Environment and Natural Resources Committee advances work sessions: plastic bag measures kept, airport safety and mining bills tabled or rejected, PFAS vehicle‑

The Environment and Natural Resources Committee of the Maine Legislature met for a series of work sessions that covered plastic bag legislation, an airport safety amendment, multiple mining proposals, an exemption for certain equipment from PFAS product notification requirements, and a study request on single‑use propane canisters.

Committee actions were mixed: the panel voted to recommend "ought not to pass" on several plastic bag bills that sought to change the 5¢ bag fee or repeal the ban; it tabled an airport/Endangered Species Act amendment after extended discussion about aviation safety; it voted "ought not to pass" on a broad metallic‑mineral mining bill and tabled a related pegmatite bill; it considered but recorded a roll call on a PFAS exemption for off‑road equipment; and it declined to pursue a narrowly drafted bill on single‑use propane canisters because the department was already studying stewardship options.

Why it matters: the bills affect everyday consumer costs (bag fees), municipal and retail operations, airport safety practices, how the state regulates mining and mineral exploration, and how businesses manage PFAS‑containing components and hard‑to‑recycle propane canisters. Several items also raise questions about how Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) rulemaking, federal aviation guidance, and other state agencies intersect with legislative changes.

Plastic bag bills (LD 56, LD 69, LD 1122) Dan Tartikoff, the committee analyst from the Office of Policy and Legislative Analysis (OPLA), summarized three related bills that had been heard together because they all amend Maine’s plastic bag law enacted in 2019 (LD 1532) and codified at 38 M.R.S.A. §1611. LD 56 would remove the 5¢ minimum fee for paper or qualifying reusable plastic bags; LD 69 would repeal the plastic bag restrictions entirely; and LD 1122 would adjust definitions and raise the fee from 5¢ to 10¢ while clarifying that certain thicker reusable plastic bags are covered.

Committee members debated consumer incentives, retailer concerns and public‑health testimony about reusable bags. Representative Bill Bridal moved that LD 56 be given an "ought not to pass" recommendation; Representative Vicky Dudera seconded. The roll call recorded seven members voting in favor of the motion and five opposed, with one member absent (7 yes, 5 no, 1 absent). The motion carried; recorded votes are shown below in the "Votes at a glance" section.

For LD 69, which would repeal the ban, Representative Art Bell moved "ought not to pass," seconded by Representative Osher. After discussion that included remarks about litter reduction and marine impacts, the motion received eight affirmative votes, three negative votes, and two absences (8 yes, 3 no, 2 absent) and carried.

LD 1122, which would increase the bag fee to 10¢ and clarify the law’s reach (including bags provided…