Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448
(Code 1981, §12-8-31.1, enacted by Ga. L. 1990, p. 412, § 1; Ga. L. 1992, p. 3276, § 12; Ga. L. 1993, p. 399, § 8; Ga. L. 2008, p. 181, §§ 13, 19/HB 1216; Ga. L. 2011, p. 312, § 1/SB 157.)
The 2011 amendment, effective July 1, 2011, designated subsection (a) as paragraph (a)(1) and subparagraph (a)(2)(A); in paragraph (a)(1), in the first sentence, deleted "not later than July 1, 1993" following "management plan", and in the second sentence substituted a period for "and shall conform to the plan development procedures developed and promulgated by the"; in subparagraph (a)(2)(A), added "shall promulgate solid waste planning guidance that a city or county may use to update or amend such city's or county's solid waste plan" at the end; added subparagraph (a)(2)(B); in subsection (b), inserted "and plan updates" near the beginning; rewrote subsection (c); in subsection (d), in the introductory language, substituted "Each city and county may" for "Effective January 1, 1992, each city and county shall" in the first sentence, and in the last sentence, substituted "may include" for "shall include"; in paragraph (d)(2), deleted ", which are not exempt from subsection (c) of Code Section 12-8-21," following "at disposal facilities" and substituted "the waste reduction goals of the state" for "the 25 percent reduction goal"; in paragraph (e)(3), substituted "plan or updated plan developed consistent" for "plan developed in accordance" and deleted "by July 1, 1996" from the end; in paragraph (f)(2), substituted "Any" for "Effective September 1, 1994, any" at the beginning, substituted "to make" for "either to submit or make" and "develop and adopt" for "submit" near the middle, substituted "planning guidance" for "standards" and deleted "by 25 percent by July 1, 1996" at the end; and added subsection (h).
- For note on 1992 amendment of this Code section, see 9 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 199 (1992).
- "Planning requirements" set forth in paragraph (e)(3) of O.C.G.A. §§ 12-8-31.1,12-8-24, and regulations thereunder, insofar as they require an applicant for a permit for a biomedical waste thermal treatment facility to provide certain verifications regarding out-of-state jurisdictions generating solid waste destined for the applicant's facility, are unconstitutional as violative of the commerce clause. Environmental Waste Reductions, Inc. v. Reheis, 887 F. Supp. 1534 (N.D. Ga. 1994).
- O.C.G.A. § 12-8-24(g) did not prohibit local governments from considering factors other than environmental and land use factors in developing a Solid Waste Management Plan (SWMP), and a local government was authorized to consider any relevant factor in determining whether a proposed facility was consistent with the facility's SWMP that the facility properly considered in the SWMP itself; the Supreme Court of Georgia overruled Butts County v. Pine Ridge Recycling, Inc., 213 Ga. App. 510, 445 S.E.2d 294 (Ga. Ct. App. 1994) and held that a trial court erred in ruling that a county improperly considered factors other than environmental and land use factors in refusing to issue a verification to the Georgia Environmental Protection Division regarding an applicant's proposed landfill. Murray County v. R&J Murray, LLC, 280 Ga. 314, 627 S.E.2d 574 (2006).
Applicant for a solid waste handling facility was entitled to mandamus relief seeking to compel a city to issue written verification that a proposed solid waste handling facility did not violate any zoning or land use ordinances and that it was consistent with all solid waste management plans because: (1) the city did not comply with O.C.G.A. § 12-8-31.1(a) and (b); and (2) the city could not rely on the city's solid waste management plan to deny the written verification under O.C.G.A. § 12-8-24(g) which was consistent with the city's plan approved in 1993. McKee v. City of Geneva, 280 Ga. 411, 627 S.E.2d 555 (2006).
- Georgia trial court erred by denying injunctive relief to a county and the county's chosen waste disposal company wherein it sought to prohibit an unauthorized waste company from providing services in the county against an ordinance because the ordinance served a legitimate public purpose by establishing means reasonably necessary to achieve the purpose of the county providing a comprehensive solid waste management plan as the county was required to do under O.C.G.A. § 12-8-31.1. Advanced Disposal Servs. Middle Ga., LLC v. Deep S. Sanitation, LLC, 296 Ga. 103, 765 S.E.2d 364 (2014).
Total Results: 6
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2014-11-03
Citation: 296 Ga. 103, 765 S.E.2d 364
Snippet: quality of [Georgia’s] environment”); OCGA § 12-8-31.1 (a) and (b) (requiring counties to develop or
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2014-09-22
Snippet: quality of [Georgia’s] environment”); OCGA § 12-8-31.1 (a ) and (b) (requiring counties to develop or
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2007-11-21
Citation: 653 S.E.2d 720, 282 Ga. 740, 2007 Fulton County D. Rep. 3595, 2007 Ga. LEXIS 858
Snippet: management plans throughout Georgia localities. OCGA§ 12-8-31.1 (a). “The legislature has provided that solid
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2006-03-13
Citation: 627 S.E.2d 574, 280 Ga. 314, 2006 Fulton County D. Rep. 719, 2006 Ga. LEXIS 166
Snippet: the Court of Appeals ruled that under OCGA § 12-8-31.1 (b), a local government can only consider environmental
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2006-03-13
Citation: 627 S.E.2d 555, 280 Ga. 411
Snippet: part subject to the provisions of Code Section 12-8-31.1 . . . .” The City approved a regional SWMP in
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia | Date Filed: 2004-03-22
Citation: 594 S.E.2d 335, 277 Ga. 690, 2004 Fulton County D. Rep. 1009, 2004 Ga. LEXIS 260
Snippet: solid waste management plan as required by OCGA § 12-8-31.1, therefore the County’s attempted regulation of