Skip to content

Use of Certain Receptacles by Certain Entities that Receive Department Collection Service

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Rule status: Proposed

Agency: DSNY

Comment by date: August 8, 2024

Rule Full Text

This proposed rule would require that all buildings that receive Department collection, other than residential buildings containing ten or more dwelling units, set out any refuse at the curb for DSNY collection in rigid containers with tight-fitting lids. This requirement would go into effect on November 13, 2024. By June 1, 2026, the proposed rule would require that such rigid containers with tight fitting lids be purchased from an authorized vendor. Such authorized vendor would be chosen through a competitive procurement process and such receptacles would be available for purchase from a retail outlet or online platform.

This rule would allow all buildings and entities that receive Department collection, or are applying for collection service, to apply for and receive a waiver if compliance would create a public safety hazard for pedestrians or would pose an unreasonable hardship. Instructions relating to such waiver requests would be outlined on the Department’s website. There will also be an appeals process for those buildings or entities that are denied such waiver request.

These changes are a part of the City’s commitment to cleaning up New York City streets and reducing food sources for rats. Residences and other buildings that receive Department collection are generators of refuse, and bags of waste set out for collection on the curb, even when in compliance with existing waste setout requirements, attract rats and vermin. Requiring such buildings to utilize a specific City approved receptacle for the disposal of refuse will allow DSNY to streamline collections and further limit potential food sources for vermin.

These changes align with other City initiatives to increase the use of containers for waste storage and collection, creating cleaner, more livable, and more vibrant streets and neighborhoods across New York City.

Attendees who need reasonable accommodation for a disability such as a sign language translation should contact the agency by calling 1 (646) 885-4786 or emailing [email protected] by August 1, 2024

Send comments by

  • Email: [email protected]
  • Mail: DSNY Bureau of Legal Affairs , 125 Worth Street Room/Floor: 710 ; New York, New York 10013

Public Hearings


August 8, 2024
9:30am - 11:00am EDT


Microsoft Teams

Connect Virtually
Meeting ID: 228 025 247 189 Passcode: Vdjy87 Dial in by phone +1 646-893-7101,,560471597# United States, New York City Phone conference ID: 560 471 597# Join on a video conferencing device Tenant key: [email protected] Video ID: 118 414 559 8

Disability Accommodation
  • Sign Language Interpretation

Comments close by August 8, 2024

Add a comment

Notes. "Required" indicates a required field. Your email address will not be made public.

Online comments: 34

  • Katherine Hanner

    I applaud the requirement that DSNY require that these receptacles have “tight fitting lids”. However the regs need to state that the lid must be secured and tight fitting when placed at the curb. Currently I see many buildings and commercial establishments placing receptacles on the street but lids are not closed since trash is overflowing. When placed like this, vermin (rats!) can easily enter them. Please edit the regs!

    Comment added July 11, 2024 8:16am
  • LesC

    It’s against the law to monopolize buying trash cans from one place. You will need to reimburse the trash cans that we just bought because the new law that was enacted by sanitation in 2023, trash cans requiring a lid. These new cans should free or allow us to exchange our cans for the new cans.

    Comment added July 21, 2024 11:39am
  • IR

    I’m supportive of any program that gets us out of the current situtation of trash bags on curbs and rodent buffets. However, I oppose a new government endorsed monopoly. Why aren’t we allowing and encouraging competition?

    From a rent stabilized housing providers perspective, this is also a new cost that our too low rents cannot cover. Why do we keep adding expenses but then not allowing for adjusting rents to cover them?

    Comment added July 21, 2024 8:11pm
  • GSKP

    I manage an IMD building that has 3 residential units. The total monthly rent from these units is $576.98 as 2 units are not paying their rent. The City continues to burden small property owners without consideration. Decisions that are destroying the ability for anyone who is trying to hold on during this extremely difficult environment. The garbage and rat problem is not resulting from small property owners, clean up has to be done by businesses such as restaurants not small property owners that are barely getting by. My building garbage is taken out at 6am in trash bags instead of bins as people use the bins as public trash cans as they pass by and we have had issues with homeless people going through the garbage. It would be a burden to be forced to put bins out as then small building owners would have to pay an additional cost for the maintenance people to bring the bins in and out especially when they do not live on site. Please do not put further regulations that creates more of a hardship without solving any real problem. Thank you.

    Comment added July 21, 2024 8:19pm
  • Richard Ulloa Melton

    I call that this rule is unconstitutional.

    “Based on the recent Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright Enterprises et al. v. Raimondo, the DSNY proposed rule mandating specific receptacles for refuse collection exceeds the agency’s statutory authority as granted by city sanitation laws. The statutes in question do not provide clear and unambiguous authorization for such detailed regulations. Furthermore, the broad discretion afforded to DSNY without clear legislative standards constitutes an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power. Therefore, the proposed rule should be deemed unconstitutional and invalidated.”

    This argument integrates the principles from the Loper case, focusing on statutory interpretation and the limits of agency authority, to challenge the constitutionality of the DSNY’s proposed rule.

    Comment added July 22, 2024 7:44pm
  • Alan M Cohen

    I have to chain my cans to the building so the homeless and addicts don’t steal them. Previously they would be stolen or removed periodically – and my video surveillance showed the perpetrators to be drug users.
    If I have to place receptacles at the curb without chains I anticipate that they will be stolen. How do you plan to deal with this issue?

    Comment added July 24, 2024 8:36am
  • Deo

    It is just another way for the city to write up more violations.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 8:56am
  • Carole Ferrara

    We are managing agents of smaller residential buildings in Manhattan and completely disagree that this requirement will do anything to abate problems with trash in the City. It will however cause a tremendous burden on small building owners, part time janitors and in the end result in fines for the building, stolen expensive trash containers, etc. One of the impossible hardships is that there is no area to store such bins. Smaller residential buildings do not have elevators, they do not have areas at street level for storage. The City is asking an individual to lug a container filled with trash from someplace in a building – typically the basement of a building – up a flight of steps – to the street curb. This requirement is inhuman and must be stopped immediately.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 9:05am

    I’m all for making our city clean. As much I would like to take the garbage bins out on the eve of collection days, twom things concern me quite a bit. 1st. The empty bins will be left out until owners come home from work. Not everyone who has a 1 to 9 family home can afford a supper. 2nd. Having lived in Brooklyn almost all my life, I can’t tell you how many times our bins have been stolen, even with the address written right on them. These new bins are not cheap. We small building landlords have far too many responsibilities imposed on us by the city, Inspections for this, inspections for that, paperwork for this or the other. It never ends and now this. ENOUGH!!! Thank God we now have good tenants, because we have gone through the ringer in the past, but shouldn’t they have the responsibility to keep their children safe in their apartments? We place window guards, special knobs on the stoves, special venetian blinds, etc.I’m know I’m rambling on, but I am a bit frustrated.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 9:06am
  • Johnny

    There’s so many factors here that is wrong. Firstly, the city is forcing us to buy bins sold by it’s own vendor thus creating a monopoly which is illegal. Second, we are then going to throw perfectly good bins into the dump where it does not biodegrade over time. (So much for the environment.) Thirdly, the garbage trucks don’t have lifts that can dump these bins out (which is what they really are intended for) so the sanitation workers would still have to pull the bags out by hand and toss the bins everywhere on the streets. Fourthly, now all landlords would have to pay their employees to come back in the morning to pull the bins back inside thus adding to costs when they are already struggling with higher taxes, utilities and other operating costs. (Which, will eventually trickle down to the renters as well). Lastly, homeowners who do their own trash will now have to potentially pull their bins up and down stairs to get them to the curb. For older people or people with disabilities this will be a huge challenge. These bins do not solve the rat problem. It is a cash grab for this city. Based on the number of buildings affected by this new mandate, times at minimum 3 bins per property, the city will make over $1.8 billion dollars and the rat problem will still exist at the end of the day. Take down the sidewalk sheds that harbor rats and have more timely and frequent garbage pick ups and there will be less rats.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 9:06am
  • Paul Fryd

    This is a real problem for our building, a condominium with 4 units and a separately owned restaurant on the ground floor. There is no room for a receptacle in the entryway of the building. And there is noone to take out the receptacle and bring it back 3 times a week after 8 pm. Now, each unit is responsible for taking out their own garbage and placing it on the curb. The restaurant already uses receptacles, this will be a tremendous burden (and eyesore) for this building.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 9:17am
  • Gary B Resnick

    This will be very difficult and costly for buildings under nine units. Most of the buildings this size, that we own and manage do NOT have live in supers. We use a company that cleans the building, and they do garbage at night. They do not return until the next garbage day (at night). So, now they would have to return to put the pails back by the building the following morning??. Who will pay for that? Some of the people we use are not available until night time. What happens when its windy and rainy? And the pails are down the block? Create heavy duty bags that have a scent that rodents avoid. This law does not work for small property owners! The 8:00PM rule is already causing a burden. Our garbage, now for multiple buildings, doesn’t get completed until 1:00AM. They clean the pails weekly. Now it’s dark, and they can’t really see the pails. The city can also use Rat bait stations on corners, by trees or on curbs. The city should inspect them and refill them. We love working with DSNY for solutions, but this is too costly and a radical decision that need to be rescinded. Every windy day will see many pails flying around in the streets!!

    Comment added July 24, 2024 9:18am
  • Rena W.

    I am writing to express my concerns regarding the proposed new rule on containerization requirements for buildings with one to nine residential units, effective November 12, 2024. As a property owner managing 19 properties in the Bronx, all of which fall within the 3-6 unit range, I believe this rule will impose significant challenges and undue burdens on building owners, property managers and supers.

    One of the primary issues we face in the Bronx is the rampant theft of garbage cans. To mitigate this problem, we currently have to chain our garbage bins to the properties. The new requirement to use bins with latching lids and discontinue the use of bags will necessitate unchaining these bins for certain periods, which will inevitably lead to an increase in theft. This issue is not just an inconvenience but also a financial burden, as replacing stolen bins will incur additional costs.

    Furthermore, the lack of an on-site superintendent for smaller properties like ours means that landlords will need to hire additional staff to manage the new bin system. This will significantly increase our operational costs. Managing waste disposal effectively without an on-site superintendent is already challenging, and this new requirement will exacerbate the situation, forcing smaller property owners to allocate more resources to waste management.

    Another concern is the efficacy of the plastic bins against the city’s notorious rat problem. NYC rats are known to chew through plastic, rendering the new bins ineffective in controlling waste and pest issues. This not only undermines the purpose of the new rule but also adds to the frustration and expenses of property owners who have to deal with damaged bins and persistent pest problems.

    This proposed rule seems to be yet another onerous requirement placed on building owners without considering the practical implications and additional costs involved. A more effective policy would be to focus on increasing DSNY staffing to ensure timely and efficient waste pickup. Improved waste collection services would address many of the issues the new containerization rule aims to solve, without placing extra burdens on property owners.

    I strongly urge the Department of Sanitation to reconsider the proposed rule and explore alternative solutions that do not disproportionately impact smaller property owners. Enhancing DSNY’s capacity to manage waste more effectively would be a more balanced and practical approach.

    Thank you for considering my concerns. I look forward to a constructive dialogue on this matter.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 9:23am
  • Christopher Athineos

    As part of the rat mitigation efforts, I purchased metal trash cans with lids for my 8 unit building. They were all stolen two weeks later. I re-purchased the same metal cans and chained and padlocked them to my fence. This was a considerable expense, given my rents are under $1,000 per month. I lined the cans with black bags and put out the trash after 8 pm. We have no problem with rats on my block. I urge the Dept of Sanitation to rescind this proposal because it puts an undue burden on property owners. Now you are requiring me to purchase more receptacles a third time in one year ! How will I prevent them from being stolen if all the cans on the block are the same? Who will bring the cans back in after the Sanitation Dept empties it? What happens in the winter when the cans blow into the street? The cans will end up being out all day on the street. This is typical gov’t dysfunction. The ones who create these rules, don’t own or run properties. There is a big difference between theory and reality. Please re-consider.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 9:31am
  • Susan Corradi

    This is totally ridiculous. What about the buildings with more than 9 units?? Why do the small mom and pop buildings have to suffer! Putting pails out by the curb are a nuisance and if the weather is windy there goes your pails at $50.00 a pail.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 9:58am
  • Howard B Brachfeld

    Building location is 619 9th ave in Manhattan. There are 6 units. There is no ability to store the plastic can in the basement or entrance way or halfway of the building. No ability to chain to front of build because of commerical store front. There is no super to move can to and from curb side 3 days a week. Tenants put bags out 8PM the evening before pick up. Never seen any evidence of rats attacking the bags.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 10:06am
  • K D

    This rule is ridiculous. First of all, it will be heavy to carry these bins from the basement to the curb. Second the locking mechanism is going to make the sanitation workers take a longer time to empty them and it will make their route longer. Third, everyone knows the sanitation workers are not going to gingerly place the containers down after they dump the trash. The containers will be thrown and the lids will break. Who has to pay for another container? We do, the owners or we get a fine, right? Fourth, the containers will be stolen, and again who has to pay for that? The owners, right? Fifth, who will pick up the containers, once the trash is picked up? Many people work and won’t be around to pick up the trash containers in a timely manner. This is going to make the sidewalks filled with garbage containers and it will give thieves the opportunity to steal them. This is totally unfair to make us do this. It was with good intentions, but it is not the solution. And why do I HAVE to get a container from the city? This is just a money grab to help pay for the migrant problem. Why should I be paying for them? I pay plenty in taxes, this is just another way to make us responsible for what the City of New York is responsible for. This plan was not thought out well. There are more problems that will come with this. Will the City of New York pay for my broken and stolen garbage containers? I know, the City of New York is hoping this will happen so they can give fines to the New York owners. It’s bad enough that we help keep this city going through our exorbently high home taxes. Now, you figured out a way to get more money from us. To what end? Again, this is ridiculous. This is not the answer. Do not pass this rule.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 10:14am

    I get it that we trying to eliminate rats and am already doing my part. Last year when I got a summons, I had my entire front yard cemented over costing me over $5k
    I am against the DSNY proposal on such a relatively short notice. For those owners already using closing lids which I recently purchased, now asking me to buy 8-10 new ones with a closing latch is crazy because they will cost me over $50 apiece.
    Please extend the date at least 1-2 years and then start the process incrementally instead of all 1-9 family units

    Comment added July 24, 2024 10:34am
  • Samantha Tung

    this proposed law is very impractical!

    – who will bring the garbage cans back to the house or building if the homeowners all work ? and will they be subject to fines if the empty garbage cans are left out until the evening when the homeowners come home?

    – there will be garbage can theft as well, although I’m pretty sure lawmakers won’t care about this issue, for the homeowners who have to shell out more money to replace the garbage cans it would be more of a hardship.

    – in Queens where parking is really tight, how will the sanitation workers get the garbage cans to their truck? will they lift it over their heads when they walk between parked cars? especially if it’s filled with heavy garbage? or roll it down several houses to where there’s adequate space between cars? what happens if a car that is parked in front of the building gets damaged, who will be responsible?

    – for buildings that have 4-9 apartments, there would be a lot of garbage cans that would clog up the sidewalks and make the sidewalks more crowded than it already is.

    Please have lawmakers who actually live in the area where this proposed law is going to take effect have input on this law. This proposed law is so impractical to homeowners, pedestrians, sanitation workers and car owners.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 10:48am
  • Irene C Krauland

    I oppose the new requirement as I often am away when the garbage collection may occur and this will mean the container will be subject to theft and destruction. Moreover it will be a temptation to others to put things in the container- such as recyclable materials – and the violation will be mine to pay. Tying up bags securely does not offer this opportunity. In the area I reside we do not have a rat issue. In the occasions we have, it is because of construction occurring in the streets which disrupts where they hide. I think in this day and age it should be possible to sterilize the rats so they don’t reproduce as proficiently as they do. The rat problem is very noticeable and persistent in the subway stations where there isn’t necessarily a steady food supply. I think 1-4 residential dwellings should be exempt of this requirement as these type of residences are not the problem.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 11:20am
  • PSE

    While it’s a great idea to contain garbage, there has to be a better solution. We have a small building with no space to house an outdoor container as well as garbage and recyclable containers. The city should build curbside sheds, which also might eliminate the theft problem. We have a part time super who we would have to pay to come in the morning to retrieve the container. Once again it’s another financial (and space) burden that falls on those of us that provide rent stabilized housing for New Yorkers with no foresight into how to make this work for both the landlords and the city.
    Thank you for your consideration.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 11:59am
  • charles green

    The fact that there is only one source for these containers stinks to high heaven.Many blocks have no curb access for the pickups.You are not considering the fact that rats can still eat through the containers.I urge the city to seek alternate methods to combat rats.perhaps you can enlist the huge migrant population to clean the streets.the unintended consequences of this legislation will place undue hardships on the population.I urge you to reconsider this law but I have little hope that you will do so.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 12:21pm
  • PC

    Small buildings with commercial spaces do not have any place to store the receptacles; no basement access nor sidewalk storage area. The tenants are responsible for their garbage and it stays in their apartments until it is pickup time/day and then gets put out.
    Unfortunately, this is another burden that the city wants to shift onto the building owner. The city has created instances when citibikes, bike lanes and restaurant shacks deter the street cleaning work of the DSNY. To require the purchase of receptacles with tight fitting lids is ludicrous – when the tight fitting lid is opened by a passerby and the garbage is all over, that’s an extra sanitation violation for “open receptacle.” Of course, the theft of the pails will always be a problem. Prompt and efficient pickups will help to keep the rats from the building trash however, there are a million other places the rats can go and eat that are in need of review.
    We had “Cleaner, more livable, more vibrant streets” years ago when it was the fulfillment of a dream for many of us to own a piece of the greatest city on earth. Our streets have changed for the worse. Small property owners are trying their best to keep everything going. Please reconsider and remove this additional burden.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 12:35pm
  • Virender k SURI

    This requirement will be a burden on small 4 -8 family owners and also hazardus to school kids and pedsterian walkers . first put after 8 pm then pick up the contaiers in the morning – sanitation look for own convwenience not the public convenience

    It wiull cost more to the owners with already LOOSING money

    Comment added July 24, 2024 12:56pm
  • Charisse Tyus

    We are opposed for many reasons which include aesthetics, parking, space will not hold all the garbage that one city block of apartments. Leave landlords to manage their garbage. and the spend the money used for containers to address the rat problem more aggressively. Thank you.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 1:08pm
  • Gordon M Stanley

    This regulation has not been sufficiently thought through. The relatively narrow sidewalks in our neighborhood are going to be rendered even less passable if there new recepticles are placed out for collection. Unless there is some way to secure them they will become an instant target for thieves, as has already occured in areas where this has been tried, and of course it will be up to the property owner to replace them. This cost will be passed on to tenants, along with other new mandated expenses, and will contribute to rising rents. It also makes no allowance for fluctuations in the amount of garbage we have to put out. I have a small building; most pickup days I put out one bag of garbage, but if I have someone moving in or there’s a renovation project there’s a lot more to throw out. If I have six bags to throw out- and this has happened- will I need six locking bins? Will it be the same for recyclables, which amounts can also vary wildly from week to week? If you want to get garbage off the sidewalks it would make much more sense to mandate block by block a narrow window in which Sanitation would pick up the trash and prohibit setouts until shortly before that time begins- essentially tightening what’s in place now.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 1:44pm
  • PLC

    I’m sure all small building owners do their utmost to keep rats from their property. Requiring small building owners to buy receptacles is an undue burden – monetarily and physically. There is no space available inside or outside the building to keep the receptacles without causing a walking problem. More than likely, the receptacles will be stolen. The proposed rule would also open the door to a whole new list of receptacle violations.

    It is unfair for the city to place this burden on the backs of the small property owner, but I believe it is being done in order to show that “something is being done” about the rats. The city should look to itself to deal with all that prevents the city from being maintained in a clean and orderly fashion.
    Creating a new rule is not going to be the solution to the problem-please reconsider.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 2:53pm
  • Esther Piscitelli

    I don’t think I should have to pay $50 for a bin that people will continue to rob. It is also my understanding that we will have to purchase multiple bins for paper, plastic, and garbage, and this isn’t fair to us residents.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 3:58pm
  • Pedro Dominguez

    Please see attached file for comments. Thank you

    Comment attachment
    Comment added July 24, 2024 5:24pm
  • Eugene Ziemak

    This is the worst idea. I’ll have to spend three hours three times a week just to wash all the bins because I’m not allowed to use garbage bags, who is the genius who thought this up!!! This must not pass. This is a hardship on the people that live in the building this will bring in rodents and cockroaches and bugs. Within six months. The neighborhood will be flooded with rats and bugs. and you’re forcing me to buy them from one person this is communism at his best.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 5:54pm
  • Jonathan Hochhauser

    I am confused by the June, 2026 date. If the city wants to require we use a certain type of container purchased from certain designated vendors, then have those vendors designated when the program goes into effect. How can the city insist we buy containers now only to insist we buy different containers two years from now? This is an unreasonable burden.

    Comment added July 24, 2024 10:54pm
  • Papoutsis Anastasia

    This new mandate is not a practical one for landlords and supers that do not live in the properties. Last year mandate was implemented to put trash bags in the curb later in the day which we adopted with some changes in our scheduling. This new mandate will require landlord or super to also visit properties in the morning hours to remove trash bins from the curb.

    Comment added July 25, 2024 10:52am
  • GKPapoutsis

    This new mandate is not a practical one for landlords and supers that do not live in the properties. Last year mandate was implemented to put trash bags in the curb later in the day which we adopted with some changes in our scheduling. This new mandate will require landlord or super to also visit properties in the morning hours to remove trash bins from the curb.

    Comment added July 25, 2024 10:53am
  • Anthony C

    Crazy to me that the law makers keep trying to push rules that hurt housing providers. One thing is if these rules only applied to owner occupied homes or buildings with live in supers but to go on and make it a requirement for all of them is pretty insane. Collection times are not consistent and then on busy blocks you will end up having cans blocking walkways/ street parking on collection days. On top of that the cost is tremendous for income capped properties. Lets just consider .5-1 hour of work per collection day, this would be approximately $1560-$3120 at $20 an hour since its 3 x a week. The average monthly rent for a rent stabilized building is $1,555 (that number includes new rent stabilized buildings). So for many owners you have just reduced their already incredibly thin margins by 1-2 months rent of one of the units. We are talking about 6-9 unit rent regulated buildings so this is huge! This is on top of all the new burdens (gas pipe testing once every 4 years, mandatory xrfs for potential lead based paint, & increased fines across the board from dob/hpd/dhcr). 2-3% annual rent increases weren’t keeping up with the typical costs that were outpacing capped rent growth. These new “requirements” just make it impossible. This is especially true since the reality is that the majority of these buildings are facing refis with interest rates that are 70%-150% higher than they were paying 5-7 years ago. The city needs to help providers not continue to overburden them to the point where they are fed up and throw in the towel.

    Comment added July 25, 2024 11:18am