Waste Management of Pennsylvania, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Department of Environmental Protection
107 A.3d 273
Pa. Commw. Ct.2015Background
- Clearfield County revised its Act 101 municipal waste plan and issued an RFP seeking integrated waste disposal and recycling services; the RFP solicited "tangible financial and/or programmatic support" (cash or in-kind) to sustain county recycling programs after a funding shortfall.
- Eight facilities bid; Veolia and Wayne offered quantified financial/in-kind support and scored highest under the County’s point-based evaluation (environmental soundness = 30/100 points); several Waste Management affiliates bid but scored lower because they did not offer quantified support.
- County awarded contracts to Veolia and Wayne; the Department of Environmental Protection approved the County’s Plan Revision under its guidelines and Act 101 requirements.
- Waste Management, as disappointed bidders, appealed to the Environmental Hearing Board and moved for summary judgment arguing the County’s solicitation and conditioning of facility selection on payments violated Act 101 and was preempted (effectively a prohibited local recycling fee); the Board denied summary judgment.
- Commonwealth Court granted interlocutory appeal and affirmed the Board: it held Act 101 preempts mandatory local recycling fees but does not as a matter of law prohibit a county from soliciting voluntary financial or programmatic support (including private sources) or from considering avoided costs or in‑kind services in evaluating bids; factual issues of voluntariness and impact on Act 101 goals remain for later proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a county violates Act 101 by requesting money/services from disposal facilities as part of an RFP | Waste Management: the request is an unauthorized means to raise revenue and is functionally a prohibited local recycling fee; Act 101 provides the exclusive funding scheme | County/DEP: request is voluntary, furthers Act 101 goals, and counties may consider private support/avoided costs; DEP approved as within guidelines | Court: Denied summary judgment — Act 101 preempts mandatory local recycling fees but does not categorically bar solicitation of voluntary support; factual inquiry remains |
| Whether conditioning facility selection on ‘‘tangible financial/programmatic support’’ is preempted or coercive | Waste Management: conditioning effectively coerces payments and circumvents precedent forbidding local fees | County: scoring was discretionary; support was only one component (30/100); facilities could win on other factors; not mandatory | Court: Not decided as a legal bar at summary judgment stage; legitimacy depends on factual record about voluntariness and effect on competition |
| Whether Act 101 restricts local financial assistance to public sources only | Waste Management: Act 101 contemplates public funding (Recycling Fund/grants) and not private-derived support | County/DEP: Act 101 expressly contemplates use of private enterprise; ‘‘avoided costs’’ and in‑kind services fit within plan funding considerations | Court: Act 101 does not limit local assistance to public sources; private support and avoided costs are contemplated and distinguishable from unauthorized local fees |
| Whether precedent (Northumberland/Lehigh/Monroe) requires revisiting because of Recycling Fund limits | Waste Management: stare decisis controls; prior holdings preclude local mechanisms raising revenue for recycling | DEP/County: funding limits justify allowing voluntary private assistance; prior cases addressed mandatory fees, not voluntary requests | Court: Declined to overturn precedent; distinguished mandatory fees from voluntary solicitation and left open factual inquiry; prior case law remains controlling re: unauthorized fees |
Key Cases Cited
- Pennsylvania Indep. Waste Haulers Assoc. v. Cnty. of Northumberland, 885 A.2d 1106 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (local administrative fees to fund recycling preempted)
- IESI PA Bethlehem Landfill Corp. v. Cnty. of Lehigh, 887 A.2d 1289 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (same: unauthorized county recycling fee preempted)
- Pa. Waste Indus. Assoc. v. Monroe Cnty. Mun. Waste Mgmt. Auth., 80 A.3d 546 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (analyzed preemption types; Act 101 preempts unauthorized local recycling fees but anticipates some local financial assistance)
- City of Reading v. Iezzi, 78 A.3d 1257 (Pa. Cmwlth.) (criticized an unauthorized local fee that covered all recycling costs as contrary to Act 101)