HOUSE BILL REPORT
HB 2662
As Reported by House Committee On:
Natural Resources, Ecology & Parks
Title: An act relating to providing electronic product recycling through manufacturer financed opportunities.
Brief Description: Providing electronic product recycling through manufacturer financed opportunities.
Sponsors: Representatives B. Sullivan, Priest, Pettigrew, Jarrett, Dunshee, Anderson, Kagi, Serben, McCoy, Ericksen, Upthegrove, Tom, Green, Strow, Rodne, Nixon, Chase, Buri, Hunt, Eickmeyer, Darneille, Linville, Morrell, Lantz, Hunter, Appleton, Williams, Hudgins, Wallace, P. Sullivan, Flannigan, Springer, Kenney, O'Brien, Simpson, Clibborn, Sells, Moeller, Ericks, Kilmer and Schual-Berke.
Brief History:
Natural Resources, Ecology & Parks: 1/17/06, 1/26/06 [DPS].
Brief Summary of Substitute Bill |
|
|
|
|
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES, ECOLOGY & PARKS
Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by 7 members: Representatives B. Sullivan, Chair; Upthegrove, Vice Chair; Blake, Dickerson, Eickmeyer, Hunt and Kagi.
Minority Report: Do not pass. Signed by 4 members: Representatives Buck, Ranking Minority Member; Kretz, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Chandler and Orcutt.
Staff: Jeff Olsen (786-7157).
Background:
The Department of Ecology (DOE) estimates that between 2003 and 2010, over 4.5 million
computer processing units, 3.5 million cathode ray tube monitors, and 1.5 million flat panel
monitors will become obsolete in Washington. These electronic products may contain many
different materials, including steel, aluminum, copper, glass, plastic, gold, and lead.
In 2004, the Legislature enacted ESHB 2488 (Chapter 194, Laws of 2004) directing the DOE,
in consultation with the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, to research information regarding
the collection, recycling, and reuse of covered electronic products (CEPs). Covered
electronic products include all computer monitors, personal computers, and televisions sold
to consumers for personal use. The DOE report recommends that a system be developed and
financed by industry based on product market share. The level of responsibility for each
participant would be based on the return share of products being collected. The
recommendations include requirements for a license to sell CEPs in Washington, with
penalties for noncompliance.
Summary of Substitute Bill:
CEPs
Legislative findings conclude that a system financed by manufacturers for the collection,
transportation, and recycling of CEPs must be established. Covered electronic products
include computer monitors, desktop computers, laptop or portable computers, or televisions
that have been used in the state by any household, charity, school district, small business, or
small government. Televisions and computer monitors must have screens with a viewable
area greater than four inches when measured diagonally.
Labeling Requirements
No person may sell or offer for sale an electronic product in Washington after January 1,
2007, unless a label with the manufacturer's brand is permanently affixed and readily visible.
In-state retailers in possession of unlabeled products on January 1, 2007, may exhaust their
stock through sales to the public.
Manufacturers, Collectors, and Transporters Registration
By January 1, 2007, manufacturers offering CEPs for sale in Washington must register
annually with the DOE. Collectors and transporters of CEPs must also register annually with
the DOE. When registering with the DOE, manufacturers must provide the DOE with
contact information, the brand names of CEPs sold in the state, the methods of sale, and the
manufacturer's preference for participating in the standard plan or an independent plan.
Manufacturers include any person who manufactures a CEP for sale in this state under their
own brand name, assembles a CEP using parts manufactured by others for sale under the
assembler's brand name, resells under its own brand name a CEP produced by other
suppliers, imports a CEP that is sold in this state, or manufactures a co-branded product for
sale in this state that carries the name of both the manufacturer and a retailer.
Manufacturer Financed Collection and Recycling Plans
Manufacturers of CEPs offered for sale in Washington must participate in plans to implement
and finance the collection, transportation, and recycling of their equivalent share of CEPs by
January 1, 2009. Manufacturers must participate in an independent plan or the standard plan
operated by the Washington Materials Management and Financing Authority (Authority).
Manufacturers must pay for all of the program costs. If program costs are passed on to
consumers, manufacturers may not charge a fee at the time an unwanted electronic product is
delivered or collected for recycling. Any person acquiring a manufacturer has responsibility
for the acquired company's CEPs.
Independent Plans and the Standard Plan
A manufacturer that sells a CEP in Washington must participate in the standard plan, unless
the manufacturer obtains approval from the DOE to participate in an independent plan. The
standard plan is the plan developed by the Authority on behalf of participating manufacturers.
An independent plan may be submitted to the DOE by manufacturers or a group of
manufacturers, provided that the plan represents at least 5 percent of the return share of
CEPs. Also, to participate in an independent plan a manufacturer may not be a new entrant
or a white box manufacturer. An authorized party is the manufacturer or the entity
designated by a group of manufacturers submitting an independent plan.
Plan Review
All independent plans and the standard plan must be submitted to the DOE by February 1,
2008. The DOE must review the plans within 90 days and notify persons with letters of
approval. If a plan is rejected, the DOE must provide reasons for rejecting the plan, and the
authority or authorized parties have 60 days to submit a new plan. Plans must be updated at
least every five years. If a program fails to meet certain plan requirements, updated plans
must be submitted to DOE describing how program adjustments will be made.
Plans submitted to the DOE must contain contact information and a list of participants, a
description of the collection system, methods of collection in both rural and urban areas, a
description of plan service to covered entities, a description of recycling processes and
facilities, processors used in the plan, how progress will be measured, and public education
efforts.
Recycling Program Requirements
Programs established to implement recycling plans must provide for convenient collection
services for both urban and rural populations. Programs must provide at least one collection
site or service for any city or town with a population greater than 10,000. Collection sites
must be staffed and open to the public at a frequency adequate to meet the needs of the area
being served. Programs may limit the number of CEPs accepted per customer per day.
Washington Materials Management and Financing Authority
The Authority is established as a public body and an instrument of Washington. The
Authority is governed by a Board of Directors (Board), comprised of 11 members of
participating manufacturers. Five Board positions are reserved for representatives from the
top ten brands by return share of CEPs, and six Board positions are reserved for other brands.
The Board must have representation from both television and computer manufacturers. The
Board must select a chair and create its own bylaws. The Directors of the Department of
Community, Trade and Economic Development (DCTED); the Director of the DOE; and the
State Treasurer serve as ex officio members.
The Authority must plan and implement a collection and recycling program for
manufacturers participating in the standard plan. The standard plan is responsible for the
sum of equivalent shares of participating manufacturers. The Board must adopt a general
operating plan of procedures and shall conduct at least one public hearing on the general
operating plan. The DOE and the DCTED must provide staff to assist in the creation of the
Authority.
Participating manufacturers shall pay the Authority to cover the administrative and collection
costs to operate the standard program. The Authority must determine the initial fee collected
from participating manufacturers. If the Board fails to set an initial fee, the fee is between $6
and $10 per unit of CEP sold in the state for the first year of operation. After the first year,
the Authority shall set annual fees and other charges to fund the standard program.
Return Share and Equivalent Share
The DOE must determine return share based on the percentage of CEPs by weight identified
for an individual manufacturer. For the first program year, the DOE must establish the return
share based on best available information from other states. In subsequent years, the return
share must be based on the most recent sampling of CEPs. Manufacturers may challenge the
preliminary return share by written petition to the DOE.
The DOE must determine the equivalent share for each manufacturer by comparing the return
share to the total weight in pounds of CEPs collected for that program year. By June 1 of
each year, the DOE must notify each manufacturer of their equivalent share for the previous
year, and shall bill the authority or any authorized party that has not attained its equivalent
share. By September 1 of each year, the DOE shall pay the authority or any authorized party
that exceeds its equivalent share. Plans using nonprofit organizations for collection services
are given a 5 percent credit to be applied towards a plan's equivalent share for pounds that are
received for recycling from those organizations.
If a plan collects less than its equivalent share, the Authority or authorized party must pay the
DOE an amount to cover the costs of handling those CEPs, plus an administrative fee.
Moneys collected by the DOE are deposited in the newly created Electronic Products
Recycling Account. If a plan collects more than its equivalent share, the DOE must pay an
amount to compensate for the collection of the surplus CEPs.
Plans must finance an auditable, statistically significant sampling of the CEPs entering its
program every year. The information collected must include the brand names, product types,
weight by brand name, and any additional information needed to assign return share.
Processors, Processing Standards, and Export Reporting Requirements
The Authority and authorized parties must obtain written statements from processors
regarding compliance with certain processor requirements. The export of unwanted CEPs is
prohibited except for exports to Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) countries, members of the European Community, or other countries that have
entered into an agreement with the United States allowing for the exports. Covered
electronic products exported to other countries must be tested and labeled as functional or
needing certain repairs. No plan or program may use federal or state prison labor for
processing a CEP.
The DOE shall establish by rule performance standards for environmentally sound
management of processors. These standards must include financial assurances to ensure
proper closure of a facility that is consistent with environmental standards. The DOE must
establish by rule the allowable percent of non-recycled residual that may be properly disposed
of after CEPs have been processed. The DOE may audit processors used to fulfill the
requirement of a plan.
Annual Reporting
By March 1 of the second program year and annually thereafter, the Authority and authorized
parties must submit annual reports to the DOE. Annual reports must include the total weight
of CEPs recycled by county, collection services by county, the weight of CEPs processed by
each processor, documentation of compliance with processing standards, educational and
promotional efforts, sampling results, and any other information deemed necessary by the
DOE. The Authority's annual report must provide a list of participating manufacturers that
have paid their equivalent share to the Authority. Nonprofit organizations that collect CEPs
must report by each plan they participate in the weight of CEPs recycled during the previous
program year. Financial and proprietary information submitted to or obtained by the DOE is
exempt from public records disclosure requirements.
Education and Outreach Requirements
Plans must inform consumers about where and how to reuse and recycle their CEPs,
including web site information or a toll-free telephone number. The DOE shall promote CEP
recycling by posting information on its web site, providing a toll-free telephone number, or
other activities. Local governments must promote recycling through existing educational
methods. Retailers must provide information to consumers describing how to recycle CEPs.
State Purchasing Policies
The Department of General Administration (GA) must adopt purchasing polices that
establish a preference for electronic products that meet environmental performance standards
relating to the reduction or elimination of hazardous materials. The GA must ensure that
certain surplus electronic products are managed only by registered transporters and
processors. The GA must ensure that their surplus electronic products are directed to legal
secondary material markets by requiring a chain of custody record.
Registration, Plan Review, and Other Fees
The DOE shall establish by rule annual registration and plan review fees to fully recover the
costs incurred by the DOE in implementing the program. Fees must be based on factors
relating to administering the collection and recycling program and be based on a sliding scale
representative of annual sales of CEPs in the state. Fees collected by the DOE must be
deposited in the Electronic Products Recycling Account to be used to fulfill their duties in
administering the program.
Penalties
Manufacturers may not sell or offer for sale a CEP in Washington unless they register with
the DOE, and they are participating in an approved plan to recycle their CEPs. The DOE
must send written warnings to manufacturers that do not have an approved plan giving them
notice to participate in an approved plan within 90 days. If manufacturers do not comply,
they must be assessed a penalty of up to $10,000.
If the Authority or an authorized party fails to implement an approved plan, the DOE must
assess a penalty of up to $5,000 upon first infraction. After 90 days, the Authority or
authorized parties must be assessed a penalty up to $10,000 if they still fail to implement
their plans.
Persons not complying with manufacturer registration, education and outreach, reporting,
labeling, retailer responsibilities, collector and transporter registration, or processing
standards must first receive a written warning. After 90 days, a person must be assessed up
to $1,000 for the first citation and $2,000 for subsequent citations.
Legislative Report
By December 31, 2012, the DOE must provide a report to the Legislature containing the
following information: the weight of CEPs recycled by plan, by county, and in total; the
performance of each plan; a description of the collection programs; an evaluation of how the
program compares to other states; comments from local governments; information on
unwanted CEPs exported; and recommendations on how to improve the program.
Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill:
The substitute clarifies that collectors providing premium or curbside collection may still
assess fees to collect CEPs. The substitute removes a penalty prohibiting a manufacturer
from offering an electronic product for sale for failing to participate in a plan. The substitute
removes specific fee requirements the Authority would assess to participating manufacturers.
The substitute extends the implementation date for complying with product labeling
requirements from July 1, 2006 to January 1, 2007 and extends implementation dates for
determining return share. The substitute directs the DOE and the DCTED to assist in
creating the Authority. The substitute requires the Authority and authorized parties to obtain
written statements from processors regarding compliance with the processor requirements.
The substitute adds a reporting requirement to the DOE's legislative report regarding export
of unwanted electronic products and scrap.
Appropriation: None.
Fiscal Note: Preliminary fiscal note available.
Effective Date of Substitute Bill: The bill takes effect July 1, 2006.
Testimony For: (In support) There have been efforts at both the national and regional level
to come up with a solution to address the recycling of unwanted electronic products.
However, there is no consensus on how to fund the program. This legislation is consistent
with recommendations made by the DOE after an 18-month stakeholder process. The bill
includes a system that has a minimal role for state government, allows businesses to work
with other businesses, and promotes the development of more environmentally friendly
products.
People need a simple, free way to dispose of their unwanted products. The bill is a shared
responsibility approach that works for many stakeholders including state and local
governments, households, nonprofits, and retailers. Local governments and nonprofits are
currently bearing the costs of disposing of unwanted electronic products. Collecting fees at
the retail level would be problematic. Some local transfer stations are unable to collect these
products, and it can be expensive to recycle. The system created is market based, which will
drive costs down and benefits up. The plan is flexible and allows manufacturers to join the
standard plan or participate in an independent plan. Retailers are ready to take their share of
products under this plan.
The plan is fair and equitable. Consumers do not want to pay fees to get rid of these products
and rather end up storing products.
(With concerns) The intent of the bill is not to include cell phones, and the federal definition
is needed to clarify that cell phones are excluded. The control of recycling markets will be
concentrated under a small number of persons. It is not clear if curbside recycling is included
in the bill. Current curbside efforts should be expanded. Recycling is an emerging industry,
and this bill may put some companies out of business.
Testimony Against: The approach in the bill places a very disproportionate share on
manufacturers. It will be difficult for manufacturers to determine how to fund the program.
Manufacturers make products, retailers sell them, and local governments manage solid waste
and recycling. Manufacturers have the least experience to operate a program, but are required
to figure out how to collect these products. Manufacturers do not track products that are sold
in Washington. The definition of retailer is weak. This approach will not result in green
design, since manufacturers already do this. Companies are spending millions on
environmental design. Currently, there are a number of activities and recycling events
involving manufacturers and retailers.
The bill requires sorting by brand, and having multiple programs will be confusing to
consumers. This is just a tax on manufacturers. The bill allows companies to opt in and out
of plans and will result in some companies not paying for their share. The bill will
disadvantage in-state companies, provides market advantages to foreign competition, and will
directly effect the ability of some companies to stay in business. The payments in the bill of
$0.50 per pound are higher than costs in other states.
Persons Testifying: (In support) Representative Sullivan, prime sponsor; Cullen
Stephenson, Department of Ecology; Mo McBroom, Washington Environmental Council;
Arnold Grothues, Radio Shack; Lisa Sepanski, King County Solid Waste Division; Larry
King, Hewlett Packard; Bill Smith, City of Tacoma and Northwest Product Stewardship;
Tiffany Hatch, Seattle Goodwill; Jan Gee, Washington Retail Association; and Suellen Mele,
Washington Citizens for Resource Conservation.
(With concerns) Steve Gano, Cingular Wireless; Craig Lorch, Total Reclaim; and David
Michener, Waste Management.
(Opposed) David Thompson, Panasonic; Douglas Smith, Sony; Frank Dick, Sharp; Dale
Swanson, Panasonic; and Steve Matheson, Northwest E-Cycle.