existing law is a matter of fairness. So purchases of previously contaminated properties can know that their deck that the declarations they receive when purchasing a property are valid. Thank you very much for your time, and I hope you will consider giving each of these bills positive3967 report. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you, Senator. Questions from committee. Okay. Thank you very much.
SPEAKER28 - Thank you.
SPEAKER2 - Chair Gonzales. Good afternoon.
REP GONZÁLEZ - HB 820 - Good afternoon. Thank you, madam Chair, Rausch and Chair Cahill and distinguished members of the committee. State representative Carlos González from Springfield. I'm here to testify an H.820. An act relative to requiring the ceiling of containers while transporting solid waste. I'm also joined by David Carlucci, the former state senator in New York, who also will testify. This year, if you recall on February 3rd, In East Palestine, Ohio, there was a train derailment carrying hazardous materials, and we all know the devastation that that created in that community. According to the federal records, trains derailed 1095 times in 2021 and 1164 times in 2022 seen an increase. This bill will require all companies to4034 transport solid waste to use a hard top cover or bigradable.
That hardens after application when transporting solid waste materials. It will help reduce the amount of trash that collects on our roads, our highways, our woods, and ocean when being transported. We4054 have guidelines for hazardous waste but not traditional wastes. Always should be handled with guidelines to prevent further pollution requiring the hard cap on an hardened seal or an iron seal will sustain both natural resources and energy by ensuring that proper handling and transfer and disposable of salad waste. With the permission of the chairs, I would like to have David Carlucci, a former state senator, and a trained safety advocate please4087 come up to also testify. Thank you very4090 much and I'll be happy to answer any questions after David speaks. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you representative. Ah, You're here in the room with us. Dear. Please. Fred and Vlad. We were looking for you online, and we didn't make sure right here.4102 Terrific.
DAVID CARLUCCI - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 820 - Well, good afternoon. Happy birthday representative, and happy flag day to everyone. Thank you, representative Gonzalez, and4110 thank you, chairs and committee people for having me. I'm David Carlucci, former state senator in New York. I represented parts of the Hudson Valley, Rockland, and Westchester counties, served 10 years in the Senate. and came to rail safety and got very involved in it through most of my career in the Senate. Ultimately, out of a horrific accident that happened in my community in Valhalla, New York where we had the most horrific MTA train accident fatalities. So that led to really a crusade to find out what's going on with rail safety in the United States and throughout our region. And like Representative González stated, we have over a thousand derailments4148 in the United States every year.
About three a day, and most of them we never hear about. Most of them are innocuous. But many of them can be extremely dangerous. Like we saw in February, in East Palestine, Ohio, where a that tanker that crashed, like Representative González said, was not even a hazardous train to have any other types of pro precautions4177 put in place. So what this bill 820 will do is a bill that we worked on in New York as well and recently just passed through the legislature that will require sealed tops on these rail cars. And that4191 does a number of things, just like the analogy of wearing a seat belt in4195 a car. If we wear a seat belt and we're in an accident or a crash, we have a chance of walking away. If we don't, we have a better chance of being seriously injured or deaf.
And that's the case if there's a derailment here in Massachusetts. By having the sealed container tops, we can prevent and East Palestine type of accident. We can prevent spills from getting into our water, into our soils, and into our air. And most importantly, in many of these communities where the rail passes in Massachusetts, they're environmental justice communities. and the air quality is one that we need to work on. And not only is it could it be toxic by having or harmless or harmful to residents by breathing in the fumes from these trains, but also affects their quality of life. Many of the rails that are transporting waste throughout Massachusetts, will linger for over a week before they are moved out and passed through these communities. What does that mean? That means an incredible odor in many cases.
So by putting these seal tops on, not only are we preventing and mitigating from a catastrophe, but we're also improving the quality of life of many residents by mitigating the odors that come from these containers. Some in the industry are already using these standards by having a simple sealed top container, some are not. But the rail system has changed pretty dramatically over the past, you know, almost 200 years that it's been in place in in the northeast. But what you'll notice with rails throughout Massachusetts, throughout New York, is that they're getting longer and longer. It's not uncommon that you'll find a rail now a train that could be up to three miles long. So many of this this statistics that you hear might be count might be contradictory in terms4309 of the amount of derailments.
Because the statistics can be used in many ways. in terms of if we count first class rail, if we count only tap things happening in rail yards, so those numbers can be misleading. But what's important to keep in context is the fact that these trains are getting bigger and more dangerous. In New York, we'd also call them bomb trains because of the hazardous materials that they're transporting through these communities. So any mitigations that we can take, any cautions that we can take, like the ones that are specified in this bill are extremely important. And it's that old adage of, you know, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and that's definitely the case with this bill. So with that, I'll pause. Thank you for listening to me and having me today. and happy to answer any questions. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions from the committee.
ARMINI - I'm just wondering, is it a cost issue that People are not adopting these voluntarily?
CARLUCCI - You know, it might be, and that's many times we'll see. It's been my experience in taking on the railroads. It's an old, you know, industry that's very important to our economy, one that's not too quick to make changes. But there have been some of these changes like having the larger rails. It's something called precision scheduling railroads. So, basically, where they run it4397 more like an airline, but they have longer trains and making it really more dangerous when there are4403 actual derailments. So cost, I'm sure, could be something that is a pushback. But I would argue that, for instance, we look at East Palestine, that was a $400 million expenditure. So the cost would far outweigh the rewards in terms of preventing a catastrophic spill. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Okay. I I remember that derailman. I grew up in New York.
SPEAKER15 - Yeah.
SPEAKER2 - So I I remember it. Thank you very much for your testimony. Both of you.
SPEAKER15 - Thank you.
SPEAKER29 - Thank you.4433
SPEAKER2 - Okay. Who's next here? Representative Scarsdale.
think I saw you online. Are4442 you still with us?
REP SCARSDALE - HB 899 - SB 511 - SB 583 - I am. Yeah. I do want to apologize to the chair in committees for having my computer off. I've been running a high fever for a couple of days, and I was trying to just conserve my energy. So thank you to everyone for your work on this committee I am here to advocate for the passage of H.899 and S.511 and 583 an act relative to liability for release of hazardous materials. Senator Kennedy touched on this in his testimony. This bill is identical to H.4898 from last session, which was passed to be in growth by the house before losing steam and senate ways and means. And I thank you for your work on the build last session and hope to obtain a favorable report this time around as well.
As Senator Kennedy mentioned, a key feature of the night 1998 Brownfields Act4504 is its liability relief for new owners of cleaned up4508 properties. This liability relief provision was designed to attract new investment in contaminated properties while ensuring that the commonwealth's environment standards are met. My constituent4521 John Hills had assurances for Mass DEP that his property was marketable. He will tell you in his own words how frustrating and confusing the 20 year saga of cleaning his property has been. if DEP can change its mind over the course of cleaning and monitoring the property, what good is 21E? and allowing DEP to ignore this exemption will have a chilling effect on anyone rehabbing a 21E property4551 and defeat the purpose of the Brownfields Act. This bill will clarify the scope of the exemption at Section 5C of Chapter 21E.
The exemption is from liability for any release of oil or hazardous material at a site owned or operated by the eligible person. and an eligible person is someone who owns the property now but did not own it at the time of the release and did not contribute to the contamination as is the case with Mr. Hills. And the liability exemption applies only where permanent solution exists according to mass DEP standards. Additionally, Mass DEP audits response to ensure that they have been conducted according to applicable requirements. After an audit, a buyer should know that property while identified as a disposal site has reached site closure, and they would know that human health public welfare and the environment have been adequately protected by the response actions conducted at the site. and they would know that they would be exempt from liability for any prior release.
But there's a problem. MassDEP does not always honor Section 5C. When off-site contamination is found or suspected years after a permanent solution has been achieved, Mass DEP has sometimes as in the case of Mr. Hills, chosen to ignore or reject the section five c liability exemption even though nothing in the section dictate Mass DEP's role. And that's what4650 this bill will do. Uncertainty about a future owner's liability cleaned up sites is what the brownfields act sought to eliminate. This bill makes it clear what Mass DEP has to do. Passage of H.899 will ensure the promise of liability protection is in fact provided to new owners of contaminated properties. For these reasons, I urge your expedited review and support of H.899 and S.511 and 583. And as I understand from the chairs office, I can call or ask the chair to call up Mr. John Hills to the table. and his attorney? SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Yes. You have you're joined by your constituent, Mr. Hills, and also Bob Cox from Bodich and Dewey, do we have you with us remotely?4704 Ah, you're here in person.
SPEAKER32 - I I am here.
SPEAKER2 - We have one of each. Okay. Fantastic. At this point,4711 we are going to start strictly enforcing the three minute rule, so please keep your4715 remarks to three minutes.
SPEAKER26 - I'll read this for a second.
SPEAKER2 - Thank you very much.
SPEAKER32 - Oh, to the chair. Go ahead, Joao.
SPEAKER26 - Should I go
SPEAKER2 - whichever order you like.
JOHN HILLS - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 899 - Hello. My name is John Hills, and I'm a lifelong resident of Pepperell. In 2004, I entered into a degree with to purchase 79 Railroad Street that grants cleaners. Before purchasing the property, I paid an environmental firm to perform 21E testing.4739 Testing found dry cleaning chemicals. Results were reported to Mass DEP. The Grant family proceeded to do a major cleanup, excavating, and trucking out thousands of yards of contaminated soil. I was assured by Mass DEP that it was clean and safe site to build on and that site closure had been achieved under DEP regulations. I purchased and built a duplex to move in with my wife, newborn son, and my four year old daughter. In 2009, I was contacted by DEP for more testing. Results came back with unsafe readings and chemicals.
DEP sent in crews and supervised to pay for all the work It told me that I was not a responsive party, and assured me it4775 was safe for us to live there. In 20204777 DEP asked to do more4779 tested, Results show traces of dry cleaning chemicals which were considered safe. DEP did test across the street at 810 Railroad Street and discovered traces of dry products, which were also at safe levels. To my shock, DEP told me that I was now responsible for the dry cleaning. Kibbles was found off the street, and that I was required to do mitigation work. I'm not sure how my status changed since 2009 with DEP said I was not considered a responsible party. But DEP performed and paid for that work. I've never had anything to do with dry cleaning chemicals and have not made changes to my property. After being notified of the year, quality assessment results of my property.
I completed a wide range of mitigation actions removal of tenders belongs to basements, ceiling cracks in the basement, removing sheet rock, applying epoxy paint to all solid surfaces. We also installed new fence in the medication system and a new monitoring system. Testing showed better results than the environmental firm confirmed4829 again that all levels were safe and4831 within DEP guidelines. Attorney Cox responded numerous times to DEP stating there is a Massachusetts statute already in place that protects me from having any responsibility for the actions to be handed of DEP Across the Street or anywhere flight property. DEP continues to send me threatening enforcement notices and demanding I do work Across the Street. I don't understand how something like this could be happening to anyone. I trust the DEP, wouldn't have allowed completion of the cleanup, or allowed any work on the site was not saved.
Not only has this been a tremendous financial burden, it has impacted by mental health and well-being affecting both my family and my work. My family continues to express concerns about my health and well-being. been seeing a psychiatrist for over two years of taking anxiety medication. My situation with DEP continues to make my symptoms worse. I bought the property only after a permanent solution site closure had been achieved under the Brownfield Act. I have exempt from liability detected for many4883 responsibility for dry cleaning chemicals found off my property. But DEP does not recognize this and continues to intimidate and threaten me with fines. I feel my only chance of being this nightmare and not have my life ruined is for4895 you to vote to protect innocent people who have followed DEP and state laws. I'd like to thank the cheers of the members of the committee for giving the opportunity to speak on behalf of H.899. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you very much. We'll take testimony from Mr. Cox first and then questions for the three people on this panel. Thank you.
ROBERT COX- CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 899 - SB 511 - SB 583 - To the chairs and committee members, thank you, and good afternoon. I'm Bob Cox, I'm an environmental attorney in Worcester, and I also teach environmental law at Suffolk University Law School as an adjunct faculty member. I speak in support of the act relative to liability release of hazardous materials which is H. 899, S.511 and S.583. Significantly, it was in August five 1998, when governor Cellucci signed into law The Brownfields Act, that amended Chapter 21E, and4953 I remembered well, to establish new incentives to encourage the cleanup and redevelopment of contaminated properties.
And as you've heard, a key feature of that statue of the Brownfields Act is its liability relief provisions. Which give certain parties certain eligible persons an exemption. from liability to the Commonwealth into 3rd parties for contaminants that may be present at a property after a site4980 has achieved. It's been cleaned up. and achieve the permanent solution and provided that the DEP's cleanup standards are met. Accordingly, a buyer contaminated property which has reached site closure4993 and achieved a permit solution, has an exemption from liability to the Commonwealth. for any release or of oil or hazardous material at or from their property.5003
That's the law. However, with 25 years of experience in looking back how this law has been implemented, it's now apparent that there5014 is a problem. with his implementation. As you heard from Mr. Hughes on his experience with DEP, not honoring exemption, Mass DEP has been acting5025 to require those who relied on the exception. To assume my ability for contamination, they did not cause, did not contribute to, and on property they did not own. The difficulty is this, the key issue is this, while section 5C of Chapter 21, he says that an eligible person shall be exempt from liability. Nothing in Chapter 21E, nothing in Section 5C informs DEP on what it is supposed to do.
when the issue comes up with respect to an elemental person and to ensure that the legislative directive of the Brownfields Act is in fact carried out. This bill addresses that. It fills the gap that was left in Section 5C of 21E It directs DEP on what is to do when the liability exemption is available. Significantly it addresses the uncertainty issue. the uncertainty5083 about a future owner's liability for cleanup sites, that was part5087 and parcel of the reason for the Brownfields Act. and this bill would close that gap and make clear what DEP must do. For these reasons, I urge your support for an act relative to liability for releases that has the material, H.899, and the senate companion bills, and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you. Questions from the committee.
Okay. Thank you all very much.
SPEAKER26 - Thank you very5115 much. Appreciate it. Senator Eldridge.
SEN ELDRIDGE - SB 477 - HB 784 - So thank you to chairman Rausch, chairman Cahill and members of the joint committee on environment of natural resources. I know that my colleague, representative Mindy Domb was just here. I think with some students from registered talking about the plastic bag band bill, so I won't add too much. But I just wanted to be here to be on Becker and a bill that I filed with representative Dome this session, senate 477, house 784, an act relative to plastic bag reduction. I really appreciate this committee's leadership over the past couple sessions of reporting out the bill. I know Senator Rauch is the chairwoman last session.
You spend an incredible amount of time on the plastic bag ban and the comprehensive bill. So really appreciate your leadership. And Chairman Cahill, I've heard a lot of compliments from environmental groups about your real interest in this issue and many environmental bills. So thank you so much for taking that a turn. I know you've already heard the details of the bill, and I just think given the increasing number of communities that past this ban at the local level, city council town meeting. I mean, it's really time. I hope this is the session. We ban plastic bags as well as other plastics in from a consumer society. So thanks so much, and appreciate you taking me out of turn. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you. Questions from the committee. Okay. Thanks very much, senator.
SPEAKER5 - Okay.
SPEAKER2 - Are there any other elected
state level elected or federal?5217 Should anyone be here? either in the room or online whom I have not yet called.
Okay. I do see we have a city councilor who I see just walked in, but I don't know that she's ready yet. Are you ready? Ready. Okay. Fantastic. Watertown City counselor Caroline based. Hi.
COUNCILOR CAROLINE BAYS - CITY OF WATERTOWN - SB 570 - Thank you so much for taking my testimony today. I want to thank Chair Rausch and Chair Cahill. for hearing my testimony in support of S.570, an act to reduce plastics. As a city councilor in Watertown for the last six years, I have been working diligently to protect the health of our residents. through reducing pollution, through reducing plastics. And as in a butter to the Charles River, we have been trying to keep the river clean especially of plastics. We tried to we I'd go we go to the rib river. We have cleanups. And until a few years ago, when we banned plastic bags, one of the most of most, you know, destructive thing we saw were plastic bags. And I am pleased to say that after banning plastic bags, we no longer see so many plastic bags near our river.
It really has made a difference and it is greatly decreased the amount the number of bags that have been there. And it's done so without too much pain. Granted there was some grumbling, from the stores and the store managers when we decided to do this, but it was relatively painless in the end. and it was successful. So we do know that banning plastic bags works. However, plastic bags aren't the only problem. Whenever I go into5331 our wherever now what we see are nips, straws, plastic cups, lots of plastic cups. And many of these eventually find our way into the river. Find our way into the river. They flow into the ocean. And, you know, we're very close to the end of the river, and they end up in fish which we, you know, we all eat.
And you've already heard or you will hear. how dangerous this can be to our health. Watertown is four square miles. So we are aware that5362 when we create ordinances, planning plastics, it’s not a very effective way to reduce plastics across the state. In fact, creating pockets of plastic pre zones in the state as a rather chaotic and haphazard way to address the issue and it has limited effect. However, while it is a lot of work to pass ordinances and they often take several years, if we feel like even in our small town, if the state doesn't act, you leave us no choice but to act. we have to protect residents of our town. As a city with the Charles River running through it, we also feel like we have an additional responsibility to protect5403 the welfare of the river as well as the health of our residents.
Our city council is doing its best to address the threat plastic like, plastic trash presents to our environment, but we need your help. We need a coherent state wide policy banning plastics. that will be better for everyone in the communities. From our stores and businesses who also would like to have more standard and know what is5430 going to happen, know what is going to be expected of them to the to the families, and especially5436 the children of our commonwealth. So as an elected representative myself, I feel a responsibility to care for our community, and I know you do too. So I am asking you now to please protect our community, our residents, and our businesses in the in favor of S.570, an act to produce plastics. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions from the5461 committee. Okay.5463 Thank you very much, counselor. Thank you. I believe we have Newton, mayor, Ruthan Fuller with us virtually. Perhaps.
Mayer Fuller? You you do.
SPEAKER18 - Thank you very much, madam Chair. I think I am joined by two people who are in the room.
SPEAKER2 - and here they come.
Alright. Matt, mayor, why don't you go for it? And then we'll turn to our folks who are here physically.
SPEAKER34 - That works too.
SPEAKER18 - Terrific. I
MAYOR RUTHANNE FULLER - CITY OF NEWTON - HB 881 - HB 916 - SB 513 - I'm very grateful to you, Chair Rausch and to Chair Cahill and I'm here to talk about the importance of extended producer responsibility for mattresses here in the Commonwealth. I am Ruthanne Fuller, and I serve the city of Newton as mayor. I also am fortunate serve on the MMA's board5519 of directors, and I recently served as the president of the MMA. Newton prior to the ban of mattresses from trash disposal in November 2020 2, which by the way is fantastic. Thank you for doing that. We here in Newton collected mattress is for disposal from the curb for a $20 fee. Once November 2022 came around this past year, our cost to recycle these mattresses rather than simply dispose of them rose significantly.
So now for mattress recycling, residents pay $35 if they can manage to get their mattress to our recycling center and drop it off.But it's $60 now to do the curbside5575 collection. We5578 were really lucky in Newton. We've got an amazing staff who were able to quickly pivot and create a functional program that complied with the solid waistband for mattresses. but from the MMA perspective, not every community can do this. So pricing and the programs for recycling of mattresses has become a real patchwork for your constituents across the cities and towns you represent. And the good news is that this complication can be resolved with an extended producer responsibility system for mattresses. The recycling systems that currently operate across the Commonwealth could be incorporated into a statewide recycling program for mattresses through the terrific EPR legislation before you specifically, house 881, house 916, and senate 513.
This group of legislation ensures that highly recyclable mattresses materials are managed a way. That is one, environmentally sustainable, two, economically sustainable, and three, provides residents with equitable,5664 reliable essential5666 services. EPR for mattresses is just like paint and packaging.5672 It can make a real difference to solve solid waste challenges and reduce cost to local towns and cities and thus reduce costs for all our residents. We're really grateful for your consideration of our testimony and these three important pieces of legislation. And please know we look forward to partnering with you as these pieces of legislation continue forward. If you have any questions about how it's operating at a city or town level, don't hesitate to reach out to us in the coming weeks as you wrestle with the legislation in isolation. We're here to help you. Thanks so much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER34 - Thank you.
JOSIE AHLBERG - MASSACHUSETTS MUNICIPAL ASSOCIATION - HB 779 - SB 572 - SB 471 - Wonderful. So good afternoon. Chair Rausch and chair Cahill and distinguished members of the committee. Thank you very much for calling this hearing. We deeply appreciate the opportunity. to be5735 here with you in person and virtually to provide a municipal perspective on5739 the legislation before you. My name is Josie Ahlberg a legislative analyst at the Massachusetts Municipal Association. And together, our panel represents the voice of cities and towns in the commonwealth. We respectfully urge you to support a slate of extended producer responsibility or EPR bills, including for packaging, paint, and mattresses. The MMA will submit Britain testimony that further expands on several bills we don't have the time to highlight today.
But to quickly speak of the issue and highlight a couple bills, As an organization, the MMA has supported EPR for a number of years as a legislative solution to address municipal solid waste challenges. Municipalities have really risen to these challenges despite dwindling landfill capacity and the ever changing regulatory landscape to provide these essential services, just as mayor Fuller explained. Local leaders and their staff are really on the front lines as environmental stewards, and their communities are on board to make decisions that are consistent with our sustainability and climate objective These costs to do the5801 work, however, are growing unsustainably each year. EPR enters5805 this conversation as a practical tool to better protect our environment through targeted recycling. It can help5811 to balance local budgets, as well5813 as ultimately to reduce the amount of waste5815 that we dispose of, and lessen the accompanying emissions.
I'd like to briefly highlight the packaging EPR bills before you today, but before turning the mic over to Michael who will speak on paint. House 779, senate 572, and senate 471, fell right in line with the MMA zone expressed commitments to support the diversion of packaging products from traditional waste streams. EPR for packaging would require producers to reconsider the end of life opportunities for packaging in similar materials and contribute financially to the often excessive packaging that they contribute. EPR is not only a financial tool, but a mechanism of accountability that will be critical in the work ahead. We're super excited to continue the conversation on the benefits of EPR today and in the future. Thank you again for your close attention to the topics on today's agenda, and I'll pass the mic over to Michael to continue his comments.
COUNCILOR MICHAEL OSSING - CITY OF MARLBOROUGH - HB 823 - SB 551 - SB 542 - Thank you, Josie. Thank you, Chair. Rausch Chair Cahill and members of the committee. I'd like to take this opportunity to share some municipal insights regarding extended producer responsibility for paint recycling and safe paint stewardship. My name is Michael Ossing. I'm a 24 year council at large in the city of Marlborough. Currently serving my5894 4th year as a city council president. I5897 also serve as the chair of the MMA Energy And Environment Policy Committee. The MMA Energy and Environment Policy Committee has unanimously endorsed. The paint recycling bills H. 823 S.551.
Is part of our MMA legislative package and encourage the environment and natural resources committee to support these bills as well as S.542. for the favorable report. So from a municipal perspective, the city of Marble conducts two hazardous waste days each year. one cost about $30,000, so the city uses $60,000 of taxpayer money to collect hazardous way waste paint, is a popular collection item. The challenge is the hazardous waste days only collect oil based paint. Latex paints must be disposed of by the resin and end up in our resident drop off facility that then require additional city funding to dispose of the paints. Unwanted paints can safely and sustainably diverted from our waste stream with an additional cost saving benefit to municipalities through EPR.
These bills will help reduce disposal costs municipalities and minimize pollution and mismanagement of paint. And you5967 heard Newton mayor Fuller share her insights on mattresses I'll I'll just share a little bit from the standpoint from the city of Marlborough. You know, currently, the city charge is $20. We're charged $20 dispose of the the mattress. And preliminary numbers this year are anticipating about 700 mattresses being collected. That equates about 14,000 just in disposal fees it does not count the cost that the city goes out each week to collect the mattress mattresses as well. So with that, Thank you, committee members, and I'm open for any comments or questions you may have. Thank you.
RAUSCH - Thank you. I'll start with a quick question. Do you have do you have a sort of guesstimate as to the collection costs as well or no?
OSSING - Well, it's two individuals on a on a on a on a truck that go out between 8-12 in the morning. So, I mean, hourly rates I mean, I'd prefer not I'm happy to get back to you with the exact cost if you like, man, and share. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Other questions from the committee. Okay.
SPEAKER7 - Great. Thank you very much.
SPEAKER2 - Are there any other elected period, who are here, whom I have not yet called. Okay,
We are now going to shift into hearing testimony about the plastics bills collectively as a topic. Okay? So we'll start with Janet Domino's.
JANET DOMENITZ - MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP - Good afternoon, and thank you to Chair Rausch and Chair Cahill and members of the committee. My name is Janet Domenitz. I am the director of MASSPIRG, the Public Interest Research Group. And I must have channeled the birthday song vibe because I have a Sesame Street testimony to give you. There's so many facts and figures6080 that I really just wanted to give a message about6084 why these reduction bills are so important. And so I came up with seven reasons, and I had a p in each one of them. So with apologies to Oscar the grouch and everyone else. Number-one, the pollution from plastic is everywhere.
You've heard it mentioned already. Plastic litter is in our streets, on our fields, in our rivers, our oceans. We've seen it everywhere. when it becomes waste and landfills and incinerators, it's all bad news. So we have to get rid of the pollution Secondly, base staters are passionate about reducing plastic as evidenced by the 156 Cities and Towns that have already passed local ordinances. As you've already heard, that's no small feat, and it represents almost two thirds of the population of the base state. third, the possibilities to reduce single use sticks with reusable bags, containers, and foodware are endless. Fourth, our patience is waning. I was remembering this morning it was almost 20 years ago when former representative Alice Wolf.
May she rest in peace, called to say that she had seen one too many plastic bags hanging from trees in our neighborhood in Cambridge, and she was going to file a bill to get rid of plastic bags. It was just almost 20 years ago. Fifth the payoff of reducing plastics would be great. A recent National Resources Defense Council Report noted. California's bag ban, which was passed in 2014, has been shown to have reduced plastic bag usage by 85%. and has had significant coastal reduced coastal pollution. 6th, this is from a recent article in scientific American. Fossil fuels are major feedstocks in petrochemicals, which are used to produce stick.
That's significant because plastics could provide a lifeline for fossil fuel companies as the world economy transitions away from oil, gas, and coal. And the last p is it's good. Let's see. We need to catch up with others. The recent plastic waste makers index compiled by the Minderoo Foundation. Found that the world generated a 139 million metric tons of single use plastic waste in 2021 which was 6 million metric tons more than in 2019. At the same time, in recent years, governments around the world have announced policies to reduce the volume of single use plastics, banning products like single use straws, disposable cutlery, food containers, bags, balloons, anymore. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - everybody the three minutes ahead.
DOMENITZ - I'm that's the last point, that's the last p, and I really appreciate your time and consideration. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you. This test brought to you by the number seven and the letter p. Exactly. I watch Sesame Street too.6268 I have two little ones. Questions from members of the committee. Okay. Thank you very much. Alright. Mara Schulman, you're up next, followed by Rebecca Mickey Tuck, and then Zachary Taylor.
MARA SHULMAN - CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION - Good afternoon. Chair Rausch, Chair Cahill, and members of the environment committee. Thank you so much for receiving my testimony. My name is Mara Shulman, and I'm a senior attorney at the zero Waste Project in the Conservation Law Foundation. You have heard a lot about the fact that we are drowning in plastic. And the question is6311 why? It's because single use plastic production is profitable. to the petrochemical industry, and the disposal of single use plastic is profitable to the waste industry. But someone is paying the price. You've already heard from two students from Amherst Crocker Elementary School about the price that the plan is paying.
Let me talk about price that the public is paying. Some communities are paying a higher price than others, based on their proximity to the plastic production and waste facilities, because plastic is toxic at every stage of its life. And that means that increased exposure means increased health risk. The public is6354 also literally paying the price because the cost of waste disposal and6358 recycling has increased as our waste increases and our capacity to manage that waste becomes constricted. But the same industries that got us into the situation and first placed are telling us that we can solve it with recycling. The truth is that recycling is not a total panacea, it is not a complete fix. Certainly mechanical recycling is an important6381 part of the waste hierarchy or any sustainable waste management6385 strategy.
But the industry is also touting what we refer to as they refer to as advanced or chemical recycling, which isn't recycling at all. It converts toxic waste into toxic fuel and differs very little from the other waste to energy incineration that we all know about. We simply cannot recycle our way out of the single use plastics crisis. Instead, we must reduce the amount of waste we produce, we must redesign our products so that we can reuse them multiple times. And you have before you a bill, that's a perfect example of how we can accomplish that by banning the single use plastic bag. I'm a lifelong resident of Western Massachusetts, in advance of this hearing, I reached out to all the cities and towns in the four counties where I live to ask them.
All the cities and towns passed single use plastic bag bands to ask them if they wanted to raise their voices at this hearing. I heard from a city councilor in East Hampton that had the climate change committee, students at the Northampton High School's environmental club who will testify later today for you, and also the towns of Lee and Dalton already put this very quickly, this matter on their select board agenda and voted unanimously to support this statewide measure, and I have copies of their letters to share with you today, and also I submitted them electronically. There are a lot of great bills before you today. I hope that you will Consider them all and take very quick and decisive action to curb our single use plastic prices. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you. Questions from the committee?
SPEAKER5 - Okay. Thank you very much. Rebecca, Mickey Tucker, and then Zachary Taylor, and then Summer Sorenson.
SPEAKER2 - Oh, fancy accessories. Nice.
REBECCA MCGEE TUCK - SURFRIDER FOUNDATION - HB 784 - SB 477 - SB 525 - SB 570 - HB 767 - HB 882 - Hello? Good afternoon. Chair Rausch Chair Cahill and members of the committee. My name is Rebecca McGee Tuck, and I live in Natick Mass. I appreciate the opportunity to speak in support of the act relative to plastic bag reduction. H.784 and S.477, and other bills like that that reduce disposable plastic pollution. I am an eco artist and a volunteer and representative today for Surfrider6526 Foundation in Massachusetts. Surfrider is a national organization whose mission is to protect and enjoy the world's ocean waves and beaches. As an organization, we've been working on plastic reduction at state and local level for over 10 years. Climate change is cleared at the forefront of my mind.
Growing fossil fuel warms the planet, which in turn makes the sea levels rise, but an often overlooked portion of this6549 problem is the overwhelming presence of disposable plastic in each of our lives. 99% of plastics are made of fossil fuels. We must act together. We need individual action, but we also need collective action. In Massachusetts, there have been several 100 local laws about plastic pollution reduction. And now it's the state's turn to act. As part of my art practice, I walk the South Coast of Massachusetts collecting trash and debris that I use to make sculpture. My art provoked viewers by using the actual trash that I collect, exposing people to the sheer amount of debris in the ocean.\
This art practice led me to become involved with group beach cleanup organized by Surfrider Foundations. I carry a large canvas bag and a knife to cut free plastic trash from organic material. I collect five to sometimes £50 of debris on a two mile stretch of Humarock Beach and Scituate. I have actually used my knife to cut frayed plastic bags from cork a carcass of a seagull, and a free to skate from entanglement and plastic balloon ribbon. If we are not there to untie and untangle the plastic debris from animals and seaweed, these entanglements would most certainly create exponential problems. As part of our sorry. As part of our group cleanup, Surfrider Foundation collects data on everything we take off the beach. From January 2022 to the present.
Our cleanups have collected 609 plastic straws, 774 plastic grocery bags, and over 4000 plastic fragments, and of note, 112 balloons. Through art and activism, I raise awareness to the constant misuse of the oceans ecosystem by transforming of sea debris into works of art and symbols of hope, calling attention to the consequences of poisoning our oceans and encouraging a new commitment to action. And that is why I'm here now. In conclusion, Surfrider respectfully6656 asked this committee to report out favorably on H.784 and S.477. I thank you for your time, and I ask that everyone joins us in our efforts to refuse, reduce, and reuse for a betterment of our future and for the health of our ocean. Thank you for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Right under the right under the limit there. Well done. Questions for the committee.
Okay. Thank you very much. Thanks.
SPEAKER5 - Back Retailer, then Summer Sorenson, and then Nancy Downs.
ZACHARY TAYLOR - AMERICAN RECYCLABLE PLASTIC BAG ALLIANCE - SB 477 - SB 525 - SB 570 - HB 767 - HB 784 - HB 882 - Good afternoon. Chair Rausch Chair Cahill and members of the committee.6703 I'm Zachary Taylor, I'm the director of the American recycled plastic bag Alliance. We represent the US manufacturers and recyclers of plastic bags. Boys more than 30,000 Americans across the country, where we focus on research and innovation to ensure we are using fewer resources and working towards recycling more of these products. We're concerned with current versions of S.477, S.525, S.570, H.767, H.784 and H.882. The current definitions in these bills prohibit, most companies from distributing American made recyclable and reusable bags. It prioritizes a stitched handles. standard.
What that means in practice is that stores will switch to imported products that are still mostly made from plastics. They can't be recycled and have higher environmental impacts. We appreciate, however, the recognition that the status quo is a complex patchwork of problematic local ordinances that are often in conflict. We want to work collaboratively to improve these bills and end the discord amongst the communities. A Stitch handle's approach overall is out of step with most Massachusetts localities on this issue, including Watertown, Amherst, and Natick. It risks moving Massachusetts backwards on sustainability because when plastic bags go away, they're replaced by other plastic bags that look like this made from nonwoven polypropylene, a plastic. imported from overseas that cannot be recycled.
The landscape today is simple. A 155 plus local ordinances, about 68% of Massachusetts citizens, live in a community that has them. 89 of these local ordinances, 57%, allow for American made recyclable, reusable plastic bags to be part of what can be offered. 60 seven% of the citizens6803 living in communities with a plastic bag ordinance are allowed to use these products. Of the 265 local ordinances across the US, 66% allow. American made recyclable reusable plastic bags. 32% of US citizens live in a jurisdiction with bad regulations, 65% allow ARPBA members products. In6826 New Jersey, which banned plastic tags, they were all replaced by this. We saw6830 imports increase dramatically, an additional 296 million new imports of these products in 2022.
That's up 45% over 2021's numbers and up 60% over the five year average. are plastic, non recyclable. Thin gauge is already6846 largely banned in Massachusetts. These are products that some wrongly referred to as single gauge. research shows that they get reused up to 77% of the time. Most communities have elected to allow more durable plastic film bags made by our companies to be part of the solution. Current bills go further than Massachusetts or the US norms and use unsustainable standards that could increase the amount of emissions associated with carry out bag usage. We're already willing to work together to get to a solution here that eliminates the Patrick ordinances but prioritizes a solution that can move Massachusetts forward sustainably. Thank you for your time and consideration. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions from the committee?
Okay. Thank you for your testimony. Thank you.
SPEAKER5 - Summer Sourcing followed by Nancy Downs, and then Craig Cookson.
SPEAKER2 - Yeah.
Oh, that's totally fine. Thank you very much. school. Right? There's, like, one more day of school or something. Yeah. Okay. After four PM. Got it. Okay. Nancy Downs.
No worries.
NANCY ESTABROOK DOWNES - OCEANA - HB 766 - HB 767 - HB 779 Chair Rausch, Cahill, member of the committee thank you. My name is Nancy Downes. I'm the field campaigns manager for Oceana. The world's largest international advocacy organization focused solely on ocean conservation. I also serve on the organizing committee of Reusable New England, a coalition of individuals and organizations with a shared goal of reducing New England's waste. I will be sending in written testimony in support of H.H.767 and 779, but speaking specifically in support of H. 766. An act to "Skip the Stuff" by Rep Ciccolo.
Every year, billions of unused straws, utensils, napkins, condiment packets, and other accessories are included in takeout and delivery orders even if customers don't want or need them. These single use items mostly cannot be recycled. They add to our plastic pollution crisis littering our streets parks, river zones, and clogging our landfills. These use more fossil fuels for items that aren't even used, and it makes no sense in the middle of a climate crisis. The waste from these items pollute our state and means restaurants are literally throwing money away. The solution is simple. Restaurants need to ask first. People that need these accessories can still get them, and if not, we're reducing waste.
By exercising our right to skip the stuff. The action simple, saves restaurants money, and significantly reduces waste and mass. I'm going to skip that this contributes to climate crisis you've already heard about refining and manufacturing, and also it affects communities of color and low income communities. Skip the stuff's already been passed in Denver, Washington DC, and Chicago, California, and Washington State passed statewide legislation that makes single use plastic accessories available with takeout orders only upon request. In January of this year, New York city mayor Eric Adams signed a skip the stuff bill into law. Massachusetts, we like to be number one in everything.
Yet we are woefully behind the curve on passing strong policies that will regulate and protect7040 our communities from this man made, non biodegradable and toxic mess. Earlier this month, Oceana released data from a statewide poll finding that 92% of registered voters are concerned about single use plastics and almost 90% of Massachusetts voters support local and state policies that reduce single use plastics. It's evident that your constituents are ready to skip the stuff, plastic pollution is a growing threat to our future, and you know, government plays a critical role in solving this crisis Oceana and our friends here today are urging you to support 766 and take swift action to address plastic pollution here in Massachusetts. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions from the committee. Okay. Thank you very much.
SPEAKER5 - Let's see. Craig Cookson.
Right.Cook's in?
SPEAKER41 - Yeah. I'm here.
SPEAKER1 - Great. We
SPEAKER2 - can. Great.
CRAIG COOKSON - AMERICAN CHEMISTRY COUNCIL - SB 572 - SB 471 - HB 779 - SB 570 - HB 882 - HB 768 - Good afternoon. Cheers, Rausch and Cahill, and members of the committee. My name is Craig Cookson, and I'm the senior director for plastic sustainability at the American Chemistry Council. I'm here to give testimony opposing S.572, S.471, H.779, S.570, H.882 and H.768. So ACC, we're a National Trade Association representing almost 200 global companies in the chemical industry, including manufacturers of plastic resin. We're here today respectfully posting these bills because it's7126 currently written. We believe that they might exclude7128 advanced recycling from the definition of the recycling and would therefore ban7132 new innovation, and Massachusetts ability to potentially recycle more types and greater amounts of plastics.
To date, Massachusetts and many other states have been able to mechanically recycle Things like soda and water bottles, milk jugs, detergent bottles, some tubs and lids. Advanced recycling technologies can increase our recycling rate by taking harder recycled plastics like pouches that contain snack food and granola, tubes that7156 contain hand cream and toothpaste and films. things that would other otherwise end up in landfill and turn them back into useful products. Advanced recycling technologies or manufacturing technologies are repurposed plastics. Very important. A few examples of products that use repurposed plastic are Wendy's drink cups, Warby Parker eyewear, and herbal essence shampoo bottle. and all those are ISCC Plus.
That's International Sustainability and Carbon Certification certified made from recycled plastics. It's very important. So far, 24 other states, most recently in Michigan, and Indiana and others have recognized that Advanced Recycling is critical to a circular economy. These states have passed7194 legislation regulate advanced recycling as manufacturing. And to be clear, despite what you heard before, it is not combustion or burning. Technologies listed in the bills include pyrolysis and gasification. Those heat plastics in an oxygen deprived environment and convert the plastics to liquid feedstocks that can be manufactured into a mix of new products. Advanced recycling facilities have emissions on par or lower than other commercial or industrial facilities.7220
And advance recycling facilities are subject to federal, state, and local authorities, including the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Of course, Massachusetts, and all facilities need to obtain operating permits from the states in which they operate and much can it must continue to report emissions data on an ongoing basis. In closing, we urge the committee to oppose any bills of banned advanced recycling technologies to ensure that Massachusetts has the ability to recycle and recover greater amounts and more types of plastics. And I'd be happy to take questions of someone who's been to 10 facilities in over two countries lot of experience, hands on experience, and seeing and understanding these technologies. So thank you for your time today, and look forward to your questions.
RAUSCH - I'll start with a question. Does advanced recycling still rely7268 on fossil fuels?
COOKSON - When you say rely on fossil fuels, so if the answer cycling does use heat in the process as does any sort of recycling or any manufacturing right now, right, where you are taking glass and melting it back into a new, you know, glass if you're taking aluminum or steel cans and turning those back into, you know, recycling those. So you're using heat to melt those down. What advanced recycling does you know, very common technology is pyrolysis. It heats the plastics in the absence of oxygen. It keeps heating them until they melt. and then they turn into gas vapors, and they cool and condense those gas vapors back into a liquid feedstock, and that's what's used as a raw material as an alternative raw material to oil and natural gas. But, yes, there is some heat used in the process, but again, I would say, in mechanical recycling in in in in glass recycling, aluminum, steel recycling, paper recycling. You need process energy heat.
RAUSCH - And are those gases then contained fully?
COOKSON - So the gases so there is so from the product of let's say, pyrolysis system.
RAUSCH - I'm sorry, sir. This is this is simple yes or no. Are the gases contained fully? Yes or no?
COOKSON - Of course. Yes.
RAUSCH - Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Other questions from the committee? Mr. Cherick.
REP CAHILL - Oh, thank you. So you mentioned that 24 other states have these advanced recycling facilities. So are there any facilities like that in Massachusetts? Are there any plans to come to Massachusetts and invest in a plant locally? Like, how does New England compare?
COOKSON - Yeah. So let me clarify. So 24 states have passed legislation to ensure that the facilities are appropriately regulated as factoring and not confused with, you know, solid waste incineration or combustion. Right now, I don't know of any plans to come to Massachusetts. But given Massachusetts, you know, where it sits in New England and the plastics that are generated here and, you know, it potentially could be an attractive place to locate a facility. If again, local communities and others in the state wanted a facility to be located in Massachusetts. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Other questions from the committee? Representative.
7406 ARMINI7406 -7406 Yeah.7406 I'd like to know if advanced cycling can create any food grade plastics or is it just plastics that are used for further on down the supply chain?
COOKSON - No. That's a great question. You know, so so mechanical recycling, think about your which is great. You know, very important mechanical recycling, very good for your PET soda water bottles, your high density polyethylene milk jugs, and detergent bottles. Think about when you get You put your red tide bottle, your white bleach bottle, your blue tier bottle, your orange oil bottle into your recycling bin. That goes to a mechanical recycling. What they do is they shred those plastics, they heat them until they melt, and they turn into new pellets again.
Now those pellets tend to be sort of grayish because you're blending all those colors together. So those Becking or something. What advance recycling does is it as I mentioned, it heats the plastics and turns them all the way back to their basic raw material. So, yes, when you make those plastics again, they have virgin equivalent properties and so can go into very high value applications like food, medical, and pharmaceutical contact applications. So Massachusetts ever passes, let's say a recycle content mandate, you're going to need advanced recycling to make sure you can hit those mandates, especially for food, pharma, medical contact packaging. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Got
SPEAKER2 - it. I have just one further question.
SPEAKER41 - Sure.
RAUSCH - Are there any emissions that results from advanced recycling?
COOKSON - With any manufacturing process you're going to see admissions. All the pharmaceutical companies that are in Massachusetts. Right? Are generating emissions because they need, you know, on on-site energy and heat and steam and other processes. So an advanced recycling facility, you know, we can submit this into the record, a company called Good Company, looked at the emissions from your average size facility and found that on par, They're very similar to hospitals, so think Mass General, you know, universities, think Boston College, as well as other types of know, manufacturing like, you know, the makers of candy bars or potato chips. So there are some emissions, but they're very low emissions. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Other questions?7549
Okay. Thank you for your testimony.
SPEAKER41 - I appreciate it. Thank you.
SPEAKER5 - Okay. Petros Pelangian. I'm sorry if
SPEAKER2 - I mispronounce name
followed by Adam Pierre.
PETROS PALANDJIAN - GOOD FILLING - HB 766 - Thank you. My name is Petros Palandjian - I'm a born in Bostonian with a is based in Woburn called Good Filling We engineer and operate cutting edge technologies for refilling CPG and grocery products. I also serve on the organizing committee of reusable New England, a coalition of individuals and organizations with a shared goal of reducing New England's waste. Today, I'm speaking in support of H.766. An Act to "Skip the Stuff" to reduce restaurant waste. Presented by representative Michelle Ciccolo. As you'll hear and have throughout the day, plastic waste is cluttering our streets, polluting our oceans, filling our landfills, and poisoning our bodies.
Plastic is seeping into virtually all organisms with the average human consuming a credit card's worth of microplastic per week, presenting a major health concern. There are four main points that I want to highlight about "Skip the Stuff". The first is that "Skip the Stuff" has been passed in other states and adopted by major delivery app platforms. It's worked in Denver, Washington DC, Chicago, California, Washington State, and most recently, New York, who usually strive to be. We have working examples of this policy as a solution on Uber Eats, DoorDash, and Toast through the request utensils button. The second I want to hit is that "Skip the Stuff" focused only on saving7649 zero use plastic.
The four Cutlery and condiment packs given out by default are never7655 used by consumers, and therefore, don't even qualify as single use plastics. They are made for the soul of being wasted. The third is that "Skip the Stuff" is not a ban. People genuinely need the items still have a convenient, easy, and cheap getting these products, you just ask. It's a social change that sparks conversation about waste and human needs. The last I want to hit on is that it's universally7679 locked. It's bipartisan. It's pro business. It's pro taxpayer. It's pro consumer, and it's pro Massachusetts. At its core, it saves businesses money spent on unused goods.
Sometimes totaling tens of thousands of dollars. It say it saves taxpayers money spent on downstream recycling and landfilling. It saves consumers time, money, and they're conscious on trash and recycling. most importantly, it saves Massachusetts from litter, waste, and an impending health crisis with microplastics. To app, I support H.766. An Act to "Skip the Stuff" because it's a bill. It reduces unnecessary zero7717 use waste. It's not a7719 ban, and it's beneficial for all mass stakeholders.7721 While I continue to fight the plastic problem through my business and my personal advocacy, I need and need the government to step in to enable these kinds of social changes. I urge you to please 766 to reduce zero use plastic. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions from the committee? Okay, thank you very
7740 SPEAKER57740 -7740 much.7740 Adam here followed by Marissa Faye Martin.
ADAM PEER - AMERICAN CHEMISTRY COUNCIL - Hey. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Adam Peer, and I'm with the American Chemistry Council, and I'm the senior director for consumer packaging and plastic goods. And so I'm here to oppose of a legislation that7760 has different bands and restrictions on different plastic items. And the reason that we're posing those items is for three reasons. because we believe by passing that legislation, It will lead to increased land filling. It will not decrease litter and will increase cost to both the state restaurants in the private sector. So plastics often is four times lighter than its alternatives. And the infrastructure often isn't available to recycle those alternatives.
Which means that, in turn, it'll be destined for landfilling. and that in turn increases what's ultimately landfilled. Also, we hold that it will not decrease litter It's only going to change the type of material that's littered, and the legislation doesn't address the root cause of litter. Lastly, it's going7809 to increase the cost of states and restaurants in the private sector. And a recent study in Virginia showed a 107815 to $15million increase in state7817 costs for very similar provisions and matter measures. And in the7821 private sector, there's been a similar increase of costs as well too. So for example, a study in in Maryland estimated on a more restrictive regulation would result in a7832 $34.9 million annually to replace the restricted products with alternatives. That same study showed that for every dollar spent on those disposable items.
A replacement item, an alternative would cost on average $1.85 more. And most recently, a fiscal note to an Illinois proposal that was even more restrictive, showed a 30 to 50% more increase. And those increases are already in the top of inflation. and supply chain disruptions. So you've heard from my colleague, Craig Cookson, who had talked about7868 advanced recycling and how that proposes the alternative that can help increase the amount of items that are recycled. And we believe items like that as well as well crafted EPR Extended Producer Responsibility would increase the amount of items that are recycled and are a better way to address the system7888 overall because it can create the incentives and disincentives to make more items circular. So with that, appreciate your time, and be happy to7896 answer any questions. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions from the committee.
Okay. Thank you for your testimony.
SPEAKER42 - Thank you.
SPEAKER5 - Marissa Faye Martin followed by Robbie McCluckie.
Marissa?
SPEAKER2 - Ah, I see you. I see you coming on the screen. There you are.
Oh, we we can't hear you, unfortunately.
Still can't hear you, unfortunately. Why don't you keep working on your tech? You'll be, you know, next. Okay. Robbie McCluckie?
SPEAKER43 - I think you, Jerry. Are you able to hear me?
SPEAKER2 - We are. Go ahead.
ROBERT MCLAUGHLIN - CONSUMER HEALTHCARE PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION - HB 766 - SB 741 - SB 572 - Thank thank you very much. Chair Rausch Chair Cahill, distinguished members of the committee, the for the opportunity to address you today. name is Robert McLaughlin, and I work for the Consumer Healthcare Products Association. Representing the manufacturers of over the counter medicines, medical devices, and dietary supplements. I am respectfully testifying today in opposition to House Bill 776 Senate bill 741 and Senate Bill 572. I want to commend the committee for taking these years under consideration, which highlight the recycling needs of the Commonwealth.
This legislation, as you know, seeks to implement a producer responsibility program for the packaging of consumer products. We are respectfully requesting an exemption for packaging for drugs, medical devices, and dietary supplements. While our members desire to increase recycling and reduce waste, We cannot support a state program that potentially conflicts with existing federally mandated packaging requirements meant to ensure consumer safety, medicinal efficacy, and product stability. Manufacturers of consumer health care products take very seriously the types of packaging used to transport, store and safely deliver consumer health care products to consumers seeking self care options.
A very complex and highly regulated federal framework for OTC Consumer Healthcare Packaging has been in place for decades and has served the public well. State action on packaging for these products likely conflicts with federal laws and regulations already in place. Conflicts include the use of post consumer recycled content in materials and reduction in the amount of covered material used. The food and drug administration has offered industry guidance stating specifically that recycled plastic should not be used8057 for primary drug or dietary supplement packaging. This bill these bills would conflict with the FDA guidance. If an exemption was added to exclude packaging for drugs, medical devices, and supplements.
We would withdraw our opposition. Similar bills considered this year in New York, Illinois, Rhode Island, Maryland, Tennessee, and others each recognize this conflict and exempt these products from the legislation scope. In fact, a similar bill under consideration by this committee today, House Bill 779 recognizes the uniqueness of our product packaging and includes the exemptions for these products in the scope. Similarly, four states that already enacted EPR Packaging laws, Colorado, Oregon, California, and Maine also recognize the federal jurisdiction over consumer health care product packaging. So I want to thank you for your time today, and I appreciate the opportunity to address you. Thank you.
RAUSCH - Okay. Can you help me understand why you couldn't use recycled plastics in this context?
MCLAUGHLIN - Due to FDA regulations, we have FDA guidance offered from offered from the food and drug administration saying that Primary drug pack primary packaging for drugs should not be used to be used for drugs or dietary supplements.
8133 RAUSCH8133 –8133 Okay.8133 SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Other questions from the committee.8135
ARMINI - Well, but why is that? Give us why that is, why That's the FDA reg.
MCLAUGHLIN - I would imagine there is concern of, you know, leach from recycled packaging if they're unable to a what's, you know, considered a virgin plastic. Most of them virgin plastics are used for the packaging of these products. So if you're using recycled substance, it's much more difficult to, you know, make sure that that plastic is pure and that contaminants are not being leached impacting the efficacy or the safety of supplement or drugs? SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - I understand8169 this is the an industry term. I'm just going8171 to make a general comment that I would love for people to start using raise new plastic instead of virgin plastic. We really don't care about the sexual history of plastics. Okay. Any other questions from the committee? Great. Thank you very much for your testimony.
SPEAKER43 - Thank you.
SPEAKER2 - Okay, Marissa. Have we sorted out our sound
SPEAKER44 - signature? me now?
SPEAKER2 - Success. Go for it.
MARISSA FAY-MARTIN - CONCERNED CITIZEN - Wonderful. Okay. Thank you so much. I would like to share a little bit of my personal experiences as they relate to the bills before you today. I live in the city of New Bedford, which is sitting directly on the coast. Like others you've heard from today, I personally participate off in in both beach and city street cleanups. Both in organized events, organized by community groups, and individually. Seeing the single8229 use products, littering the beaches and8231 streets, has inspired me personally to live as zero waste as I8235 can, I use things such as bar shampoo, bar dish soap, metal Razor Blades, etcetera. Let's see.
Sorry. Cleaning up countless straws, take out food containers, nip, classic cups, bottles, and so much more off of the beaches and streets has changed my perspectives of them. This is an experience that not all members of the public have had as soon as they do not have that particular perspective when they view these items. You have you're being8272 having this protect perspective shared with you today, and I hope8276 that you will keep this in mind as you view the bills. When I go to restaurants, I request not to have a straw, but it is stressful trying to remember to get asked before they get my beverage. And sometimes, I'm giving a straw even though I asked not to.
I do not feel comfortable purchasing takeout food because of the plastic disposed disposable food service wear. Compostable and biodegradable materials8302 are available but there's no incentive or reason for the businesses to make the switch. When I go to the grocery store, it is extremely difficult to purchase food that is not wrapped in plastic. I can do my part as an individual as we all should but we need your help to make any real lasting change. You have a unique opportunity and responsibility to make the changes we need as a community and as a world. So thank you so much for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you. Questions from the committee. Okay. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Alright.
SPEAKER5 - Next up, we have Mary Lou Nicholson followed by Christine Cassidy.
SPEAKER24 - Oh, props. Tools. Terrific.
SPEAKER2 - I'm a visual learner, so I like that. Sure.
SPEAKER45 - A little bit of my world.
MARY LOU NICHOLSON - BE THE SOLUTION TO POLLUTION - HB 784 - SB 477 - HB 767 - SB 525 - Thank you so much co chairs, Rausch and Cahill for allowing me to testify. My name is Mary Lou Nicholson, and I am the founder of coordinator for Be the Solution To Pollution, a shoreline cleanup group on the south hosted, Massachusetts. We hold educational events also showing the connection between single use plastic and climate change. I am pleased to be able to submit the following testimony in support of House bill 784, senate bill 477, house bill 767, and senate bill 525. We have conducted at least 137 cleanups in the last 12 years and have picked up over 32,000 pounds of trash Most of the of it, the marine debris we found was single use plastic.
So very light 32,000 pounds. It doesn't matter. We need House Bill 784 and Senate Bill 477 to8419 stop the flow of single use plastic bags. Every year we collect data either for co sweep data collection or through brand audits. I picked a few examples of three hour cleanups and the8431 number of plastic bags we removed from the shoreline.8433 At four Phoenix Town Beach in Fairhaven Mass, in 2013, there were 508 plastic bags. In 2019, on the same little stretch of beach, there were 271. We did a brand audit in Swansea Mass on May 27th this year and collected 49 plastic bags in an area that had just been cleaned 30 day before. Thicker plastic bags are not a solution, and should not be used as a replacement.
These bags are light and travel8463 easily into storm drains and waterways. I also enthusiastically support a house bill 767 and senate bill 525. My volunteers, and I have8474 been sounding the alarm about single use plastics8476 since 2011. So we would be thrilled to have legislation reducing these unnecessary products from circulation. I can share photos from every cleanup showing piles of plastic bags cutleries, straws, bottles, snack bags, and other single use products. For many reasons, we urge the state legislative to take action to regulate the proliferation of8499 plastic with these pills. Restricting or banning these plastic cuts down on litter. For example, since plastic bags have been banned in the state of New Jersey, Clean Ocean Access.
Has found a significant reduction of bags littering the shoreline. Because plastics contain toxins, their proliferation and creates significant public health risks. The collection of recycling of plastics does not solve the problem of toxicity in plastics. A recent study showed that without dramatically reducing plastic production, it will be impossible to end plastic pollution and eliminate health threats from chemicals and plastics. The simple truth is that our dependence on plastics is a catastrophe for the climate. As a citizen action group dedicated to acting on climate change in our region, be the solution to pollution knows that addressing the climate crisis also means addressing the plastic crisis. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you for your testimony. I'm sorry. Time is up. Questions from the committee.
Okay. Thank you very much, and thank you for the props. Christine Cassidy followed by Natalie CRD.
Miss Cassidy?
8573 Christine8573 Cassidy. Date of birth. Yeah.
Well, I bet nope. We have you later.
SPEAKER26 - Okay. Perfect.
SPEAKER2 - Have you later. Bye.
SPEAKER18 - Have a good 1. Nope.
SPEAKER2 - Nope. That's thank you for your help. Appreciate that. Alright. Let's see. Natalie Ciotti, are you with us?
SPEAKER46 - Yes. I
SPEAKER2 - am. Can you hear me?
SPEAKER29 - Flour is yours.
NATALIE CIARDI - BOSTON UNIVERSITY - HB 787 - SB 525 - Awesome. Good afternoon.8598 Chairs Rausch, Cahill, and members of the committee. My name is Natalie. I live in Brookline Mass at College Corner, and I'm an MBA student at Boston University, who's working at seaside Centability as a fellow in Gloucester Mass. I support Bills H.787 and S.525 on single use plastics. Now a bit about myself. I used to be very cynical about chronic crisis. In fact, I think it's very easily easy and dangerous to be. Years ago, I had a professor of marine biology who told us that it was too late to our environmental crisis. I was only 18, a baby adult, essentially, when I was told that we'd fail before we began our careers. This8636 dissuaded me from action till I had time to reflect on what would make my life meaningful during the pandemic.
The professor was wrong, and I believe that now wholeheartedly.8644 I understand her in retrospect. Because I know her attitude came from a deep love. A love of marine environments tarnished by humanity, trashing ecosystems she dedicated her life to. My entire career pivot from8656 social media into social impact has8658 been about not allowing that terrible mindset8660 to inflict anybody else. The items on the bills plastic shopping bags, balloons, nips, baby wipes, cutlery condiments, hotel shampoo bottles are convenient. Yes. But they're not in need. They're wants. They're part of our8673 disposable economy, and the need for them is taught. Reusable are number one for me, but I'm sure the people gathered here today. I've heard seaweed based alternative packaging.
These new items about to hit our markets are developed to look and feel like traditional plastics. Even going as hard to be compatible with existing packaging machinery, but8691 they only take days or weeks to decompose, and they don't splinter into microplastics. I think this is revolutionary for restaurants and grocery stores. I urge you to check out the companies that participated in Tom Ford's Plastic Innovation Prize. I was told that supporting this bill was ambitious, But that's just an echo about familiar nihilism creeping in. Mass has always been the driving force behind progressive legislation, and I believe that our state will make the right decision and our plastic crisis. Why should we allow ourselves to create ways that outlives us for 100 years when we enjoy the material for a single afternoon or hour? Thank you so much for your time. Please join me in supporting Bill's h787 and s 525. Thanks. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions from the committee?
Okay. Thank you very much for your testimony. Next up, Abigail Steyn followed by Allen Gordon and Eileen Ryan in that order.
Good afternoon.
SPEAKER1 - Good afternoon. Co chairs.
ABIGAIL SZTEIN - AMERICAN FOREST & PAPER ASSOCIATION - SB 477 - HB 776 - SB 572 - HB 779 - Good afternoon, committee. Thank you all for allowing me to8769 be here today. My name is Abigail Sztein, and I'm speaking on behalf of The8773 American Forest & Paper Association. AF&PA is the National Trade Association, representing the Forest Products Manufacturing Industry. In Massachusetts, the Forest Price employs nearly 11,000 individuals in 100 and nine facilities producing packaging, sales displays, printing paper, core data is in other products with an annual payroll of about $884 million. The paper industry has a demonstrable measurable record of success in making paper and paper based packaging more circular and sustainable through market based approaches.
Paper recycling has enjoyed decades of success because of the industry's investments, consumer education, and the wide availability of recycling programs. For 2021, the paper recovery rate was 68%, and the8820 industry's recovery rate has met or exceeded8822 63% annually since 2009. 8 to 7% of Massachusetts residents have curbside access to recycling for paper, which wouldn't be sustainable if there wasn't a market for those coverable materials. Recycling is integrated into our businesses as well. Our members own 114 materials recovery facilities including two in Massachusetts, and 80% of8847 paper mills use some amount of recovered fiber. Looking to the future The paper industry is planned or announced around $5, billion in manufacturing investments by 2025.8859 Resulting in an over 8-million-ton increase in available capacity.
So when we say we're concerned with the impacts of some of this legislation, it comes with familiarity with the issue and from an industry that has had decades of experience as a sustainable materials management. So there are a number of those that raise concerns for us. I'll touch on a few here, and we'll have more detail on our written testimony related to bags particularly Senate Bill 477. We are concerned that it puts an unfair fee on paper bags. It creates an unequal playing field with reusable It requires retailers to a remit part of the fee to include the bureaucracy of that for the what's collected for paper bags, but that is not required. There's no remitting any portion of the fee for reusable. Which creates a concern because paper is the only carryout bag option that's recyclable at curbside. Some folks have mentioned New Jersey.
New Jersey also band paper bags, and the increase in reusable bags in that state has led to something of a glut. There's not a place for those reusable bags to go once you've had a certain volume of them. They they are not meant they are not required to be. recyclable as a part of that. And so, eventually, those do end up in the landfills. I also wanted to touch on the extended producer responsibility bills, including 776, 572, 779. EPR is typically in most successfully a solution for hazardous and hard to materials with low recycling rates. The paper industry contributes to economically sustainable recycling programs by purchasing and utilizing material source from residential collection programs in manufacturing new products, and we're concerned that EPR would disrupt efficient and effective programs. I think that's my time, but we appreciate your time today SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Questions from the committee.
SPEAKER2 - Okay? Thank you very much. Thank you.
Alan Gordon. Welcome. Followed by Eileen. Ryan.
ALAN GORDON - SIERRA CLUB OF MASSACHUSETTS - HB 784 - SB 477 - HB 770 - SB 450 - HB 371 - SB 525 - HB 767 - SB 570 - HB 802 - Good afternoon. Thank you. Chairs Rausch Cahill, and members of the committee for hearing my testimony today. My name is Alan Gordon. I'm I'm here speaking on p excuse me, on behalf of the Sierra Club of Massachusetts Chapter. and it's 100,000 members and supporters. I serve on the executive committee and also on the Sierra Club's top 16. I'm also on the board of Green Newton, and on a member of Newton Sustainable Materials Management Commission, the Mayor Pointed Commission advising on municipal solid waste. I'm here to take to urge the committee to take strong action on the various plastic bills in front of you.
There are a number of bills being considered. I'm not going to list all of them. I'll mention a couple in the interest of time. H.784, S.477, an act relative to the plastic bag reduction. You've heard some of the statistics. To me, this is an easy one. two thirds of the population of Massachusetts is already under a plastic bag ban. No one has pointed this out, but every Northeastern state except for Massachusetts and New Hampshire have plastic bag bands. It's really time for us to have one also. 56 Massachusetts Municipalities have banned polystyrene, and some of them include all food packaging, nonrecyclable, noncomposable, nonreusable food packaging. So H.770, S.450, requires food service may be compostable, recyclable, or reusable.
We support this bill as well. There are other things we've heard about. Straws, balloons, water bottles, nips. There are bills on each of these. We support them all. Plastic is a pollution them. We've heard about this. You only need to9094 walk our towns, our streets, our cities, go to our beaches, you see plastic. Plastic is a health problem. We've heard this as well. The plastic breaks down into nanoparticles, micro particles, it gets in our food. It bleaches from food service containers black plastic is made in part from recycled electronics. Black plastic has been shown to leach a heavy metal such as cadmium into the food. When you hit they get your takeout in black plastic. Plastic is a climate problem. Plastic is made from toxic petrochemicals.
And it releases greenhouse gases when it's made.9131 Plastic is not a recycling problem. I will point out this it wasn't on my written testimony, but your esteemed members of TUE, I have another bill, H.371 on advanced chemical recycling, which has been discussed. If you're interested in that, when that comes up, it's an interesting would be an interesting one to approach. The Sierra Club strongly supports all of the bills mentioned. We would strongly recommend that you either Bass on on the slate of bills on each of the individual topics or one of the more comprehensive bills. s eight S.525 H.767 or S.570 H.802. It's time for bold action, and the time is now. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - questions from the committee. Thank you very much. Eileen Ryan.
EILEEN RYAN - BEYOND PLASTICS GREATER BOSTON - SB 570 - HB 766 - SB 572 - HB 799 - Hello. I am Eileen Ryan. am the volunteer leader of Beyond Plastics Greater Boston, and I live in Watertown where I was instrumental in passing the class single use plastic shopping bag ban. Plastic production is an environmental, ecological, and human health crisis. The production, use, and disposal of classics is directly connected to climate change environmental injustice and the exponential rise in chronic diseases that we are witnessing such as cancer, diabetes, thyroid disorders, Alzheimer's disease, asthma, learning disorders, infertility, and9226 more.
It is heartbreaking to witness our loved ones suffering from diseases caused by plastic production and use. Micropopics are now in the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the food we eat. Microplastics have been found in human blood, lungs, livers, and placentas. The equivalent of two garbage trucks worth of acid trash now ends up in the ocean every minute. The fossil fuel industry views plastics as their land B as transportation and housing become more energy efficient. If plastics were a country, it would be the 5th largest contributor to greenhouse gases after China, the USA, Russia, and India, and 40% of all plastic produced is used only once. It is time for Massachusetts to regulate the use of single use plastics.
I urge you to in active reduced plastic. Rebecca Rausch’s bill. Senate bill number 570, which helped to greatly reduce the amount of plastic waste in Massachusetts. Single use plastics used by the food and beverage industry contribute to street litter, contain toxic chemicals, and are replaceable with refillable reusable options. Also, support Reo Ciccolo’s bill and act to skip this stuff, H.766.9309 Recycling9309 plastic is a false solution to the overwhelming issue of9313 plastic waste disposal. The idea of recycling was created by the petrochemical industry and places a huge financial burden on municipal waste management systems.
The disposal of plastic waste is becoming more and more expensive, and Massachusetts municipalities are unfairly brewed. the cost of disposal. Recycling plastic produces microplastics and toxins.9337 In addition, plastic9339 packaging is one of the biggest contributors to pollution. We need to reduce the financial burden of plastic waste disposal on city and towns, encourage producers to reduce the amount of that they create and hold corporations accountable for the cost of plastic pollution. Please9356 support and act to save recycling costs in the Commonwealth send9360 a bill 572, and house9362 bill 799. Thank9364 you very much for listening to me. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Question on Summit Mini. Okay. Thank you very much.
SPEAKER5 - Okay. David Melly followed by Lewis Dubuque.
SPEAKER2 - Ashley number. Oh, yeah. Fantastic.
Who is your copenalyst?
SPEAKER29 - Peter Blair. Okay. Unless someone. Alright.
DAVID MELLY - ENVIRONMENTAL LEAGUE OF MASSACHUSETTS - HB 779 - SB 471 - SB 572 - Good afternoon Chair Cahill Chair Rausch, members of the committee. My name is David Molly. I'm the legislative director for the Environmental League of Massachusetts. I'm here in support of H.779, S.471 and S.572, and act to save recycling costs in the Commonwealth. I'm going to save everybody a little time and try not to repeat what9416 other folks have said. Plastic is bad. It's bad in many ways. We have a real expensive and increasing waste management problem in the Commonwealth. one thing I do want to highlight is that it's a real climate issue as well. Only 10% of plastic that we produce is actually9432 recycled. The rest gets sent to landfills, incinerators, it9436 gets burned.
It is expensive, toxic, and contributes to emissions. On the bright side, if we achieve the 20309444 waste reduction goals that we've set out for ourselves, It could prevent over 1.7 million metric tons of carbon from entering the atmosphere. That's the equivalent of taking 370,000 cars off the road. And the extended producer responsibility framework is a proven model that really works. It brings stakeholders to the table in a collaborative process. to assess9467 and address our waste management means. And just as importantly, it gives cities and9471 towns the resources they need to help us achieve our ambitious waste reduction goals. four other states already have EPR for packaging. Including California, and this legislation builds9482 on the lessons learned and best practices established already elsewhere.
We already have some EPR in Massachusetts for other classes of products like Mercury. The bottle bill is a sort of EPR method as well. and Mass DP in its own solid waste master plan recommends working with the legislature to establish EPR for packaging, paint, electronics, and mattresses. There are some small differences between these bills, but the central elements are that it creates a statewide packaging, reduction, recycling program. that it uses that program to collect and distribute money to cover the costs associated with reducing and managing packing packaging waste, and then it directs producers to, over time, reduce their total packaging, increase the amount of their packaging that is recyclable. This9529 multipronged approach serves as their producers have a seat at the table, the industry expertise and innovation are heard and implemented.
But it also ensures that cities and towns receive the financial support they may need.9542 As I'm sure you have heard from9544 your cities and towns, this is an9546 increasing and really unsustainable burden on municipal budgets. And it takes a really forward looking approach as which is really essential moving us toward overall waste reduction and incentivizing more9557 sustainable practices. My9559 colleague, Peter, from Just Zero, will go into more of the9561 details. I noticed folks have talked about certain exemptions and other sort of little pieces of language. We're happy to work with other stakeholders, advocates, the committee and the sponsors to kind of address some of those languages. But overall, we're really supportive of this legislation, and thank you so much for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you.
SPEAKER50 - Good that. Right?
SPEAKER2 - Well done. Mr. Blair, good luck.
SPEAKER51 - Yeah. Good afternoon. Can you hear
SPEAKER2 - me? We can.
PETER BLAIR - JUST ZERO - HB 779 - SB 471 - SB 572 - Alright. Terrific. My name is Peter Blair. I'm the policy director for Just Ziro. For those of you who are unfamiliar with us, Just Ziro is a national environmental advocacy organization. we work to implement just and equitable solutions to toxic waste disposal practices. I've submitted written testimony in support of several of the bills, But9604 today, I want to talk primarily about H.779 extended producer responsibility. For the last three9610 years, I have been testifying on, commenting on following, and most importantly, helping develop extended producer responsibility for packaging proposals all across the9619 country. At this point, I've seen in red dozens of these bills, and none of them are as comprehensive or as strong and complete as the bill you have before you today.
The way we9628 think about and manage waste in this country is flawed, it is expensive, it's inherently unjust, and it's deeply unsustainable. This unfortunately is not surprising, the companies that design, package, and market, the household products that we all know and rely on, they're completely detached from the end of life management of these materials. Instead, individuals, communities, they're the one stuck paying to collect and manage a waste stream that they have little to no control over. As a result, recycling and waste disposal costs are increasing while waste diversion and recycling is decreasing. H.779 will address this by creating a comprehensive producer responsibility for packaging program, like all producer responsibility programs.
Large companies, are going9670 to pay fees that are designed to cover the cost of collecting and managing this material, as well as for the environmental impact of the waste associated with their products. A portion of these fees is going to be used to pay for the recycling and waste management services, things that are normally covered by residents today, and this is significantly going to alleviate9687 the financial burden that's being felt across the Commonwealth. Additionally, the bill also requires companies to slowly reduce the amount of packaging material that they use to sell distribute and market their products. This reduction can be achieved by eliminating excess packaging, so no more9702 boxes and boxes, no more needless plastic film or it can be done by switching from single use materials to reusable materials or through a combination of both.
And importantly, a portion of the funds that these companies are paying is going to pay for the infrastructure and the systems here in Massachusetts that are going to transition us away from single use disposal towards a reuse and refill economy where things are put back into circulation and not disposed of or incinerated. Extended producer responsibility for packaging is not a new concept. These programs have been successfully implemented in dozens of jurisdictions across the world. all of which have seen tremendous economic and environmental benefits. They have less waste, higher recycling rates all over dosing the cost to consumers and communities. The pollution and public health impacts you have heard about today, they are significant. They can be addressed, and this is the policy to do that in a comprehensive way. Thank you for your consideration of this testimony. I'm happy to answer any questions you have. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - All done. Questions from the committee?
Okay. Thank you both very much.
SPEAKER43 - Thanks so much.
SPEAKER5 - Okay. Lewis Dubuque followed by Liza Casella.
LEWIS DUBUQUE - NATIONAL WASTE & RECYCLING ASSOCIATION - HB 889 - HB 820 - Afternoon. Chair Rausch Chair Cahill and community members. I'm Lewis Dubuque and I'm here today representing the Massachusetts Chapter at the National Waste And Recycling Association. I'm here today to express our deep opposition to extended produce responsibility for paper and plastic packaging. It is well known that Massachusetts is a national leader with one of the highest recycling rates for containers and packaging materials in the country. The state has a robust and efficient hauler infrastructure to collect recyclables. These companies are privately owned by families that have been in the industry for generations.
Each town in Massachusetts has universal access to curbside, or drop off collections or recyclables. There is no more convenient process of recycling items in at the curb, and these materials are produced at MIRFs. and then sold as commodity back to the market. EPR does not shift the cost to handle the recyclables to producers9838 It shifts the cost to the back of commonwealth residents. The producers will embed and internalize these costs to collect process and market the recyclables at the cash register No reasonable person believes producers will not pass on this cost to consumers, determining that EPR is a solution before determining the cause is putting the cart before the horse.
EPR is a wholesale revamping of the system that works. At the end of the day, Massachusetts has a simple solution to help increase recycling in the state and it's currently in listed bills today, which is H.899. Instead of establishing EPR, a more effective solution will be setting post consumer content standards for materials, including past plastic glass paper packaging containers. Such standards will9885 create more robust markets for materials covered through existing recycling programs, thereby supporting their use in manufacturing into new products and packages. Last year, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy signed into law a bill establishing post consumer recycled content requirements.
Connecticut just passed legislation doing the same for plastic bottles. Considering the guidelines that mirror in New Jersey and Connecticut would jump start demand for recycled materials throughout the region and could ultimately inspire nationwide recycled content standards while protecting Massachusetts vital existing recycling9920 programs and infrastructures. I'd appreciate if you take the time to go through our submitted written testimony we provided, which will focus on several other issues discussed today, including H.820, which would require hard covered tarps on rail carts carrying MSW. which we believe is unconstitutional. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions?
just a quick one from me -- Okay.
SPEAKER1 - --
SPEAKER2 - a potentially quick 1.
9950 RAUSCH9950 -9950 What9950 are the grounds on which you believe that bill is unconstitutional?
9954 DUBUQUE9954 -9954 It's9954 these are railcars that are going from state to state. That's the interstate yeah. The interstate commerce. Yes. Exactly. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
So -- Okay. Thanks very much.
SPEAKER5 - Liza Cassello followed by Sarah Bloomquist.
LIZA CASELLA - CASELLA WASTE SYSTEMS HB 779 - SB 572 - Good afternoon, and thank you. My name is Liza Casella from Casella Waste Systems. At Casella, our commitment to sustainability dates back over four decades when we opened the state of Vermont's first recycling facility in 1977, and it is part of our DNA. Today, we help communities conserve and renew resources to create a sustainable world for future generations. In my role, I have a the distinct pleasure of working closely with our customers to help them achieve their sustainability goals, while driving service innovation at our company to enable highest and best use of materials society consumes and disposes of.
We believe extended producer responsibility, APR, can be successful when used for hard to recycle materials that ex existing material recovery facilities cannot handle. Currently proposed EPR initiatives for electronics and paint as heard earlier today will drive more types of recycling. And as such, we are supportive of those pieces of legislation. We also support EPR for packaging like products, such as flexible packaging, films, plastic bags, and plastic straws as these materials are also not easily handled in existing recycling facilities. We ask that you focus on decreasing these types of single use plastics, packaging like products, excuse me, for sale and the Commonwealth.
And if they are distributed, that they make sure to have the highest level of consumer recycled content possible. To that end, implementation of standalone legislation that increases post consumer recycled content is something to sell a support The waste and recycling industry is rapidly changing on a local, national, and global scale. And our operations in the northeast are constrained by limited capacity, higher costs, and evolving demands of our customers. Casella is investing in new assets, new technology, and10075 innovations to enable a more circular economy10077 and doubling down on our nearly 50 years of putting waste work. These investments include, but are not limited to.
Investing approximately $20 million in our Charlestown recycling facility. One of largest recycling facilities in the United States and the Commonwealth's largest recycling facility. We are upgrading equipment and technology to improve the efficiency and quality of material capture. embed robotics and artificial intelligence technology and improve employer retention and work environments. We are initiating a voluntary EPR like program. and residential pilot to collect difficult to recycle materials in partnership with Terra10111 Cycle. We've launched our10113 first electric refuse collection vehicle in10115 Vermont earlier this year.
We are acquiring businesses that advance our material processing capacities to offer more solutions to our customers such as mattress recycling. We're conducting first of its kind research in innovative recycling trials with a global medical device company, Becton Dickinson, to enable circularity and downstream recycling solutions of syringes for the healthcare industry. And we published our sixth sustainability report updating our stakeholders on our positions, invest assessments and belief systems that will continue to guide our environmental impact well into the future. I will submit written testimony to go through all of the details of the specific bills that we're interested in, and I appreciate your time. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Okay. Terrific. Thank you. Thank you very much.
SPEAKER5 - Sarah Bloomquist
followed by Robert Keefe.
SARAH BLOOMQUIST - TOMRA SYSTEMS - HB 779 - SB 572 - Hello. Good afternoon, chairman Rausch chairman Cahill and members of the committee. My name is Sarah Bloomquist, and I'm the director of Public Affairs for recycling in Circular Economy at TOMRA Systems. Thanks for the opportunity to testify and share our experience and recommendations on how EPR for packaging can reduce waste and invigorate municipal recycling programs across the state. Please reference our written comments for our detailed recommendations. A little bit about who we are, TOMRA provides sensor based solutions that promote a circular economy in the collection and sorting sectors of the recycling value chain. In Massachusetts and throughout the northeast. We provide reverse vending machine technology to collect beverage containers.
In the deposit system as well as the back end services that keep that system running. We also provide advanced sorting equipment, such as optical sorters at material recovery facilities, where municipal curbside materials processed or, sorry, sorted and then processed. In Massachusetts alone, there are 50 sorting units and operations, sorting those recyclables into valuable commodities. So what we've seen from our engagement in more than 40 EPR markets around the world, is that the two most effective EPR systems for household packaging that are complementary in nature, and they're able to achieve the highest recovery rates when they're implemented in tandem. Those two systems are first of all deposit return systems for beverage containers which can achieve up to 90% if they're in well designed systems. Along with EPR for curbside collection systems.
Which ensures, of course, a consistent funding stream to support fluctuating recycling markets. We've found that there are five key principles coming to high performing deposit in EPR for curbside systems along with distinct elements for each of those programs, all of which we've outlined into recent relatively recent white papers over the last couple years, and I'll include links to those papers in my comments. But those five core principles that we see in these programs are on the globe. Our circularity, performance, system integrity, producer responsibility, and convenience. And the elements under those10291 principles, I would form the basis of our recommendations for H.779, an act to save recycling costs10298 in the common null. And I'll summarize four of those points right here real quickly. So first of all, we have targets. So performance target targets are critical to good EPR.
We recommend targets are set in statute for a couple different areas, collection, recycling, and recycled content, and that they're set at the material level. and with separate targets for beverage containers. seconded point, we recommend that definitions for recycling and recycling right ensure quality processing and very accurate measurement. So that means counting only what enters for final recycling towards that recycling rate. Third, we recommend setting a convenience standard to ensure that everyone in the state has access to recycling, that's at least as convenient as trash service. And fourth, investment into the system is needed to improve overall performance and achieve targets. Technology exists today, as some folks have mentioned, that can deliver quality outputs, but investment is needed.10353 It also ensures that EPR does not just ship the costs, but also that system performance is achieved.10359 SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you. That's time. Any questions from the committee? Okay.
SPEAKER5 - Thank you very much.
SPEAKER2 - Robert Keith.
SPEAKER54 - Thank you. Can you hear me?
SPEAKER2 - We can. Excellent.
ROB KEITH - AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR PACKAGING AND THE ENVIRONMENT - HB 776 - HB 779 - SB 471 - SB 572 - Thank you. My name is Rob Keith, and I'm the membership and policy director for AMERIPEN the American Institute for Packaging In The Environment. I'd like to thank chairs Rausch and Cahill as well as the members of the joint committee. In addition to my comments today, we've also submitted written testimony to in opposition to the following packaging producer or EPR responsibility legislation, H.776, H.779 and S.471 and 572. It's important for me to note that several of the EPR packaging responsibility bills are focused on far more than just plastics and cover a variety of packaging mist materials.
American's a material inclusive association, meaning that our comments are not focused on one material in particular, rather our concern is with the improvement of the recycling systems themselves. We do support packaging producer responsibility policy solutions that we deem to be results based, effective, inefficient, and equitable, and fair. We're involved in dozens of packaging responsibility, stakeholder processes as well as active legislation and rulemaking processes around the country. And we feel that the aforementioned bills don't be standard, hence our opposition to them today. The first of some reasons for10440 our opposition include the need for a statewide needs assessment recognizing the lack of adequate data on recycling as well as its associated costs in Massachusetts.
Needs assessments are a key10450 provision for programs such as these to be both successful and transparent. And they're the standard in most of the states they're considering or have already implemented packaging legislation. Massachusetts should not be an exception to this. Additionally, funding provided for all these bills provided for in these bills by disposal or landfilling of certain pack covered packaging products is in American's view a deeply flawed approach that would actually incentivize waste collectors to trash or otherwise dispose of valuable recyclable packaging materials and to receive funding for doing so. That's not an approach we've seen in any other jurisdiction in the world, and we think represents sort of a fundamental flaw in this policy.
Further, the inclusion of10488 packaging or waste reduction goals could very well have an important place in the systems laid out in10492 these bills. However, the inclusion10494 of prescriptive and aggressive10496 rates and dates in statute don't10498 line up with the real world markets or the capabilities of the current recycling systems. We'd rather see that. set by the pro after statute rather than being a triendance statute. Another concern is the definition of readily recyclable as it seems based on the assumption that market prices for full pales of certain recyclable materials are consistent. This is an incorrect assumption of material end markets and could lead to a situation where Most packaging materials fail10522 to meet that criteria for readily recyclable, causing confusion amongst consumers and producers alike.
Lastly, concerns with the program, administration, and rulemaking specified in the bills, including a scenario where Massachusetts DEP would run the PRO instead of a nonprofit. the requirement the producers would supply data that's currently infeasible to collect, such as the detailed tracking of UPCs and their sale10543 points across the state. as well as the formation of oversight bodies that would feature zero or very little producer input. Abandon is the idea that packaging producer visibility. It could be a shared enterprise between producers and government. We respectfully encourage the committee to consider policies that utilize more workable and feasible packaging recycling solutions that will actually improve the recycling systems in Massachusetts. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Right on the dot. Well done.
Questions? Nope.
Okay. Thank you for your testimony.
SPEAKER54 - Thank you so much.
SPEAKER2 - Chris Antinacci followed by Doctor Calvin Lackin.
SPEAKER55 - Yes. Hello. Can you hear me?
SPEAKER2 - We can.
CHRISTOPHER ANTONACCI - USA WASTE AND RECYCLING - HB 779 - SB 572 - HB 820 - Thank you. Well, thank you, chairs, Cahill and Rausch and this joint committee for allowing me the opportunity to comment on HB.779 and HB. 820. My name is10595 Christopher Antonacci. I'm a resident of Camden Massachusetts. A Massachusetts admit attorney, and I'm a third generation principal10601 and council for Christopher Antonacci. USA provides recycling waste and organic services throughout the Pioneer Valley, from Springfield to Greenfield. We oppose house bill 779, which proposes an EPR for packaging scheme. Put simply EPR for packaging schemes are overly complex. programs that do not deliver on any of their promises of environmental or cost savings. For example, EPR for packaging will not increase recycling rates in Massachusetts.
Massachusetts, as you've heard, is already a top three state in, like, nation in terms of recycling, has modern murphy it has stringent laws in the books to promote recycling,10639 and it has widespread access via either curbside or drop off10643 or a convenient drop off of recycle. EPR for packaging will also non incentivize producers to change their packaging. In no jurisdiction that has EPR for packaging, has there been any evidence suggest otherwise. EPR for packaging also will not cause the development or build out of new recycling infrastructure in Massachusetts. Throughout New England and the region, there are many modern murphy. Including USA's affiliates, Murphy Road Recycling, New Murphy in Hartford, Connecticut that services Western Massachusetts recyclables, you also heard from miss Casella about the Casella's new investment in Charlestown.
Those Murphy are keeping Massachusetts at the forefront of recycling. And finally, EPR for packaging will not save Massachusetts money on recycling. In fact, it will do the opposite. Cost of10692 the EPR programs implemented in British Columbia and Ontario have skyrocketed since implementation, up double10698 digit percentages year over year. These costs will get passed on to consumers at the cash register, but it's not just the cost of recycling anymore. Now it's the cost of multiple bureaucracies layered on top of. Research conducted on a proposed APR program in Connecticut indicated that grocery costs could increase three to 7% for a family of 4. that equates to up to $700 a year at the cash register. And the hardest hit? Well, several researchers have determined that disadvantaged communities.
Will be portionately negatively impacted by EPR programs. EPR for packaging may not do any of those things, but it will,10735 however, be a tax on Roche and other retail consumer items, dangerously upset Massachusetts already successful recycling system, and be away from producers to control their own supply chain by controlling the pro, PRO, controlling the pricing of the recyclable commodities, and restricting the flow of those commodities in the marketplace. We ask that you oppose HB.779. Additionally, we ask that you oppose HB 820 requiring ceiling hardcover lids on rail cars. is unnecessary and dangerous to the waste management infrastructure in Massachusetts that relies heavily on rail transportation to manage municipal solid waste on a daily basis. Rail cars with these materials are already covered in an environmental and safe way. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - That's time. Thank you very much for your testimony. Questions from the committee.
SPEAKER55 - Thank you very much for having me.
SPEAKER2 - Okay.
Doctor Lachen.
SPEAKER56 - So good afternoon. Can everyone hear me?
SPEAKER2 - We can.
CALVIN LAKHAN - YORK UNIVERSITY - HB 779 - SB 572 - Perfect. So once again, thank you so much for being here, Mr. Speaker,10794 listening to committee. I'm here to comment on the opposition of Bill HB.779.10798 My name is Doctor. Calvin Lakhan, a professor in the faculty of environmental studies and urgent change at York University. And for Brevity, I'd like to comment on two topics in particular. experiences of EPR in Canada, will EPR impact the price of consumer goods? So in terms of EPR in Canada, I want to share with you some facts from EPR legislation based on my experiences. For context, I've been intimately involved in the development and implementation of EPR programs, and was part of the team that developed the fee model for Ontario's blue box.
EPR for packaging waste is not the silver bullet to our waste management always that some people make it up to be. I've been to dozens of conferences and presentations where British Columbia is cited as a best in class model for EPR, and one of the only full EPR programs for packaging in North America. There's a particular attention paid to their world leading recovery rates in some instances exceeding 100%. If this sounds too good to be true, it is. EC uses a metric called recovery rates, which counts BC and I diversion towards collective collected totals. It is fundamentally different than recycling rate. And in fact, BC is the only program in all of North America and Europe to use this metric. At present, there's not a single jurisdiction all of North America that has a recycling rate exceeding 75%.
For household packaging waste, and in most instances, it is significantly less in trending downwards. Ontario and BC was cycle less today than they did five years ago, they abate less carbon than they did five years ago, and recycling system costs have increased by double digits year over year. Recycle BC's program has experienced an 87% increase in cost over the past five years, but per capita recovery has remained unchanged while Ontario's blue box system has tripled in cost from 90 to 300 million, and we recycle less today than we did in 2007. The10906 second point I would like to make is whether EPR has an impact in the price of consumer goods. Proponents of EPR often claim that there's no evidence cost increases, often citing the study by IRS, which found that there was no statistical relationship between the cost of EPR and the price of consumer goods.
Unfortunately, what is often glossed over is that RS's findings were ultimately rebuked as the methodology was found to be statistically flawed, and these flaws were acknowledged by the study authors. studies by York University, Columbia University, the Center of Economic Studies and Corporate Sustainability in Belgium and OECD found that costs are passed on to consumers, the debate isn't whether it happens, it's10943 the magnitude of the impact. Based10945 on the available literature, estimated cost10947 increases range from two to 7% depending on locality, And the secondary finding is that these studies from these studies is that the impact of these costs are most likely to be felt by lower income households as they consume more prepackaged food stuff as a proportion of their overall budget relative to more affluent families. Thank you very kindly, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - questions from the committee. Okay. Thank you, professor.
Claire Alkowski, followed by Scott Cat fall.
Good afternoon. Good afternoon.
CLAIRE GALKOWSKI - SB 551 - HB 88 - HB 891 - SB 471 - SOUTH SHORE RECYCLING COOPERATIVE - I’m Claire Galkowski. I have been the Executive director of South Shore Recycling Cooperative for 25 years. I worked for 20 for 18 Municipalities on the South Shore. You have many props. I do have some props, and I hope I get to them. Today, I am Speaking on behalf of my 18 towns, which have signed a resolution, supporting the product stewardship and producer responsibility bills. We also support the Murhp transparency bill. So the numbers are S.551, paint, mattresses, H.881, Murph transparency, H.891, and but the holy grail of bills, which has been discussed for better and for worse is the packaging and paper producer responsibility bill. S.471. And that's what I'd like to spend my time talking about.
I did submit written testimony, and I do hope you will read it. Last session, the camera committee approved the bill favorably reported it out. S.471 is based on that bill that you reported and with some improvements because I went through it with a fine tooth comb and said that's not going to work. We need to fix this. So I just want to show a few things. k. This is trash. This is trash. This is trash. This is very expensive to manage. This might as well be trash. It's also had a very, very high carbon footprint as does paper even though they try to put it off11100 as being benign. This is a number seven plastic which is other. it's not recyclable. This is wonderful, wonderful fiber, sandwiched between two layers of plastic which need special equipment, to pull apart which and it has to be bailed separately which we don't do here in Massachusetts.
Black, plastic cannot be seen by the readers. A well written and implemented producer responsibility bill would encourage and make possible either making these things recyclable or encourage the man characters to switch materials, this should be a number one. Why is it a number seven? I don't know. What started as Ash and carcass collection has evolved into municipalities managing mountains of materials, as we've talked about, Brand owners have us hooked on juice boxes, take out food, big boxes with11163 small items delivered to our doorsteps, but the companies that are profiting from this are free once the sale is made, as you well know. Both disposal and recycling costs are now around a $100 a ton and more in some cases plus transportation. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - I'm sorry. That's time, but have very much enjoyed your visual aids. It goes back.
SPEAKER1 - It's all
SPEAKER2 - real time. Questions from the committee.
RAUSCH - I have a question. Can you tell me more about the glass jar? please.
11194 GALKOWSKI11194 -11194 You11194 got to heat this up to oops, sorry. 4000 degrees. to make to melt it into glass. So glass is not an environmentally preferable material. It's heavy. It's very inefficient, and it's got the remains of the propane tag that was confiscated at security, which is another material that would be covered by this this legislation. Similarly, paper has a very high environmental footprint upstream. Yeah. You don't see it in the oceans, but, you know, the oceans are feeling it because it's they result in the emission of a lot of carbon pollution.
RAUSCH - Okay. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Any other questions? Okay. Thank you for your testimony. Thank
SPEAKER9 - you for your time.
SPEAKER2 - Scott Castle. followed by Summer Sorenson, who I believe has now joined us after her school day ended. Go ahead, sir.
SPEAKER57 - Sure. Can you hear me?
SPEAKER2 - We can.
SCOTT CASSEL - PRODUCT STEWARDSHIP INSTITUTE - SB 471 - HB 779 - HB 823 - SB 551 - SB 542 - SB 513 - HB 916 - SB 554 - HB 871 - Alright. Chair Rausch Chair Cahill, and many members. I'm Scott Cassel. I'm the CEO and founder of the Product Stewardship Institute or PSI. We're a 23 year old nonprofit organization based right here in Boston working exclusively on EPR systems for the entire waste stream. I'm also a founding board member of the Marine Debris Foundation created by the Save Seas Act to reduce ocean plastics. And previously, I was waste policy director for Massachusetts in the environment secretary for seven years. I'm here in support of four bills, and I submitted written testimony. S. 471.
Is the first one, packaging and paper products. So this bill draws from our best practices model bill. that has been used for varying degrees by each of the four states that already enacted packaging EPR laws. That's Maine, Oregon, Colorado, and California. It is the best choice of bills introduced here in Massachusetts, and it is consistent with legislative models and laws already established. There's already similar systems operating all around the world even in emerging economies. This is not what you're hearing here today of something that's not needed. Even emerging economies are moving to these systems.
H7.79 by contrast, very strong, but I do not believe it's going to get the needed multi stakeholder support among governments, moderate environmental groups, moderate industry groups, and many others. A bill similar to that was introduced for four years in New York and failed each time of, you know, tanking really good bills. So watch out. So let's not have that perfect be the enemy of the very good. Second bill, paint stewardship, H.823,S.551 and S.542. This bill has been in play for nearly a decade in Massachusetts. It's time to get it done. There's states 11 states to be Illinois is going to be the latest one. Retailers love the program. gets people in the stores, 872% recycling rate.
It's run by the industry, alleviating government burden. and it's based on a model bill that I mediated with the industry, governments including state and local governments and the US EPA, paint recyclers, and retailers. Supporting here lastly or, secondly, mattress stewardship, S.513 and H.916. And I see my time is running thin here. So let11427 me just also support S.554 and S.871for electronic stewardship, and I want to just lastly say, Massachusetts, unfortunately, is woefully behind on progressive laws like EPR. It's time to change that these are four really good bills, and there's. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you, Mr. Casale. Your time is fired.11453 Questions from the committee. Okay. Thank you very much. Also, I apologi ze for mispronouncing your last name earlier. No problem. Okay. Now Lumber sorensen.
SUMMER SORENSEN - NORTHAMPTON HIGH SCHOOL'S ENVIRONMENTAL CLUB - HB 784 - SB 477 - Hello. Co Chair's senator Rauch and representative Cahill and members of the environment and natural resource committee. Thank you for taking the time to listen to our testimony today. My name is Summer Sorenson.
CHLOE RITT - NORTHAMPTON HIGH SCHOOL'S ENVIRONMENTAL CLUB - HB 784 - SB 477 - And my name is Chloe Ritt.
SORENSEN & RITT - And we are leaders of the Northampton High School Environmental Club in Western Massachusetts.
RITT - Our club works to reduce environmental impacts and increase the sustainability of our high school through events, projects, and community outreach. We are here today to provide testimony in support of the House 784 and senate bill 477, An act relative plastic bag reduction.
SORENSEN - We are sure that we are not alone in11499 having the experience of going to the grocery store11501 and feeling overwhelmed, frustrated, and sad by the amount of plastic that11505 surrounds us. Plastic is everywhere, and much of it is single use. After plastic serves its limited single use purpose, very little of it is actually recycled. because the truth is is as not designed to be recycled. Most of this plastic ends up in landfills, incinerate it, or as litter in the environment and oceans
RITT - Single use plastics are woven into our everyday lives, and they pollute our soil, water, and breakdown into microplastics that end up in our food, air, and even our bodies. As youth activists, we understand that the only way to combat plastic pollution is by reducing plastic production. This bill will restrict the use of plastic bags in Massachusetts, which will be one step in the right direction towards limiting plastic production. Our plastic problem11548 is also a climate problem. and we know that addressing the climate crisis also means addressing the plastic crisis. In 2021, our town enacted a ban of plastic bags, and we have gotten a firsthand experience with the success of plastic bag free environment. people have changed habits and easily adapted to11568 a new and more sustainable way of life.11570
SORENSEN - As young people looking ahead11572 to future with a plastic filled environment and ecosystem and ecosystems and crisis, we call on you our legislative body to take immediate action to ensure that we and other generations to come will have a livable future. Since we are currently not able to pass the laws that will ensure our future on Earth, we call upon you as our representatives to fulfill this responsibility. Please utilize that power and take the necessary steps to lessen our dependence on fossil fuel based plastics.
RITT - We want you to know that we are not comfortable with exporting our waste to other regions and countries. We are not comfortable with policies that are only a band aid solution and leave it for the next generation to solve. We demand that our policymakers and lawmakers listen to our generation and take action now before it's too late. Governments need to start the push towards a cleaner economy. For the reasons above, we urge you to pass this bill and other bills that were would restrict our sing our ban on single use plastics. Our future and the future of our11632 planet depends on it.
SORENSEN - Thank you for taking the time to listen to our testimony today. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Well done. Questions from the committee. Hope you had a good school day, and hope you have a wonderful summer. Thank you for your testimony.
Okay. Who's next here? Jacob Cassidy followed by Danielle Fortunato. told you we'd get to you.
SPEAKER60 - I I appreciate you getting my name right
SPEAKER25 - this time.
SPEAKER9 - I got it.
SPEAKER60 - I wanted to make sure I wasn't missed by
SPEAKER50 - a typo.
SPEAKER60 - -It happens. Appreciate it.
JACOB CASSADY - ASSOCIATION OF HOME APPLIANCE MANUFACTURERS - HB 779 - SB 572 - HB 776 - SB 471 - Thank you. and good afternoon. Chair Rush, members of the committee. My name is Jacob Cassidy, and I'm the director of government relations for the Association of Home appliance manufacturers. AHAM’s members manufacture major portable and floor care appliances, and there's about a 150 of total, which includes the industry suppliers. While I'm here signed in in opposition to the legislation I'm going to speak to, which is for the record, H.779 S.572, H.776, H.471. Those are the ones. Okay. Sorry about that in my own handwriting at times.
What I wanted to really come here and use my time to say is that While we are technically opposed. We support these measures so long as the appliance industry and our member products are recognized as unique in the world of consumer packaged goods. So within my testimony, which I won't repeat, there's a few principles or concepts that we shoot for. one is that Major appliances when they're delivered. As part of the delivery distribution system, the packaging as it unloaded, usually on a in the street or on your front lawn, is taken back along with the old or used appliance. depending on your agreement with the with the delivery company.
That material is11767 actually commercially recycled. And as a result, any legislation that includes all packaging EPR will seek to not exclude or exempt. But simply to acknowledge it and11783 to say this shouldn't be included in the totals as the whole system's figured out. one is that there are specific materials that we have seen attempts to ban. which there are no substitutes for major appliances. And that includes extended polystyrene styrofoam styrene, excuse me, and the plastic film that is used to prevent scratches. When appliance is damaged during the delivery process, gets returned and the appliance gets recycled starting the whole process over.
And we also seek a harmonized approach among other things. In my 30 seconds, I do want to just say that We want to work with the committee. We want to work with the legislature and find a solution. I hear a lot about plastic waste. AHAM is actually among the only industry, if not the only industry that supported a California ballot initiative, which would have put a 1¢ tags on plastic material sold. That would include our members. My highlighted major appliances are Portables, our floor care would have to comply with all other requirements in it as well. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Okay. Thank you. Questions from the committee. Thank you for your testimony.
SPEAKER52 - Thank you.
SPEAKER5 - Danielle Fortunato.
SPEAKER2 - followed by Steven Buksensky as we move towards some of the more issue specific bills.
DANIELLE FORTUNATO - PLASTICS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION - HB 833 - Hi. How are you? Thank you. Thank you to the chairs and the members of the committee for having me here today. I am here to testify in support of a bill that the Plastics Industry Association supported two years ago. That's going to be House bill 833. As I just mentioned, the Plastics Industry Association. I am the regional director of government affairs. of state government affairs for the Northeast for plastics that it is as it is commonly also referred to. A little bit about our association, we represent companies across entire plastic supply chain. Our membership includes resin makers, processors, recyclers, machinery makers, kind of run the gambit top to bottom.
11917 Right11917 now, our industry is regarded as the sixth largest manufacturing industry in the United States, and we employ approximately one million employees across the country. Given those facts, we obviously have very vested interest11930 in extended producer responsibility, which is why I'll be speaking about House bill 833. I will not be getting into our opposition about the other EPR bills and the single use plastics bills. Instead, we wanted to use our time to highlight why a bill like 833 is important and should be taken up favorably. This bill would institute a commission to study EPR in a variety of items including packaging of all sorts. We do think that a study or commission or needs assessment is the first step to implementing any successful EPR program.
Any rates and dates that could be11964 put into statute or that could be found after implementing a program should come from the findings of a needs assessment. Otherwise, you could be setting up the state for a program that is just not going to work from the start. Our members fully believe in extended producer responsibility. Our industry fully believes in extended producer responsibility that is crafted correctly. We are on the same side as this. I know that sometimes that is hard to believe, but we do want well crafted policies put in place, and we truly just ask that our industry and our members are used for the expertise that we do have to give to11998 to Massachusetts as well as any other state. We do appreciate that HB. 833 is written in a way that would study seven key issues..
Specifically the study of existing recycling infrastructure within the Commonwealth as well as the need for public education to reach target populations. We know that education for the public is going to be a joint effort on our side as well as the government side. Sorry. I just lost my train of thought. With the remaining 35 seconds that I have, I'll just write a few key facts that some hits aren't accepted as fact, but I can see who they are. Since 2017, billions of dollars in investments have been announced in relation to our industry that would help remove about nine million metric tonsfrom landfills. We also hate plastic waste and do not want it in our environment. Also, various has showed that consumers, the majority of consumers do want more recycling as opposed to bans or reduction in plastics. products, and I will yield my one second back. It's been a long day. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Well done. Questions for the committee. Okay. Thank you very much.
SPEAKER21 - Perfect. Thanks so much.
SPEAKER2 - Okay. We have covered most of, I think, most of the sort of general topic wide testimony. And so now we're going to move to some more specific areas. Steven Bozanski with regard to Senate 565 and act relative to recycling.
STEVE BOKSANSKI - MASSACHUSETTS BEVERAGE ASSOCIATION - SB 565 - SB 509 - Good afternoon. Chairs Rausch, and Cahill members of the committee. My name is Steve Boksanski. I'm here today on on behalf of the Massachusetts Beverage Association. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. The Massachusetts Beverage Association represents a Commonwealth's Bottlers and distributors of nonalcoholic beverages. So the big national brands that everyone knows as well as some of the regional family owned brands like our very own Polar Beverages in Worcester, Massachusetts. We have partnerships across the Commonwealth from the Berkshires to Providence town. Because so many businesses rely on at least in part on the sale of beverages for their livelihood, grocery stores, convenience stores, movie theaters, little mom and pop pizza shops.
So we've got relationships again, all the way across the Commonwealth, and we value those relationships. Our industry plays an important role in the circular economy, our aluminum cans and PET bottles are highly recyclable and have high commodity value. And we are here to tell you that we're interested in improving collection policy here in Massachusetts. We wanted to take a slightly different twist from some of the other folks who are here today. While we support EPR legislation principle. We just design of those systems is critical to their success. The bills in front of you today, we don't think meet that standard of being able to bring meaningful reform. So I did want to focus a little bit of time on a couple other things. We know our municipalities are at the front line of this battle with handling waste and recyclable material.
And so Senate 565 would impose Performance standards for cities and towns, and that would mean every city and town would have to put in place best practices to recycle more and divert more recyclable material from their waste their trash screen. We think that makes a lot of sense. We also know that would require a12201 great deal of capital So we have a plan for that too. Senate 509 sponsored by Senate Kenney would reestablish the clean environment fund. And that clean environment fund used to hold unclaimed deposit money. That that those unclaimed deposits are going upwards of $70 million every year now into the general fund. We would love the idea of using some of that money12222 to plow back to cities and towns.
So they can improve their recycling capabilities and we think that's another strategy that the committee ought to consider. Finally, I'd like to just state that we're opposed to legislation that bans the sale of bottled water We just think this misses the mark of meaningful reform. If people don't want to buy those bottles right now, they don't have to. They can use a recyclable container. They can use a reusable container. We're not forcing anyone to buy those products. We do think that we do know Those PET bottles are 100% recyclable. So if people buy them and they use them meaningfully and use them responsibly, they12259 can't be recycled. So that's the end of my time.12261 I want to thank you very much for this opportunity, and we are willing and would12265 love to work with the committee to go into more detail on all these issues. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions. Thank you for your testimony.
SPEAKER62 - Thank you very much.
SPEAKER5 - Okay. Moving to paint.
SPEAKER2 - Starrin Kishida followed by Thomas Irwin.
SPEAKER1 - Good
SPEAKER63 - afternoon.
SPEAKER58 - afternoon.
SHARON BYRNE KISHIDA - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 823 - SB 551 - SB 542 - My name is Sharon Byrne Kishida, and I am testifying in support of the three paint stewardship bills. House Bill 823, and senate bills 551 and 442. Two years ago, I came before this committee for the 1st time to speak in support of rep Haddad's paint bill. I had recently retired from mass DEP where I served 23 years as the regional waste and recycling coordinator for 39 Cities and Towns North of Boston. Before that, I briefly served as the 1st and only recycling coordinator for Essex County, where I started a regional hazardous waste collection procurement that12333 lasted 20 years and was utilized by 30 plus communities annually. Many communities only hold one hazardous waste collection event per year.
The majority of what residents want to12347 drop off is paint. Although usable latex paint can be recycled into new paint, The cost is too high for most municipalities, and so residents are instructed to dry it out and put it in the trash. Roughly 50% of what comes into hazardous waste events is oil based paint. All this is to say, we need a better way to manage unwanted paint in Massachusetts. Paint's stewardship laws have been success fully implemented in10 states, and Scott just said Illinois is making it 11. and they have diverted12387 6512389 million12389 gallons12389 of latex and oil based paint. five of these states are our neighbors. Through this program, most collected latex paint is recycled, and oil based paint is beneficially reused as fuel. Paint stewardship laws have broad support.
Including the paint industry, municipalities, the mass municipal association, and many small paint real retailers, including the home decor group with 19 stores from Gloucester to Worcester. Paint stewardship laws require paint manufacturers to establish a convenient paint collection network. that both residents and businesses can use. The program is funded by a visible fee when new paint is purchased. Paint Manufacturers represented by a nonprofit called PaintCare are responsible for public education and transportation. from collection sites to recycling or appropriate disposal sites. Becoming a collection site is completely voluntary. For those communities that hold hazardous waste collection events, they will be able12459 to accept both latex and12461 oil based paint at no12463 cost. And this includes all that12466 unused paint sitting in our garages12468 and basements. A paint sewer chip law makes so much sense. for Massachusetts. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you very much. Questions from the committee.
SPEAKER1 - k.
SPEAKER2 - Thank you for your time.
SPEAKER63 - very much for the privilege12481 to speak to you today. Absolutely.
SPEAKER2 - hour where are we? three a half hours in. Good job, everybody.
Okay. Thomas Irwin, followed by Waneta Travert, and then Heidi McColliff and Daniel Greenberg. All about paint.
When you're ready, sir.
TOM IRWIN - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 823 - SB 551 - SB 542 - Good afternoon to me. My name is Tom Irwin. I'm a retired chemical engineer and primary care physician. I worked for and consulted with General Electric for 23 years in their chemical and metallurgy division. before developing significant sensitivity to industrial chemicals and changing careers to become a nasty path for a practice primary care for 15 years. In retirement, I became active in supporting my town to Dalton join three committees. I quickly became aware of the solid way crisis and while researching solutions learned of paint stewardship as a means of not only decreasing waste but better managing a hazardous waste. Based on my experiences, both the chemical engineer intimately familiar with the challenges of preventing.
And dealing with hazardous waste, hazardous spills, and contaminated soil. and a physician helping patients deal with preventable cancers. This solution resonated deeply with me. My wish today is to add insight into the depth of public support for H.823, S.542 and S.551, garnered for my many hours grassroots advocacy for paint stewardship. Early in my journey, I was fortunate to meet two other passionate advocates12571 in form the Massachusetts paint stewardship,12573 the advocacy group. Our collective efforts to support the paint storage of bills have been wide ranging include visiting town administrations and over 50 western mass communities. Creating a presentation that we've given to groups and towns that has been shared with other groups.
And spread across the state gathering petition signatures at events and going door to door. letter writing to municipalities and contributing letters to the editor and planning and sponsoring public forums across the state the first to occur in Pittsfield in July. My journey has revealed tremendous support from all corners12605 and all demographics. There are few things in society that I believe enjoy this level of support. and now for some statistics. Of over 50 Town administrations contact, all were in favor. Of the 30% of people who have answered the several hundred doors I've on. More than12622 97% enthusiastically supported the bill and no 90% signed a petition. Of the over 250 attending12630 household hazardous waste day events. Over 95% this support this legislation and signed petitions.
Of the several states, excuse me, of the several residents who I've talked to who moved here from a current bank care state, all missed this program or surprised Massachusetts does not happen. From personally visiting paint retailers and citizens in our adjoining states of Vermont, New York, and Connecticut. I learned all citizens were aware of the program at all retailers appreciate the law. Of note recycling latex also will decrease the greenhouse gas emissions generated by the paint engine street by approximately 4% annually. This is based on 10% of all paint being recycled, 80% of latex being reusable, and latex being 50% of the total paint produced annually. I strongly believe the downside of this law is vanishing small, and the benefit is significant. Hence, I encourage your reporting of this legislation favorably and supporting its continuation to the next step in the legislative process. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you for your testimony. Questions from the committee. Okay. Thank you very much.
SPEAKER5 - Onenette, Trevor, followed by Heidi12701 McCollough, and then Daniel Greenberg.
12705 SPEAKER212705 -12705 Good12705 afternoon..
12709 WANETA12709 TRABERT12709 -12709 MASSACHUSETTS12709 PRODUCTS12709 STEWARDSHIP12709 COUNCIL12709 -12709 Good12709 afternoon12709 HB12709 82312709 -12709 SB12709 55112709 -12709 SB12709 54212709 -12709 HB12709 88112709 -12709 HB12709 91612709 -12709 SB12709 51312709 -12709 SB12709 47112709 -12709 Thank12709 you.12709 Chairs Rausch Cahill and committee members. I'm Waneta Trabert, Chair of the Massachusetts Products Stewardship Council. The mission of the MassPSC is to shift costs of materials management away from municipalities on to product manufacturers by advocating for product stewardship and EPR policies. Massachusetts faces a looming disposal diversity crisis that is already increasing the cost of managing our trash by as much as 40% and costs will continue to rise until something12739 is done.
These costs these cost increases are impacting every municipality in the Commonwealth, and will continue to cause more and more strain on municipal budgets until bold action is taken by you, our state's leaders, to develop sustainably funded collection networks to make waste diversion easier for everyone. EPR laws are a proven solution to do just that. I'm speaking today on behalf of 58 municipalities 13 NGOs and six businesses that have endorsed the following bills. We are asking that the committee move favorable on bills H.823, S.551 and S.542 to establish a stewardship program in the Commonwealth. In instead of our current system of unwanted sitting idle in basements and garages and becoming12789 a turn in the side of our residents.
When it is time to dispose of the paint, this person would sustainably fund a robust network of voluntary collection sites provide education on responsible pain management and save municipalities at least $3 million per year. This small, but often overlooked would be a big win for residents, municipalities, and the paint industry. We asked the committee to move favorably on bills H.881, H.916, and sS.513 to create a sustainably funded mattress stewardship program. This program successfully operates in Connecticut, Rhode Island, and California collecting more than 1.7 million mattresses each year. Implementing a mattress stewardship program is the logical next step for Massachusetts following the unfunded mandate mattress disposal ban that took effect last November.
And finally, we ask the committee to move favorably on bill S.471 and act to reduce waste and recycling costs. This law would require manufacturers to reimburse municipalities for recycling costs while preserving and improving existing infrastructure. We estimate from survey data that passage of this bill would result in cost savings upwards of $250 million annually for municipalities. Dozens of Countries in several Canadian provinces have successful packaging stewardship programs that achieve recycling rates two to three times higher12874 than Massachusetts. We must do better on diverting our waste. EPR laws are an important tool to get us there. Thank you for your service and leadership and for consideration of my testimony today. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions from the committee. Okay. Thank you for your testimony, and I apologize for mispronouncing your name. That's okay. Thank you.
SPEAKER5 - Heidi McColliff.
SPEAKER2 - Shit to go.
Thank you, Daniel Greenberg. Mr.
Greenberg,
Okay. Well, that's going to make the hearing a little bit shorter. Okay. Moving to electronics. Daniel Zotos, followed by Alipec.
Mr. Zotos.
Now we see who had the stamina to last until three a half hours in.
SPEAKER42 - Ellie, I can't delete Bogle's spit in the Tesla.
SPEAKER2 - Okay. And, Mr. Zotos, I presume also has left. Okay. Moving right along.
Let's see. I believe we have Christine Cassidy now who was called earlier, but missed it. She's now online.
Is that correct? Yes. Hi. Can you hear me now? We can.
Okay. Great. Sorry, I computer issues. I'm going to discuss my opposition for a couple of plastic bills. I'm Christine Cassidy, the for those who do not know Dart? Are there any global
SPEAKER1 - --
SPEAKER2 - Miss Cassidy, I'm I'm sorry. You're you're breaking up. maybe you want to get to another position where where you might have better service. We'll circle back to you.
SPEAKER5 - Let's turn to house
SPEAKER1 - 891
SPEAKER2 - regarding transparency and disclosures. Mike Gurney, followed by Eric Dyson. Hello?
How's it going?
SPEAKER28 - Hanging in there. Right?
SPEAKER2 - Hanging in. You're hanging in.
MIKE GURNEE - TOUGH STUFF RECYCLING - HB 891 - Thank you. Chair Rausch Chair Cahill and everybody else on the board. Never spoken at one of these, and I've read up this entire thing, but I've also submitted it. So I think I want to spare you guys the entire reread here. So I'm with Tough Stuff Recycling. I'm a mattress recycling here in Massachusetts. I also represent Xtraction,, which is one of my other mattress recycling companies in California. which is currently under13027 an EPR program. So I have13029 a little bit of insight into how those things work. Just so you guys13033 are under aware, I do have opposition to these EPR bills. but I don't have opposition to EPR. Kind of some of the main points here is the provisions.
Actually, in these bills, they should ensure, you know, fair and competitive environment Like, some of these stewardship programs and stuff like that doesn't exactly encourage that. I mean, most of the times in here, and I'm not going to read a verbatim, but it doesn't address things like our downstream13058 markets as these13060 EPR legislations are passed in other states. we're starting to flood these downstream markets. Mostly, wood markets, foam, different things like that. That's causing a really big issue with recycling percentages. If we don't have downstream markets, how we actually just recycle these things. Right? So and13075 we've seen that. We thought this was four or five years out, but we're seeing it now.
I mean, some of our markets are they're cutting down by 90%. so you can imagine even though or some of the largest mattresses or I'm sorry. I'm one of the largest mattress recyclers in Massachusetts and California. we're having to squeeze our stuff in as hard as can be, and none of these bills say anything to that effect. Moreover, some of these bills don't even really address reuse sanity sanitization, things like that. Those are big diversions for landfills for these mattresses, which I think is sorely overlooked. And another aspect of this and I apologize. So, basically, to sum everything up because I know I get a minute left, is a lot of these businesses, including my own.
We've invested million of dollars in the infrastructure facilities here, not only here in Mass chooses, but other states around. We have done so in anticipation and needs of the communities in the environment effectively addressing potential problems before they become critical issues. So it's crucial that any legislation recognize and respect these existing investments and efforts and not just disregard them. The introduction of an EPR program should not undermine or validate the work that has already been done, but rather it should aim to complement and enhance it. That's my main things that won this 1. I mean, there's a lot of other stuff in here. I hope you guys read it, but pretty much all I got. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER10 - So -- Okay.
SPEAKER2 - We will read it. Questions from the committee. Terrific. Thank you very much. Eric Dyson. Yes. Welcome.
SPEAKER7 - You'll teach me to sign
SPEAKER24 - up at two minutes to 12th on the deadline.
Now I understand when you have to sign up.
ERIK DYSON - HANDUP MATTRESS RECYCLING & UPCYCLING - HB 916 - SB 512 - So hi. I'm Eric Dyson. I'm the founder of HandUp Mattress Recycling. Social impact business that started about 18 months ago down in New Bedford. And frankly, I was inspired by UTEC a couple years ago about what they were doing, heard about the impending mattress band decided to start this business. We're a business that's dedicated to helping immigrants and refugees. We now employ 19 folks from nine countries. Even though we're for profit business, 60% of our profits, we then divert back to a nonprofit that does work with refugees and immigrants. Sorry.
As the folks from Tufts have said, conceptually, I agree with EPR. I think the challenge with these three bills that are before you all is that they're really a problem they're a solution chasing a problem at this point. You know, Massachusetts implemented the mattress ban in in November. We've had great success with Mass DEP. The program is working. I understand there's lots of concerns from towns and cities about that being unfunded mandate. And I do think that there is the room for an EPR program to collect that that fee from the consumer. And again, it's interesting to call it EPR when it's actually extending consumer responsibility.
Because the consumer is not paying not the producers themselves. but to collect that fund from the consumer and let those and let those funds then be go back to help these towns and cities look for creative solutions. Unfortunately, the three bills that are in front of you are cut and paste pieces of legislation that have been used by the man manufacturing industry through their non profit MRC in Connecticut, Rhode Island, California, and now Oregon. So13265 it's a cut and paste solution that really doesn't understand the intricacies of13269 our market. We have entity in place Mass DEP that oversees and regulates this market, we're all under FAC 90 pricing.
So our pricing is transparent to anyone that any city or town. I think there's a way for this to move forward. Frankly, if I were looking at this legislation, I would put this under Mass DEP, not under stewardship organization that's run by an independent third party run by the manufacturing industry. Part of my business also is very strictly a very works on reuse or upcycling. About 5% of all the matches that we bring in every month, we're able to clean and sanitize and resell. We're the only recycle13306 I think in the country doing this today. We'll do about 2500 mattresses this year that way. We're licensed by the state. We resell mattresses about 10% of retail cost to enable other folks to have great matches.
All those are the kinds of things that will not be captured by this bill, and frankly, would put that kind of business. I wouldn't be allowed to do that business under this bill. because the manufacturers, of course, do not want us to reuse, they want us to consume and throw away and get to the next One. So I think because of all that, I have to be in opposition to these piece of legislation. I think Senator Kennedy's s 512 is a great idea because it's an assessment of the industry. to look at and see what's happening, to talk with folks like us that are involved, talk with stakeholders like Townsend Cities, and see how we can better form this really a nascent industry, but in a way that works for everyone. Thank you much for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Questions. Okay. Thank you very much. More on mattresses. I see Greg up there on the screen. Why don't you take it away, sir?
GREGORY CROTEAU - UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY - HB 916 - SB 513 - HB 881 - Great seeing you, Chairs Thanks again. Really appreciate the opportunity. I want to also thank Senator Kennedy. represent as Vargas and representative Domb for their filing of the bills. We are here to testify in support of H.916 and senate 513. Not in support of H.881. And you already heard from our team, so I think my job not to mess anything13394 up. I'll be very brief. You've heard the value of mattress13398 recycling as a social enterprise. We really appreciate the past support. We're speaking in favor of the Kennedy and Vargas bill. With the I think over the past year, to be honest, seen some I think it's been really good to see the work that DEP has been able to do.
And so we do have a respectful tweak to the bill which we've been having conversations with other mattress recycling recyclers. And I believe there's some kind of unifying consensus around the idea that it has been working well through the DEP's leadership, and instead of the MRC coordinating it, being able to kind of have the DEP coordinate. And so I think a lot of aspects of the bill still remain the same, but, really, the oversight looking that more from the DEP because of the way in which they've handled it, which has worked out really, really well for us. And so I'd want to message that. We also I agree with Eric's prior testimony about including the reuse of mattresses.
We think that's a great addition to that, an important one. And then we also and you may hear from some of the other recyclers, the idea of including the potential for funding innovations and research. We all struggle over some of the same things. How do you dispose of certain materials, how to get more value for it and having that as part of it. So some of these tweaks to the bills, we're interested in supporting and exploring further. and really appreciate all the past support and the prior bills, the support13484 for the social enterprises, and all of your leadership. And so I will relinquish one minute 10 seconds back. We really want you to support. And always happy, open invite anytime you all want to come back, and see mattresses get sliced up anytime. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - It's pretty cool. Thank you very much. Questions from13503 the committee. Okay. Thank you. Marcos Estebes.
Also from your tech, guys, I understand it.
SPEAKER64 - Actually, he so Mig spoke for him. So he yeah.
SPEAKER1 - So he yeah.
SPEAKER2 - Got it. Thank you, Greg. Okay. Yeah. Grant Johnson
Hello?
SPEAKER65 - Good at that. Nope. We're evening at something.
SPEAKER2 - I'm not sure if you've been anymore.
Yeah. No windows. There's maybe a reason why they built this room with no windows.
SPEAKER65 - Exactly. Exactly.
SPEAKER2 - Go ahead, sir.
GRANT JOHNSON - INTERNATIONAL SLEEP PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION - HB 881 - Alright. Thank you. Good afternoon. Chair Rausch, Chair Cahill and members of the committee. My name is Grant Johnson. I'm with the International Sleep Products Association. ISPA represents mattress manufacturers and suppliers of components and services to the mattress industry. We support H.881 to established industry led mattress recycling in the13558 commonwealth. This was long supported mattress recycling. We created a nonprofit called the Mattress Recycling Council to operate Mattress Recycling programs in Rhode Island, Connecticut, and California.
They have successfully recycled over 12 million mattresses and box rings over the past seven years. To put that number in perspective, if those mattresses were placed end to end, they would form a line nearly 14,000 miles long, equal to more than half of the circumference of the world. Excuse me. We work with nonprofits and existing solid waste infrastructure to accomplish for this mission. MRC expects to launch a new mattress for soybean program in Oregon next year. Based on MRC's experience, operating these successful programs ISPA has worked with representative Phillips to craft H.881 to create a similar mattress recycling program in Massachusetts. H.881 would require the mattress industry develop and run the program subject to state oversight.
Through a network of third party transporters and recyclers, MRC would provide no cost and accessible statewide opportunities for residents and businesses to discard their used mattresses for recycling. This program would provide cost effective recycling and would help local cities and towns save money and resources. Mattress Recycling generates impressive environmental benefits. A life cycle analysis, MRC conducted in California shows that each mattress recycled avoids greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to driving 60 fewer miles saves 500 gallons of water and saves enough energy to power an average household for three days. Massachusetts needs an efficient statewide recycling program now that deep or DEP, excuse me, has banned mattresses from state landfills effective November one 2022.
A patchwork policies has emerged with each municipality deciding how to dispose of its mattresses separately, This has created a confusing landscape, the consequences of which result in a significant financial burden on municipalities and consumers or both. My industry is prepared to establish an efficient, proven matrix recycling program in Massachusetts working within the Commonwealth's existing solid waste infrastructure. That program will reduce the burden that the landfill ban has imposed on13695 consumers and municipalities to13697 provide statewide mattress recycling for all residents and create new recycling sector jobs. Please support house bill 881to make this happen. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I haven't answered any questions. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER26 - Questions.
SPEAKER2 - All set. Thank you for your testimony. Okay, miss Cassidy. How you doing over there?
Why are you still with us? Okay. I'll try again in a few minutes. Rodney Clara,
Oh, more visual aids.
SPEAKER25 - It's weeks back.
SPEAKER2 - Perfect.
SPEAKER25 - ask and actually see one of the pains that I'm going to strange.
SPEAKER2 - Ah, I saw I've seen these before when I stored you tech. makes.
SPEAKER25 - I love the box.
RODNEY CLARA - TOUGH STUFF RECYCLING - HB 881 - HB 916 - SB 513 - Hi. My name is Rodney J. Clara. I'm with I'm the director of sales and business development for tough stuff recycling. First, I like Sam's, I'm in opposition to H.881. For the simple fact that the bill does not provide equal representation, on an advisory committee for recyclers. Your body actually came and saw us and saw our challenges, and you spoke to that when you listen and when you, you know, went to our facility you learned, it's important that the recycle is a part of that13789 process. The Matthew Stewart's advisory committee must have an equal representation of all parties involved in the collection and the recycling of mattresses. that this bill, 881, has no provisions for recyclers to be part of that committee.
It actually forbids the appointment of any person that has any pecuniary interest in a contract awarded by the stewardship13809 industry. So we're pretty much13811 written out of any kind of how it functions13814 down the road. I had to redo everything as I was listening, so bear with. And13820 speaking to the assesses the future of the mattress recycling in a commonwealth. I heard a lot with UTEC. Right? They're a great organization. I believe in them. But I want to make it a point that there are many other recyclers in the state. The recyclers in the commonwealth are made up of a for profit. and nonprofit. Both have made great efforts and strides to meet the demands of the municipalities currently under the FAC 90 contract.
I truly believe that Mass13850 DEP when they created the FAC 9013852 and13852 created a solid structure13854 that allowed there to be a vibrant business model for us to move forward with mattress recycling. With that said, I think it's also very important The bills that you see right now, and I hope that this is introduced, is reuse and refurbished. We've heard a little bit just a minute about how that is. if you look at the other EPR bills that exist in other states, that does not make have one word refurbished. I believe that in the that there's two pieces I believe for Kennedy, the to learn and innovate. There needs to be and I even wrote it down here. There needs to be issue with the pocket coils, but most importantly, there needs to be benefits of mattress for refurbishment and upcycling of units.
Why? Because it reduces carbon emissions. Every time we take a mattress apart, we have to bail those items. We have to ship them across the country. They get processed into a new product. Right? Carbon emissions. Second thing is refurbishing allows people with a lower income value, and they have they don't have enough money to buy a $3000 or $800 $1000 mattress, they can buy a reused mattress as13917 long as it's been processed correctly, sanitized, refurbished in the right way using the right fire protections, there’s ways to be able to do this. I'm hoping this legislation will incorporate innovative growth opportunities and funding mechanisms for that to happen. And so if you want to ask a question about the podcast, I sure would like to have you.
RAUSCH - Thank you. I'm going to ask actually a different question, which I maybe should have asked earlier. But how do you clean a mattress. Right? We hear about dust mites and all sorts of other things that make a mattress, I don't13948 know, 50% heavier or something over the course13950 of a decade. Like, how do you actually clean that at so that it's ready for subsequent consumer use.
CLARA - There's actually a license way to do it. And, again, you know, Eric can speak to it. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER21 - Welcome to come back
SPEAKER2 - up to that. We just need the microphone to share.
CLARA - Yeah. Yeah. I I'll let you speak to it. one of the things we know is that you cook a mattress, so a lot of refurbish beers will have an oven, and you can raise it to a certain temperature and you can cook it. And then you can pull
RAUSCH - It and cover over it.
CLARA - Yeah. You can see the same13976 or the mat the mattress is actually cooked. It's actually so it gets13980 rid of any kind of contamination, and then they pull a new cover over it. What's most important is that cover has to be stitched with fireproof retardant material. A lot of refurbishment, again, this is why it should be in the bill, is because it happens in people's garages. If you see a mattress on the street one day and it's gone, it's probably because a refurbished picked it up. Eric?14000
DYSON - I don't pick him up off the street. Well, yes, we do. We do curbside14006 recycling. So, yes, we do that. So, basically, you know, the way we work here in Massachusetts, we look at14012 three things. We look at the age of the unit. The great news is literally every mattress has that little sticker in it that says, do not tear off by a penny of the law, and it tells you when it was manufactured. So anything more than two years older, so we're not even going to try to resell. Secondly, we look at the wear and tear of the unit and then the end of the brand. And based upon those three factors, that will let us when we do our triage when it comes into the facility.
And again, 95% are end of life that get cut apart. 5% we're going to take to the side. And we've developed techniques of how to clean them. A lot of them, as Rodney said, you can take off the external cover. We take those and we have those dry cleaned and sanitized. And so they come back brand new. Even though it doesn't do not dry clean, know, we do it, and it works just fine. And it ends up that you end up having, you know, matches that literally look brand new. And as Ravi said, you know, the $3000 matches you buy for $250 so folks who work very hard every day in physical labor actually get to sleep on a good mattress.
CLARA - If you look at, like, a Salvation Army of goodwill, they have actually a mattresses that are in the stores. Those are actually refurbished mattresses. So, again, it's it's a great way to approach it. And, again, if you want to ask me about or lower left.
RAUSCH - Alright. Tell us about the coins. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Alright.
CLARA - So I'm SPEAKER15 - going to wait till about
SPEAKER1 - 5
SPEAKER25 - to 4th.
CLARA - Yeah. Intimated funding that's introduced to this, a study. Because, again, this is part of what is not mentioned in any EPR bill is how to process this. Right now, you think of14090 a whole mattresses made up of these. In order to get this steel out, I can't recycle I can't bail this and recycle this steel and sell it to a downstream fender, which means it becomes waste and has to go on the landfill. The only14100 way to get this steel out is manually cut each one open and pull out14104 this particular piece of steel to recycle it. Huge cost but it's not again, look at that EPR bill. It's not in any of them. So we ask that some studies people in there of how can we write that amount in so we can make money being able to pull this out so we can actually become a viable industry and actually recycle and service the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Thank you for asking me the question. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you. Welcome. Any other questions? Okay.
SPEAKER27 - Thank you. Okay.
SPEAKER5 - Checking in on Miss Cassidy.
SPEAKER66 - Yes. Can you hear me?
SPEAKER2 - Terrific. Let's try again.
SPEAKER66 - Guys a charm, apparently.
SPEAKER5 - I hope so.
SPEAKER2 - fingers crossed.
CHRISTINE CASSIDY - DART CONTAINER - HB 916 - SB 513 - Okay. Thank you. And thank you for your patience. I'm going to pose a few bills, one of which is a ban on polystyrene material. I am Christine Cassidy, the government affairs and sustainability manager for Dark Container. those that do not know Dark, we are a global food service manufacturer that makes products out of paper, classic, compostable products, and then also polystyrene foam material. We produce a variety of products to meet customers' needs, whether it be for food integrity or to meet a certain cost point so that a customer can, you know, decrease their cost.
And so we see a need for our products in the market. So with that said, we've done a lot of work with trade organizations. Sorry. Some of which are sitting in the room right now to advance recycling and increase access to commercial compost facilities that accept food service packaging. We want to make sure that our products that do go out in the environment are actually collected and recycled. We do not want them to go to landfill whether some people say that we do we do not. We want to make sure that they are captured. And we believe that banning certain products that without advancing recycling or composting throughout Massachusetts.
Massachusetts is not doing too much for the environment. This just mandates restaurants to purchase more expensive items that are usually not recycled or composted within their area. A restaurant just asked me, you know, if I saw to compostable products, where can I compost them? And I didn't have an answer for them because there wasn't a facility within a hundred miles of them. So this kind of list misleads restaurant owners and consumers to believe that they're doing the right thing for the environment, and it's actually going to the garbage.
So instead of banning products throughout the state, a greater focus should be looking at ways to increase recycling and create more access commercial compost facilities that will accept these packages. And I encourage you to look at comprehensive ETR programs that will benefit the recycling and compost industry and supply the necessary14274 funds to these facilities. And I am one that will help out in any way and put you14280 in touch with trade organizations And we also do a lot of work to mitigate litter into the environment as well. So I appreciate your patience and welcome any questions that you may have. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Terrific. Any questions? Okay. Thank you very much for your testimony. Glad it works. 3rd time was the charm.
SPEAKER66 - Yeah.
SPEAKER2 - Okay. Turning to house bill 870 regarding the ceiling of containers transporting solid waste. We have four people signed up testified. We'll begin with Neil Ryan followed by Mike Ewell, Elliot Smith, and Carmen Martinez.
SPEAKER1 - Okay. Alright. Can you hear me? We can. Alright. I was actually signed up to speak some other issues including that. Can I talk about the other ones first?
SPEAKER2 - You have three minutes that you may use, however you like.
NEIL RHEIN - KEEP MASSACHUSETTS BEAUTIFUL - HB 875 - SB 509 - SB 551 - HB 823 - HB 820 - Alright. Number one, I'm the executive14334 director of Keep Massachusetts Beautiful. So we're a nonprofit organization. We do a lot of litter cleanup all across the state, including in Watertown yesterday where someone mentioned earlier along the14346 Charles River, and we do find lots of helium balloons. And turn that off. So we support H.875. I mean, Helium, it's really a no brainer. A lot of these issues we're talking about today are very complex. One million balloons are pretty simple. Totally unnecessary to be having planned releases of balloons. In addition to the environmental impact, you may not be aware, but the helium is used for MRIs, and there's actually a shortage of helium. Worldwide. We have a tech a reserve in Texas that's dwindling. So if someone wants to honor a loved one or do some other type of thing.14391
They could plant a tree, and that would14393 be a much more appropriate way to honor someone than basically legalized litter so much which is what mass balloon releases are. Other bills that I wanted to talk about quickly are the clean environment fund, you know, as a nonprofit here in the state, we engaged thousands of volunteers to clean up litter and do community cleanups with zero funding from the state. And we know that there are million many millions of dollars every year going from unclaimed deposits. That originally were put into some type of clean environment fund that went away,14431 I think, in the early 2000. So we would love to see that restored, not only for us, but all the other great environmental nonprofits in Massachusetts that are trying to do so much to clean up our state.
In regards to another kind of single issue, Bill, was paint. Yeah. I know that's been before this legislature for a long time now. I think it was 11 other states already have this in place. Again, it's a kind of a single product solution that is highly effective and, really, I don't see any reason why we can't just get that done. Finally, on the H.820 on the ceiling, you know, from a litter perspective, that's where our interest is on whether it's trains or trucks, in particular, trucks is where we see the problem. We often hear stories or are personally witnessed trucks traveling down the highways, spewing litter that is very disconcerting to the volunteers who are out there trying to clean it up. So those are the four bills that that we support as well as many of the others, but, obviously, time is short. It's been a long afternoon. Thank you for leaving me at 4:59 to get my comments in. Appreciate SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - it.
Questions from the committee. Thank you for your testimony. Mike, you all.
SPEAKER3 - Okay. Can you hear me alright?
SPEAKER2 - We sure can.
MIKE EWALL - ENERGY JUSTICE NETWORK - HB 820 - Excellent. So my name is Mike Ewall. I'm the founder and executive director of a National called Energy14532 Justice Network. I've been working with folks in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on waste incineration and then filling issues. Massachusetts relies very heavily on14543 trash incineration for its waste management, which is a whole14547 other matter that's quite problematic. But on the relevance of health bill 820, incinerator rash is being carted around in trucks. two landfills like the one in Saugus, which is sitting on an online landfill and a marsh or other ones like in Millbury and other ones like I think, I don't even know if it's still open, but Bondi is out in near Springfield.
hese are in communities where this ash is going to be more dangerous in a landfill to the groundwater than just normal trash wood, and it can blow off of the landfills. And just like it blows off the landfills, which residents have documented in sagas, it can blow off of trucks if they're not covered. What makes incinerator rash so dangerous that it can blow off of trucks or any other thing that's carrying it is that it's much more toxic because of the burning process that took place. So you have toxic chemicals that weren't already in the waste, now in the waste. and those that were already, they are more available because they're small particles, and they can blow away more easily. Claims that incinerator ashes entered are false.
They come from a wild extrapolation from EPA's test14618 that tests just whether it's legally hazardous or not. And since that test was designed with certain tricks they do with pH with the ash to come up nonhazardous that does not mean it's non14631 toxic. EPA and we've met with them about this in the past year has admitted to us that they're testing for whether ash is hazardous is only based on what leeches out in and theoretically, into groundwater over certain conditions. It's not based on what can blow off of landfills or trucks and be inhaled or ingested by residents. And so that toxicity is not being considered, and it is a serious one because of all the chemicals that are now available in that ash. So if fully support 820 and this passage, to make sure that as ash is carted around this date is not blowing into communities and harming anyone's health. Thank you so much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you. Questions from the committee. Okay. Thank you for your testimony. Elliot Smith.
Mr. Smith?
Hey, Carmen Martinez.
miss Martinez.
Okay,
1 person sign up to test on Senate Bill 522, Vincent Lawrence Dixon.
SPEAKER4 - And good evening.
SPEAKER2 - Good evening, sir.
SPEAKER4 - Should find out online earlier, been out of here earlier.
SPEAKER2 - Somebody has to be last. every time.
SPEAKER4 - We we may have to call you the Rebecca allow of the delay.
VINCENT LAWRENCE DIXON - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 522 - My name is Vincent Lawrence Dixon, 60 Lake Street, Unit Inn Winchester, Mass zero 1890. Somehow the record on the bill should show that address because it got left off. I'm appearing to support14729 a proposed piece of legislation authored by myself based on recent14733 discoveries regarding recycling issues and a particular approach that is known in Germany and has been to some extent copied elsewhere called the German green dot waste reduction standards. Having had a three credit course this afternoon, a mini course. This is actually a precondition that could reduce some of these problems. Within the day, I will follow-up on this testimony with some additional reference material.
Recycling has various aspects of complexity that interest act as we in Massachusetts and more broadly across sedation, analyze, and approach various environmental matters. Recycling itself is not by itself, likely the goal, but rather our ultimate goals must include waste reduction, demand side reduction, not just reprocessing and disposal of materials. While respecting the needs of the millions of individual smaller businesses and individual entrepreneurs, I have been an m one myself as a tour guide an historian. We need to, in the terms of a popular and appropriate word of our time, hybridize our approaches. The German Green Dot program focuses on waste reduction by encouraging manufacturers to design packaging that is more efficient and less in amount.
Less is more, a valuable description of the set of ideals. This is a program that has been in effect for at least about 15 or more years. After all, we want to have safely an unbroken delivery of goods, but not unnecessarily be contributors to14822 the waste stream, the processing of recyclable material can be significantly improved. The German Green Dot program14828 rewards corporate participation in important packaging standards by allowing companies to display a recognizable green dot on their packaging. A 21 member of Massachusetts Climate Action Advisory Council is established by this legislation to enable the development of appropriate standards and incentives for corporations, businesses, services, and other groups and individuals and municipalities. As I have been careful to do in the writing of legislation, the text of S.522 is quite straightforward.
And should help further defining the appropriate actions that can help further improve our environment. I think that we can just the German Green Dot program copy it and adapt it to our needs, reflecting the experience of as much as 15 to 20 years as a base, adapting the years of experience they have had and implementing such knowledge. I look forward14878 to appropriate intersection with your committee, your staff, and such other individuals who are interested in accomplishing these needed goals, and I think the committee would allow bringing together all these different pieces that are wandering about that really need an overall thing. I served for four years on the finance committee of my town at Winchester. And these are issues and too often they're just sort of scattered about, and I think they need to. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - --
SPEAKER2 - Thank you. That's that's time. Thank you. Questions? Okay. Thank you for your testimony and for waiting. That, my friends, is the end of my list. Is there anyone else here who would like to testify on any of the bills pending on14914 today's docket.
Last call, going once. Going twice. I assume I have unanimous consent to close this hearing. We are adjourned.
© InstaTrac 2025