[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6340037,"mediaKeyId","2260284-dd73c1024ba2a4da6d9f1217ff489440","parentId",2260284,"title","Lawmakers refine landfill rules: net-benefit review, third-party assessments and leachate plans considered","audioSeconds",462,"startMs",268000,"endMs",730000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2260284-dd73c1024ba2a4da6d9f1217ff489440&start=268&end=730","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2260284-dd73c1024ba2a4da6d9f1217ff489440/thumbnail_268000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6340037/New-Hampshire/Lawmakers-refine-landfill-rules-net-benefit-review-third-party-assessments-and-leachate-plans-considered","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6340037-3382c0bb7460c7ec247137c09215c8cc/orig.mp4?Expires=1771138160&Signature=bG0GTzpQ72OALbZI~6H8P~tVdsB41sw1AhQm5gwQZPoRTGwdw03wC8u9mn34oMEB~vLQEeok94cPD~ciFCuPt~bPpQDcLumWoNplszCQLhsyc9RFOF0n3x~epnXxJUFh66qpZAxsCigQRkoxE8Jqk7zrm~5trCSFq2UFsCVIdLd7IDHgXSae-Vp3Hmi52BokXVX06mB95Khxe0m88-rYPcUJTGck-ekeBI5jRpmbzDUUwKbip8ICfO75Xezx5~tpe2Tk7Qawe4sB0kP5x~QqAzZcj8HbX1DSj-GkkQtfXT3L8dxGlQnjBEISmSoczkS-heFA3ValGUHzxv~YZ5N70g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","NH House of Representatives Committee","date","2025-02-11T00:00:00Z","article","Representative- and agency-led discussions in the House Environment & Agriculture Committee’s Solid Waste Subcommittee this week focused on tightening how New Hampshire reviews proposed new landfills and on strengthening operators’ leachate-management plans.

A trio of bills under consideration would: (1) create an initial screening step for landfill permits that requires DES to determine whether a \"net public benefit\" exists before a full technical review; (2) allow DES to accept and evaluate pending applications for completeness during a moratorium without triggering automatic approval; and (3) require more-detailed leachate-management plans and contract disclosures from applicants.

DES Waste Division Director Mike Wimsatt advised the subcommittee multiple times during the session. On the two-stage review he told members that \"if changes in policy through law or administrative rule were made during that time, it would be necessary for the landfill applicant, permit applicant to amend the application.\" Wimsatt said the department commonly consults with other agencies and recommended language allowing DES to consult the Departments of Transportation, Business and Economic Affairs, and Natural and Cultural Resources when evaluating traffic, economic and tourism impacts associated with a proposed site.

Representative Peter Germana led drafting of the amendment to HB215 (landfill net-benefit review). The amendment would require an independent third-party assessment paid for by the applicant and requested by the host community (or other abutting municipalities). Applicants must submit at least three independent contractor candidates; DES would vet qualifications and, if the parties cannot agree, the commissioner would pick a contractor from the list after a 60-day window. The proposed bill text defines \"net public benefit\" as present when \"potential benefits for a proposed project are determined to be greater than the potential harms\" and lists harms (health, property-value, tourism and wildlife impacts) and benefits (capacity need, local economic benefits and infrastructure improvements) to guide the evaluation.

Subcommittee members debated whether that initial determination should be appealable and heard DES advise the appeals already exist through the state’s Waste Management Council for department decisions. Representative Germana said the amendment is intended to give DES an early stage to filter out proposals that would not produce a net benefit before investing in full technical review.

On HB171 (a temporary moratorium on new landfill permits), members discussed language changes recommended by Director Wimsatt to allow DES to receive applications and evaluate them for completeness during the moratorium but not to proceed to a substantive review that would trigger statutory timelines or automatic approvals. Wimsatt told the panel the \"notwithstanding\" language is necessary because current RSA provisions can cause an application that is not acted on within a set period to be deemed automatically approved; the amendment would create an exception for the moratorium period.

On HB566 (leachate management), Representative Germana presented amended language that would require applicants to include a detailed long-term leachate-management plan in permit filings: how leachate is collected, any on-site treatment, storage, transportation off-site, destination/treatment facility and a projected frequency of transports, plus contingency plans and contract details for leachate handling. Members pressed whether the bill should require evidence of multiple disposal outlets; DES staff and an operator from a turnkey facility said existing rules already require at least two contracted outlets, and in practice operators identify multiple contingencies. The amendment’s author said the bill moves some contract-related items into the required plan rather than trying to force long-term contractual terms into statute.

What the committee did
- Subcommittee members indicated consensus to have sponsors send drafted language to OLS for HB215 and HB171 and to forward amended versions to the full committee’s executive session once OLS restores any omitted statutory sections.
- On HB566 the subcommittee asked sponsors to continue refinement; the sponsor planned to circulate updated language to colleagues and to the chair before executive session.

Why it matters
New Hampshire law requires the state to ensure adequate solid-waste capacity while also protecting public health and natural resources. These bills aim to add earlier-stage screening and outside expertise so DES and host communities can evaluate where benefits outweigh harms — and to tighten permitting details (for example, leachate plans) so reviewers and the public have clearer information earlier in the process.

What remains unresolved
Members asked whether the first-stage net-benefit decision should explicitly reference an appeal route; DES said department decisions are appealable to the state Waste Management Council and that the written denial/approval letters should reference appeal rights. Sponsors and staff also flagged drafting fixes (some omitted sections by OLS) and asked OLS to reinsert original statutory material before the bill is scheduled for executive session.

Next steps
Sponsors said they will work with the director and OLS to finalize amendments and bring the bills to the committee’s executive session. The subcommittee did not adopt final statutory text; members asked that OLS restore omitted sections and that sponsors circulate the redraft to members in advance of the executive session.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Environment and Agriculture (02/11/2025)","oneSentenceSummary","Representative- and agency-led discussions in the House Environment & Agriculture Committee’s Solid Waste Subcommittee this week focused on tightening how New Hampshire reviews proposed new landfills and on strengthening operators’ leachate-management plans.","taxTitle","Environment and Agriculture, House of Representatives, Committees\t, Legislative, New Hampshire","taxId",17747,"location","New Hampshire","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6340032,"House panel advances several homestead food bills: QR-code labeling, weekly ‘occasional’ sales, and equipment clarifications",120,1620000,1740000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2260284-dd73c1024ba2a4da6d9f1217ff489440&start=1620&end=1740","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2260284-dd73c1024ba2a4da6d9f1217ff489440/thumbnail_1620000.jpg","/articles/6340032/New-Hampshire/House-panel-advances-several-homestead-food-bills-QR-code-labeling-weekly-occasional-sales-and-equipment-clarifications","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6340032-ce574e908d538e001b577ffe4a96f285/orig.mp4?Expires=1771138160&Signature=JOscZ9SK92UWr~RsKXPkOmYu-AQ8KaT6j~1srfZtnnPwCp8aNLRr3yviT2vILPUrSVpguCYNsLPQHeoqIsdyAvivwnuR3wUq5j5TdQ0eXnGqfvqznjmgGeLp26cL7GJS6k0UdCG~ZMLivoeYLFVB-3TOrwub2Svx6oUVkT0nCzuVHShS1ym2vijMC7ayH950EEnPTH4MI~s70w6wOi6wjFOHR9AjGP7~U1-00fCaOdAMWjjU41l2wZOhaIUjk3cYlq-VLRZxSjeiadbXP7b43xTgVJDGb6BM7KHZ1tA6SwASAaqf0u9Uw1xZew7F44v4gjV5i2UWlfuAKUrKB1KWhw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House members in the Environment & Agriculture Committee spent substantial time this week on multiple bills that would change how New Hampshire defines and regulates home-based food production, labeling and occasional on-site sales.

The committee heard testimony, received technical input from the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Food Protection Section, and in several cases voted to advance bills to the committee’s executive session.

What the bills would do
- HB279 (study): Establish a committee to review how recipes and processing methods are approved for homestead foods, after concerns that some recipe or process modifications (for example, adding herbs to a tested jelly recipe) need clearer administrative treatment. Sponsor Peter Bixby said the study grew from interim meetings between stakeholders and Food Protection staff.
- HB304 (labeling): Allow homestead producers selling directly from their home or on their farm stand to post a physical ingredient card at point of sale and use a persistent QR code or URL on packaged products that links to the up-to-date ingredient list instead of printing a new label for every small seasonal change. DHHS said the bill presents no fiscal or food-safety risk; producers argued the change would eliminate large amounts of waste and save time for micro-producers. Addie Leader Zavos, a Dunbarton baker, told the committee: \"It would save me personally 3 hours a week.\" The bill passed out of committee on an OTP (ought to pass) motion and the vote was recorded as unanimous (13–0) in committee.
- HB371 (occasional food service): Narrowly changes the statutory definition so that a vendor operating \"occasionally\" may serve four days in a 28-day period (rather than four days in a 30-day period), a small change sponsors say allows clearer weekly scheduling and better predictability for customers. DHHS indicated no fiscal or safety impact; the committee approved the bill (13–0) for executive session.
- HB150 (commercial equipment): Clarifies that homestead operations may use commercial kitchen equipment provided the equipment can be washed, rinsed and — per DHHS’s recommendation — sanitized in the processing area. DHHS suggested adding the word \"sanitized\" to the bill text; committee members agreed that sanitizing is a critical step and the sponsor indicated willingness to adopt that fix.
- HB307 (food production area): Proposes replacing the word \"kitchen\" with \"food production area\" in the homestead-food definition so a properly equipped, sanitary room in a primary residence could be used for production even if it is not a conventional kitchen. DHHS asked for clearer statutory linkage to the department’s sanitary requirements — their staff worried that removing the word \"kitchen\" could unintentionally allow spaces not designed for food production (unfinished garages, non-cleanable floors) unless the statute or rules were explicit. Sponsors said they wanted flexibility for producers who set up certified sinks, cleanable walls and floors, or separate decorating rooms that are functionally equivalent to a kitchen.

Votes and committee actions
- HB279 (study) — committee recorded as \"autopass\"; committee moved it forward at the executive session previously scheduled (13–0 recorded on the committee floor).
- HB304 (labeling) — committee voted OTPA; clerk recorded a 13–0 vote in favor; committee placed the bill on the consent calendar.
- HB371 (occasional service) — committee voted OTPA; recorded 13–0; also placed on consent.
- HB150 (commercial equipment) — DHHS suggested a minor, clarifying amendment to add \"sanitized\" to washing/rinsing language; sponsors signaled they would accept that technical edit; bill not finalized in committee this session.
- HB307 (food production area) — committee discussion exposed differing drafting approaches; sponsors and DHHS agreed to continue work and to address rule linkages before executive session.

Why this matters
Micro- and small-scale food producers are an important part of New Hampshire’s local food economy; committee members and producers described the bills as attempts to reduce paperwork and waste (for seasonal labeling), modernize language to reflect common practices (QR codes and web links), and offer producers straightforward, predictable rules for occasional sales and production locations. DHHS repeatedly emphasized public-health safeguards and recommended small clarifying edits — for example, explicitly requiring sanitization rather than only washing and rinsing.

Quotes from the hearing
- Addie Leader Zavos (homestead producer): \"It would save me personally 3 hours a week.\" (on QR-code labeling benefits)
- Erica Davis (DHHS, Food Protection): DHHS has \"no fiscal impact\" concern and recommended adding sanitization language to equipment-use bill.

Next steps
Sponsors will: (a) accept the DHHS wording suggestion to add \"sanitized\" to HB150; (b) continue refining HB307 language so statutory text explicitly ties a non-kitchen production room to the department’s sanitary rules; and (c) move the labeling and occasional-sales bills through executive session (the committee placed labeling and occasional-sales bills on the consent calendar after unanimous committee votes). The study committee (HB279) will compile findings on recipe/process approval and may inform future statutory or rule changes.","House members in the Environment & Agriculture Committee spent substantial time this week on multiple bills that would change how New Hampshire defines and regulates home-based food production, labeling and occasional on-site sales.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Lawmakers refine landfill rules: net-benefit review, third-party assessments and leachate plans considered

House panel advances several homestead food bills: QR-code labeling, weekly ‘occasional’ sales, and equipment clarifications