Environmental protection: hazardous waste; environmental protection; landfills; disposal fees; increase, and limit certain disposal wells and TENORM disposal. Amends secs. 11102, 11103, 11104, 11108, 11109, 11110, 11125, 11132, 11514b, 11525a, 62501 & 62509 of 1994 PA 451 (MCL 324.11102 et seq.); adds secs. 11122, 62508b & 62509d & repeals secs. 11111 & 11112 of 1994 PA 451 (MCL 324.11111 & 324.11112).
SB 246 would substantially revise Michigan’s hazardous waste and landfill regulation framework under Part 111 of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, and related provisions governing solid waste landfills and mineral wells. The bill increases hazardous waste disposal fees and TENORM disposal fees beginning in 2026, adds inflation indexing beginning in 2031, and redirects fee revenue into a revised set of funds that support cleanup, municipal grants, host community grants, and program administration. It also expands reporting, certification, and monitoring requirements for landfill operators and generators, including more detailed fee exemption documentation and annual reporting on hazardous waste, TENORM, and landfill capacity.
The bill also creates a new state hazardous and LARM waste management planning process that must be updated every five years and include siting criteria, capacity projections, waste-stream analysis, and recommendations to reduce landfilling in favor of source reduction, recycling, and treatment. It imposes a temporary moratorium on new multisource commercial hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facilities, and restricts expansions of existing facilities unless they fit within narrow exceptions. In addition, it adds location-based limits on new or expanded hazardous waste facilities, including restrictions tied to nearby facilities, population density, poverty, and environmental justice screening scores.
For radioactive and technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive material, the bill tightens rules for disposal in landfills and type II landfills, including concentration limits, sampling and disclosure requirements, annual reporting, deeper placement requirements, and monitoring obligations. It also prohibits new or converted multisource commercial hazardous waste disposal wells and new or converted class IV wells, while allowing limited maintenance and certain risk-reducing modifications subject to department approval and public comment. The bill further requires operators of class I and class III wells, and test wells, to maintain financial responsibility through bonds, cash accounts, or certificates of deposit, along with pollution insurance for certain class I wells.
The overall sentiment reflected in the voting history appears mixed but generally supportive among a majority of senators, with the bill reported favorably from committee and then passing the Senate on third reading by a narrow margin. The close floor vote suggests significant concern remained, even though the bill advanced. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record does not show detailed debate, but the structure of the bill indicates a strong regulatory and environmental-protection approach that likely appealed to supporters concerned about waste disposal, groundwater protection, and environmental justice.
The main points of contention are likely the higher fees, the moratorium on new commercial hazardous waste facilities, the limits on disposal wells, and the siting restrictions that could constrain industrial waste management capacity. Opponents may view these provisions as burdensome to industry, potentially limiting disposal options and increasing costs for generators and landfill operators. Supporters, by contrast, appear to favor stronger oversight, better funding for cleanup and local impacts, and tighter controls on hazardous waste, TENORM, and disposal wells near vulnerable communities.
The bill would amend multiple sections of Part 111 and Part 115 of NREPA and related mineral well provisions in Part 625, while repealing sections 11111 and 11112. It raises and restructures hazardous waste and TENORM fees, creates new grant funds and revenue allocations, imposes new licensing, reporting, and monitoring requirements, and adds a five-year hazardous and LARM waste planning mandate. It also restricts new or expanded hazardous waste facilities and disposal wells, and adds financial assurance requirements for certain wells and test wells, affecting landfill operators, hazardous waste generators, municipal governments, and well operators statewide.
The bill appears to have had enough support to move through committee and pass the Senate, but the final 19-15 vote indicates substantial division. The favorable committee report suggests institutional support among some legislators, while the close floor vote points to meaningful concern about the bill’s regulatory reach and economic effects. Overall, the sentiment seems cautiously supportive among proponents of stronger environmental controls, but contested among members worried about costs, siting limits, and reduced disposal capacity.
The most notable contention centers on the bill’s tighter controls on hazardous waste infrastructure: the moratorium on new multisource commercial hazardous waste facilities, the cap on expansion capacity, and the location-based restrictions tied to nearby facilities and environmental justice metrics. Industry and waste-management stakeholders are likely to object to higher fees, stricter licensing, and the prohibition on new disposal wells and class IV wells, while environmental and community advocates are likely to support those provisions as necessary to protect groundwater, reduce pollution burdens, and steer waste management toward reduction and treatment rather than landfilling.