Will there be enough trash to operate?

By Joe Kelly

The rocky, contentious rollout of a new regional trash authority to serve Norfolk and other Northwest Connecticut towns has become even rockier and more contentious. Now there are worries that the new entity—known as the Northwest Resource Recovery Authority (NRRA)—may not have enough volume to be viable. As a result, who ultimately manages Norfolk’s trash when it gets collected at the transfer station on Route 44 remains up for grabs.

Norfolk’s trash used to get hauled to a large waste processing facility in Hartford where it was burned and converted into electricity. That facility closed in 2022, and Norfolk’s trash has since gone to landfills in Pennsylvania and Ohio with a stop at a transfer station in Torrington.

To create a better long-term solution, the Northwest Hills Council of Governments developed the idea of the NRRA as a way to give Norfolk and other towns a public option for trash disposal that would be an alternative to private waste disposal companies, such as USA Waste & Recycling, and also support composting and conversion of trash into building materials.

By mid-June, the NRRA seemed to have overcome one of its biggest challenges: it successfully lobbied the state legislature for an act giving it ownership of the state-owned Torrington transfer station at no cost, effectively blocking a $3.25 million bid from USA Waste. The issue dragged on over two years, requiring two separate legislative acts. The final measure approving the transaction was signed by Gov. Ned Lamont and approved at a June 11 meeting of the state Properties Review Board. The transfer officially occurs on July 1.

Meanwhile, Frank Antonacci, the president of USA Waste, announced that two towns that had previously agreed to join the NRRA had negotiated multiyear contracts with the company. That has led to concerns that the NRRA may not have enough trash to operate.

The Torrington transfer station has typically handled some 50,000 tons of trash a year, but the small towns in the Northwest corner will come nowhere near that volume. Norfolk, for example, generates less than a 1,000 tons a year. One possibility would be to reach an agreement that makes USA Waste the operator of the Torrington facility on behalf of the NRRA. USA Waste is the dominant waste disposal company in this area of Connecticut and Western Massachusetts and operates more than 20 transfer stations.

Another option would be to join forces on an interim basis with the Housatonic Resources Recovery Authority (HRRA). The HRRA represents towns from Kent to Danbury and has negotiated contracts with a private waste disposal company that competes with USA Waste. It has formally offered to extend those contracts to the towns that are part of the NRRA.

Norfolk First Selectman Henry Tirrell said Norfolk and other towns that agreed to join the NRRA have been meeting regularly to come up with a solution. He said the NRRA is about to retain a consultant to help develop a long-term plan. “We have to have more trash,” he noted.

Information on the development of the NRRA has been limited. Key players from the Northwest Hills Council of Governments and the HRRA have regularly declined to answer questions posed to them via email or on the phone. USA Waste has also complained about the lack of public disclosure and filed three Freedom of Information Act complaints .

That has created an opening for commentary from observers like Dan Haar, a longtime reporter and columnist now affiliated with the CT Insider digital network. “Those of us scattered across the rest of the state should have no reason to care about a spat in the Northwest Hills over who controls the flow of trash from all those tiny, tony towns where rich New Yorkers, Hollywood celebrities and old-line New England Yankees own homes,” Haar wrote recently. The columnist encouraged people across Connecticut to take note of the dispute arguing that by refusing the $3.25 million offer from USA Waste the state was “tipping the scales (pun intended) toward yet another public authority” that would result in taxpayer subsidies and higher prices. That viewpoint, echoed by some during the lengthy legislative debate, was countered by supporters of the NRRA. They contended that turning the Torrington facility over to the public authority would ultimately result in a better deal for residents.