HB 1622 New Hampshire House · 2026 Regular Session

requiring the state to develop additional solid waste disposal capacity.

This bill requires New Hampshire's Department of Environmental Services (DES) to inventory all operating and closed landfills (including those needing remediation) and assess available acreage for expansion while considering current regulations like setbacks from water bodies and homes. It prohibits DES from accepting new landfill applications in undeveloped "greenfield" areas unless applicants prove existing landfills cannot be expanded. The state must fund this through its existing Solid Waste Management Fund, with estimated annual costs of $4.2 million starting in fiscal year 2027 for staff and consultant work. The bill directly affects DES and future landfill developers seeking permits, mandating a comprehensive review before new disposal sites can be approved.
Bill status passed 3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Dec 2025
Committee Review
Apr 2026
House Passage
Mar 2026
Senate Passage
Governor
Introduced Dec 10, 2025 Last action May 5, 2026
Maddy AI version diff · 1 comparison

What changed between versions

Introduced As Amended by the House · 8 edits
MODERATE
The House amendment fundamentally restructured the bill from a mandatory landfill inventory with a hard ban on greenfield sites into a preference-based system that prioritizes expanding existing landfills and brownfield development. It added a legal standard (capacity shortfall in at least half of permit years) for when DES must find a project satisfies the state's capacity need, and delayed greenfield operations until an actual shortfall year arrives. The fiscal impact dropped from over $4 million per year to zero because the expensive consultant-driven site investigation requirement was replaced with a directive to use existing data.
SCOPE

The bill changed from requiring DES to conduct a comprehensive new inventory of all landfills (including fieldwork and remediation assessments) to directing DES to compile a list using existing data and determine suitability based on setback regulations. The expensive multi-year consultant program was eliminated.

The original bill's hard prohibition on accepting greenfield applications (unless all cataloged sites were unsuitable) was replaced with a three-tier preference system: first preference for expansions of existing landfills, second preference for brownfield sites, and greenfield applications processed only after the developer explains their site choice relative to the department's list.

REQUIREMENT

A new legal standard was added: for both expansions and new greenfield landfills, DES 'shall find' the project satisfies the state's capacity need if the state will face a capacity shortfall in at least one-half of the years covered by the permit. This creates a mandatory finding rather than discretionary review.

Greenfield landfills are now subject to a delay provision: they cannot begin accepting waste until the first year in which a capacity shortfall is actually expected to exist, even if the permit is granted earlier.

DES is now required to include potential future expansion capacity for currently operating landfills in its biennial solid waste reports, in addition to reporting existing capacity.

DEFINITION

A Statement of Purpose was added establishing three policy findings: that new capacity should come from expanding existing permitted landfills rather than greenfield sites, that existing sites have already been studied and found suitable, and that DES has decades of familiarity with conditions at those sites.

FISCAL

The fiscal impact changed from an estimated $4.2 million per year in expenditures (plus ~$28 million in consultant costs over seven years) funded by the Solid Waste Management Fund, to 'no fiscal impact on state, county and local expenditures or revenue.'

TECHNICAL

The bill title changed from 'requiring the state to develop additional solid waste disposal capacity' to 'relative to the state's solid waste disposal capacity,' reflecting the shift from a mandatory directive to a more flexible preference framework.

Floor votes

How they voted

No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history

Actions timeline

Total actions
20
Key actions
8
Committee
10
Amendments
1
Apr 30, 2026
Committee
Committee Report: Referred to Interim Study, 05/07/2026; Vote 4-1; CC; SC 17
upper
Mar 30, 2026
Introduced
Introduced 03/26/2026 and Referred to Energy and Natural Resources; SJ 7
upper
Mar 26, 2026
Lower · Passed
Ought to Pass: MA VV 03/26/2026 HJ 9 P. 3
lower
Mar 18, 2026
Lower · Passed
Committee Report: Ought to Pass 03/17/2026 (Vote 25-0; CC)
lower
Feb 19, 2026
Committee
Referred to Finance 02/19/2026 HJ 5 P. 39
lower
Feb 19, 2026
Lower · Passed
Ought to Pass with Amendment 2026-0629h: MA VV 02/19/2026 HJ 5 P. 18
lower
Feb 19, 2026
Introduced
Amendment # 2026-0629h: AA VV 02/19/2026 HJ 5 P. 17
lower
Feb 11, 2026
Lower · Passed
Committee Report: Ought to Pass with Amendment # 2026-0629h (NT) 02/10/2026 (Vote 13-1; CC) HC 7 P. 12
lower
Feb 4, 2026
Lower · Passed
Full Committee Work Session: 02/10/2026 10:00 am GP 153
lower
Jan 27, 2026
Lower · Passed
Full Committee Work Session: 02/03/2026 09:15 am GP 153
lower
Jan 21, 2026
Lower · Passed
Subcommittee Work Session: 01/27/2026 09:00 am GP 153
lower
Jan 21, 2026
Lower · Passed
Full Committee Work Session: 01/27/2026 10:00 am GP 153
lower
Dec 10, 2025
Introduced
Introduced 01/07/2026 and referred to Environment and Agriculture HJ 1 P. 28
lower
0 primary · 5 co-sponsors

Sponsors

No sponsor information available.