Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Concerned about whether the nation has sufficient capacity for the safe disposal of solid waste, the Ranking Minority Member, Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, asked us to examine (1) how the states are addressing solid waste issues, including what efforts state and local governments are making to pay for higher waste management costs and to develop additional solid waste management capacity amid growing opposition to placing waste facilities in local communities, and (2) where the states see the need for a federal role in addressing these issues. We reviewed studies and surveys of states’ solid waste management conducted by national solid waste organizations and editors of trade publications, such as Biocycle and the Solid Waste Report, to obtain an overview of the states’ rates of generating solid waste, disposal methods, recycling programs, goals and laws, and trends and potential problems with solid waste management. Some states’ plans also address where or how to locate new waste management facilities. State and Local Governments Have Developed Plans to Address Concerns About Solid Waste

As of December 1994, a total of 46 states had either developed plans or were in the process of developing plans for managing solid waste. Alternative Funding Mechanisms Are Needed to Pay Rising Costs of Waste Management

Nationwide, a majority of states continue to rely on general revenue funds to finance the majority of their solid waste management planning and programs. States See a Federal Role in Waste Reduction, Recycling, and Planning for Capacity

Because the states’ progress has been slow towards meeting goals and objectives for source reduction and recycling and towards ensuring that waste disposal capacity is sufficient, state and industry officials believe the federal government has a role in (1) developing current national goals for source reduction, (2) setting standards for packaging, (3) setting standards for products containing material recovered from recycled goods, and (4) promoting the development of markets for recyclable materials. Industry experts also support these views. EPA does not believe that it should take the lead in promoting source reduction or recycling because it views solid waste management, for both municipal and industrial nonhazardous wastes, as primarily a state responsibility. EPA projected in 1994 that recycling rates of between 25 and 35 percent may be achievable in 2000. To achieve the recycling rates that EPA projects, however, 50 percent or more of some wastes may have to be recovered. This lack of data makes it difficult to determine the impact of legislative action that places restrictions on interstate waste shipments.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed state and federal efforts to manage municipal, commercial, and industrial solid waste, focusing on: (1) how states are addressing the rising costs of solid waste management and public opposition to solid waste facilities; and (2) the federal role in addressing solid waste management issues.

What GAO Found

GAO found that: (1) as of December 1994, 46 states had developed or were developing solid waste management plans to address diminishing disposal capacity, the rising costs of solid waste management, and public opposition to new disposal sites in local communities; (2) the eight state plans reviewed propose options for managing solid waste and alternative financing mechanisms to support local recycling programs and landfill closings; (3) states have used special fees and taxes to finance 74 percent of their solid waste programs; (4) although local opposition to solid waste management facilities has delayed site selection and construction, two of the eight plans contain procedures for selecting waste management sites; (5) some state officials and industry experts believe that the federal government should assist in developing national source reduction goals, setting packaging and recovered material standards, developing markets for recyclable materials, and ensuring sufficient disposal capacity; (6) although the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) supports state source reduction and recycling efforts, it does not plan to enforce its 1992 municipal solid waste agenda or believe that it should lead recycling or source reduction activities; (7) although EPA projects that recycling rates of 25 to 35 percent may be achieved by the year 2000, additional advances may have to be made to achieve these rates; and (8) although legislation has been proposed authorizing states to restrict the interstate and intrastate shipment of solid waste, sufficient data do not exist to determine the impact of this authority on the solid waste management industry.