Pennsylvania House Bill HB2393

Pennsylvania 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 6/7/24
• Refer: 6/7/24
• Refer: 10/9/24
• Report Pass: 10/21/24
• Engrossed: 10/21/24
• Refer: 10/24/24

Caption

In general provisions, further providing for definitions and for powers and duties of department; in applications and permits, further providing for permits and licenses required, transition scheme and reporting requirements and providing for food processing residuals; and imposing penalties.

Impact

The legislation empowers the Department of Agriculture to oversee the storage and application of food processing residuals, which is intended to enhance environmental protection while enabling beneficial use of agricultural by-products. By implementing a structured framework for managing residuals, the bill is expected to boost agricultural efficiency and compliance with state regulations. Furthermore, it centralizes authority over these operations at the state level, minimizing local regulations that might complicate the regulatory landscape for food processing enterprises.

Summary

House Bill 2393 aims to amend the Solid Waste Management Act, focusing specifically on the storage and application of food processing residuals. The bill introduces definitions related to animal processing waste and vegetative processing waste, thereby clarifying the types of materials involved within the food processing sector. Additionally, it outlines the powers and responsibilities of the Department of Agriculture and the State Conservation Commission regarding the management of these residuals, establishing requirements for a land application system that incorporates best management practices.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 2393 appears to be generally favorable among proponents who view it as a necessary update to existing legislation that streamlines processes for food processors and promotes environmental stewardship. However, concerns have been raised regarding local governance, as critics argue that centralizing regulations could limit local authorities’ ability to manage waste in a way that best suits community needs and circumstances. This debate highlights a central tension between state and local regulatory frameworks.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the degree of state control over local waste management practices and the potential difficulty for smaller operators to comply with new regulations. Critics express concern that these regulations might favor larger agricultural operations that can more easily meet the requirements, potentially disadvantaging smaller farms. Additionally, discussions have emerged about the adequacy of penalties for noncompliance and the broad authority granted to the state regarding the management of food processing residuals, raising questions about the protection of community interests and the efficacy of oversight.