|
Hydropress Environmental Service, Inc., v. Twp. of Upper Mt. Bethel, 836 A.2d 912 (Pa. Nov. 25, 2003):
In a plurality opinion, three Justices of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court concluded that although the Solid Waste Management Act (SWMA) does not preempt municipalities from regulating the land application of waste material such as biosolids, septage or sewage, however, a municipality lacks the power to enact certain provisions that charge road users for road improvements and required those that beneficially use waste to obtain a permit.
The Justices agreeing with the lead opinion concluded that the SWMA contained no express preemptive mandate from the legislature, and declared that the language used in the statute is of “intergovernmental coordination and cooperation, not of preemption.” Therefore, the Justices’ focus shifted from preemption to whether the township had the authority to enact the specific regulations. In the context of this issue, six Justices believed that a municipality exceeded the general police authority reserved to Townships of the Second Class.
It is important to note that three Justices dissented from the lead opinion on the preemption issue. These Justices believed that the SWMA did in fact preempt any local regulation of the land application of waste materials.
DISCLAIMER:
This site is designed to provide summary review of selected Pennsylvania and Federal Court decisions related to land use and land use controls. The information contained herein, although produced by professionals, is not intended to render any legal service. Nor should the materials herein be utilized as a substitute for professional services. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the service of an attorney or other professional should be sought. DCED makes no representations, warranties or guarantees as to the accuracy, completeness or suitability of the information provided herein.
Back to Top |
