Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solid Waste topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Solid‑waste review: state surcharge, glass markets and lithium battery rules raise costs and handling changes
Summary
Solid waste staff told the board that a newly instituted state surcharge of $3.50 per ton (reimbursable to municipalities) and modest tipping fee increases will raise upfront costs; recycling prices and lithium‑battery handling rules require operational adjustments.
Henniker’s transfer station revenue has exceeded projections this year, but staff warned the Select Board that state policy changes and shifting recycling markets will affect future costs.
Solid waste presenter (speaker 11) reported year‑to‑date transfer station revenue above the budgeted projection and noted that New Hampshire is raising tipping fees from $1.15 to $1.20 per ton. More consequential, the presenter said, is a new state surcharge of $3.50 per ton on material sent to landfills or incinerators; municipalities must pay the surcharge up front and (according to the presenter) can claim quarterly reimbursement from the state. He estimated the town’s worst‑case annual exposure at roughly $5,400, which would be offset when the town files for the reimbursement.
The presenter also discussed recycling markets: the town currently pays roughly $35 per ton to send clean glass to processors, but a new vendor might improve that price. Staff said crushing glass for in‑town road aggregate is limited by state rules and contamination concerns; processed glass (PGA) must meet quality standards and cannot contain battery or other contaminants.
On hazardous materials, staff flagged a new state ban on lithium‑ion batteries in curbside trash and described tightened handling: batteries should be collected separately, taped where required and stored in fireproof containers for transport. The presenter said the town found a lower‑cost batching option for mercury and other battery disposal that uses a bucket system and will reduce per‑unit costs.
Board members asked about weighing and fee enforcement; staff said drive‑on portable scales and larger floor scales had been considered but were not cost‑effective. There were no votes; staff will pursue improved glass pricing and confirm the timing and mechanics of reimbursement for the state surcharge.
Next steps: solid waste staff to meet a prospective glass vendor, confirm the reimbursement timing for the state surcharge and update the board on costs for battery handling and hazardous waste disposal.
