SENATE BILL REPORT

ESHB 1671

BYHouse Committee on Environmental Affairs (originally sponsored by Representatives Sprenkle, D. Sommers, Basich, Pruitt, Braddock, Appelwick, Ebersole, Walker, Phillips, Brekke, Rust, May, R. Fisher, Valle, Nelson, Rasmussen, Rector, Spanel, Todd and R. King) 

Providing major solid waste reform.

House Committe on Environmental Affairs

Rereferred House Committee on Appropriations

Senate Committee on Environment & Natural Resources

Senate Hearing Date(s):March 22, 1989; March 28, 1989; March 29, 1989

Majority Report:  Do pass as amended and be referred to Committee on Ways & Means.

      Signed by Senators Metcalf, Chairman; Barr, Bauer, Benitz, Owen, Patterson.

Senate Staff:Gary Wilburn (786-7453); Atsushi Kiuchi (786-7708)

                  March 29, 1989

Senate Committee on Ways & Means

Senate Hearing Date(s):March 29, 1989; March 30, 1989

Majority Report:  Do pass as amended.

      Signed by Senators McDonald, Chairman; Craswell, Vice Chairman; Bluechel, Cantu, Gaspard, Hayner, Johnson, Lee, Niemi, Owen, Smith, Talmadge.

Senate Staff:Steve Jones (786-7715)

                  March 31, 1989

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON WAYS & MEANS, MARCH 30, 1989

BACKGROUND:

In 1987, the Joint Select Committee for Preferred Solid Waste Management was created to recommend strategies to manage waste in an environmentally acceptable and cost-effective manner.  The committee's efforts have focused on the development of a system to separate various components of the waste stream, such as paper, metals, glass, and yard waste, and to manage them using a variety of "integrated" practices.  These practices include recycling, composting, incineration, and landfilling.  By separating the various components of the waste stream at the place where they are generated, each component can then be managed in a way that will extract its highest economic value while minimizing adverse environmental impacts.

Another focus of the committee has been to identify ways in which the counties' authority to implement these practices can be increased.  Under current law, counties have much less authority to manage solid waste than do cities.

SUMMARY:

Findings:  The new solid waste management priorities are based upon waste reduction and source separation.  After waste reduction and source separation, the following priorities apply:  1) recycling, 2) processing mixed waste, 3) incinerating separated wastes, and 4) incinerating or landfilling mixed waste.  A statewide goal of 50 percent recycling is established.

Definitions:  "Recyclable materials" are defined to distinguish "recyclables" from "garbage."  "Solid waste" is defined to include both "garbage" and "recyclable materials."

Service Levels:  Local governments are required to revise their solid waste plan by including a "waste reduction and recycling element."  This plan revision is to specify how source separation programs will be implemented locally.  The plan revisions will be reviewed by the Department of Ecology within 90 days.  If Ecology does not approve the plan revisions, they must specify why they were not approved.  Administrative law judges will hear appeals from local governments on Ecology plan decisions.

Local governments are grouped into three classes for the purpose of determining planning timelines.  Class 1 areas are the counties of:  Spokane, Snohomish, King, Pierce, Thurston, and Kitsap.  Class 2 areas are the counties in western Washington, except for those in class 1.  Class 3 areas are the counties of eastern Washington, except for Spokane.

Plan revisions must be submitted to Ecology as follows:  July 1, 1991 for class 1 areas, July 1, 1992 for class 2 areas, and July 1, 1994 for class 3 areas.

Local governments shall consider enumerated parameters in making designations of urban and rural areas.  For example, cities with a population of 17,500 or more should be considered as urban.

Urban level services include programs to:  1) collect, at the residence, those recyclable materials identified by the local government; 2) collect source separated waste at nonresidential sites; 3) divert yard waste from disposal facilities, if markets exist; and 4) educate citizens about recycling.

A local government may use an alternative to curbside collection of recyclables if it can prove that the alternative has the same or greater recovery rate, and a reasonable level of participation.

Rural level services include programs to:  1) collect recyclables at drop-off and buy-back centers; 2) collect recyclables from nonresidential sites; 3) divert yard waste from landfills, if markets exist; and 4) educate citizens about recycling.

Collection and Management Authority:  The Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC) is directed to grant a permit to collect recyclables to all applicants that meet safety, insurance, and public interest requirements.  County governments are given the optional authority to contract with, and regulate, the collection of recyclables.  If a county declines to exercise this option, the UTC regulates the service to be provided through issuance of permits.

Commercial generators may direct their recyclable materials to recycling companies.  Recycling companies are authorized to collect and transport recyclables from recycling centers and, upon mutual agreement, from solid waste collection companies.  Cities and counties may impose a fee on the service of garbage collection for the purpose of reducing the cost of collecting recyclable materials.  The UTC may incorporate a surcharge in the rates of a solid waste collection company in order to fund all or part of the operations of a recycling company.

Enforcement Authority:  The Institute for Urban and Rural Studies at Eastern Washington State University is to conduct a study to evaluate the roles and responsibilities of state and local entities in enforcing solid waste regulations.

A local health jurisdiction is authorized to give any part of its enforcement authority to the Department of Ecology if approved by the legislative authority of a city and/or county.

Planning:  The Department of Ecology is required to monitor the amount and types of waste generated and to evaluate the programs to collect source separated materials by local governments.  Companies engaging in recycling or garbage collection are required to provide waste stream data to Ecology.

Local governments are required to assess how the local solid waste management plan will affect solid waste collection costs.  The UTC is directed to review local solid waste management plans and to advise Ecology and the local government on the plan's impact on ratepayers.  The UTC is also directed to require recycling and solid waste collection companies to use rate structures and billing systems that encourage recycling over garbage disposal.

Automotive Batteries:  It is unlawful to dispose of automotive batteries in landfills or incinerators.  Retail establishments selling batteries are required to accept used batteries from their customers purchasing new batteries in a one-to-one exchange.  Battery wholesalers are required to accept batteries from retail customers in a one-to-one exchange.  Battery retailers are required to add $5 to the price of a battery if the customer does not return a used battery for exchange.  Provisions are made to suspend the requirements on battery retailers and wholesalers if the market price of lead, the principal component of batteries, drops below a specified value.

Incinerators:  An incinerator burning medical waste must operate in such a manner that the combustible portion of the medical waste is completely reduced to ash.

A solid waste incinerator cannot be permitted unless it is consistent with the local solid waste plan and it does not conflict with waste reduction and recycling programs.  Local governments that have already contracted for such a facility are exempt.  Ecology may grant waivers.

Product Packaging/Education:  A product packaging task force is created to develop an action plan for reducing and recycling product packaging waste.  An environmental awards program is amended to include awards for product packaging.  The taskforce is to recommend standards to the awards committee for "environmental packaging."

Local Government Restrictions:  Beginning July 1, 1989, the state will preempt local government's authority to impose certain bans or taxes on products or product packaging.  The state will have exclusive authority to ban or tax certain products or product packaging for two years, after which time state preemption is terminated.

Local governments are prohibited from requiring retail businesses to site recycling facilities on or near their establishments as a condition of doing business.

State Agency Waste Reduction and Recycling Programs:  Ecology and the Department of General Administration are required to develop a model state waste reduction and recycling program.  All state agencies are required to implement the plan. Ecology is also directed to develop a competitive awards program within public schools for waste reduction and recycling.  Ecology is directed to coordinate the efforts of state and local agencies developing educational materials on waste reduction and recycling.

Market Development:  Local governments may develop policies to preferentially purchase products made of recyclable materials.

Local governments may receive funds from the Community Economic Revitalization Board to build public infrastructure facilities for the purpose of encouraging private development of facilities to process recyclable materials.

A committee is established within the Department of Trade and Economic Development (DTED) to make recommendations on creating markets for recyclable materials.  The committee will be staffed by DTED and Ecology and will be terminated in November of 1990.

Ecology is required to determine the feasibility of composting and intensive waste diversion programs by funding local government demonstration projects.  Ecology is also directed to evaluate unused paint recycling and uses for mixed waste paper in the pulp and paper industry.  The State Energy Office is required to determine the feasibility of burning mixed paper and plastics for energy recovery.

Operator Certification:  Operators of solid waste incinerators and landfills are required to employ certified operators by January 1, 1992.  Ecology is directed to create an advisory committee to develop a process to certify operators.  Penalties for noncompliance are established.

Revenues:  A 1 percent state tax is imposed on the charges made for solid waste collection services.  Collection of recyclable materials is excluded from the base of the tax.  A lid is imposed on the amount of the monthly collection charge that is subject to the tax.  Residents not receiving refuse collection services are excluded from taxation on minimum monthly charges.  The state tax is terminated July 1, 1993.  Revenues, estimated at $6 million per biennium, are deposited in the state solid waste management account.

Prevailing Wages:  Companies that provide curbside collection service of recyclable materials are required to pay prevailing wages.

Utilities and Transportation Commission:  The UTC is to consider certain expenses incurred by refuse collection companies as normal operating expenses (i.e., "pass-throughs"), for purposes of rate-making.  The UTC is permitted to grant refuse collection companies an interim rate before making a final decision about rates.  The UTC is to conduct a study and make recommendations on the appropriate regulatory structure for the collection of solid waste by January, 1990.  The regulatory fee imposed by the UTC on solid waste companies is increased from 0.8 percent to 1 percent of gross revenues.  Companies collecting source separated recyclable materials are subject to the same fee.

Problem Waste Study:  Ecology is to determine the best available practices for the management of problem wastes.  The study will include an analysis of toxic materials in landfills, incinerator ash, and air emissions.

Joint Select Committee:  The expiration date of the Joint Select Committee for Preferred Solid Waste Management is extended from July of 1989 to July of 1991.

Appropriation:    none

Revenue:    yes

Fiscal Note:      available

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED SENATE AMENDMENTS:

The waste management priorities are modified to list methods of disposal of separated waste as a higher priority than disposal of mixed waste.  Local comprehensive plans in urban areas are to include curbside recycling collection unless the Department of Ecology approves an alternative, following specified criteria. Local plans are to include programs to monitor collection of recyclables from nonresidential sources.  In determining which areas are urban for planning purposes, local governments are to consider Ecology planning guidelines, total population, population density, and land use and utility service plans.

Ecology review of local plans is by a two-step process beginning with submittal of a preliminary draft plan.  Ecology is to identify in its comments actions necessary for the plan to be approvable, and upon submittal of the final draft Ecology's review is limited to issues previously identified.

The state solid waste management plan is to be a single integrated document and is to be adopted by Ecology no later than October 1990.

Collection of source separated recyclables from residences may be regulated through county contracts, or the county may elect to have such collection regulated by the UTC.  The initial election must be made at any time prior to 90 days following approval of the local solid waste plan.  If the county opts for UTC regulation, the recyclables will be collected by the existing certificate holder, unless the UTC determines to award the collection authority through competitive bidding.  By October 1, 1990, the UTC will develop rules setting criteria for determining when to use competitive bidding, and to establish procedures for competitive bidding.  The local government shall select the winning bidder.  The provisions for the competitive bidding alternative under the UTC expire June 30, 1991.

Provisions of the engrossed house bill relating to charges imposed by the UTC or local governments upon solid waste collection rates to subsidize recyclables collection are deleted.

A $1 per tire assessment fee for each replacement vehicle tire sold is established to fund waste tire cleanup and disposal program.  The fee is exempt from B&O, sales and use axes.

The criteria for environmental excellence awards for products are to be developed by the state Solid Waste Advisory Committee.

The Department of Trade and Economic Development is the lead agency for developing and improving markets for recyclables. It is to establish programs to develop markets for recycling and recycled products in the state.

The prevailing wage requirements applicable to local government recycling services in the engrossed house bill are deleted.

Studies by Ecology of unused paint and waste diversion programs were deleted.  Also deleted from the engrossed house bill is a study by the UTC of the regulation of solid waste and recyclables material collection.

Ecology is to grant a maximum of three grants to local governments planning regional solid waste facilities.  Such facilities are to be allowed flexibility in the application of solid waste management priorities.

Senate Committee - Testified: ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES:  Paul Barden, King County Council (pro); Representative Nancy Rust (pro); Representative Art Sprenkle (pro); Rod Hansen, King County Public Works (pro); Randy Scott, Association of Counties (pro); Chris Gregoire, Department of Ecology (pro); Terry Husseman, Department of Ecology (pro); Diana Gale, Seattle Solid Waste Division (pro); George Civitanich, Washington Waste Management Association; Leonard Dietrich, President, Washington Waste Management Association; Dan Leidecker; Agnes Walker; Don Lingren; Joe Willis; Ben Vinson; Kathleen Collins, Association of Cities; Stan Arlt, City of Richland; Mayor Doug Sutherland, City of Tacoma; Mayor Brent Shirley, City of Port Townsend; Raymond Hoffman, Executive Director, Washington Citizens for Recycling (pro); Roger Gruener, University Place Refuse Inc. (con); Greg Matheson, Fibres Int.; Lou Holcomb; Rick Sternoff, ISRI (pro); Barbara Brenner; Linda Zander, Washington State Farm Bureau (con); Nancy Pearson, League of Women Voters (pro); Norman LeMay, Pierce County Refuse (con); Ed Rubatino, Rubatino Refuse (con); Mark Crisson, Tacoma City Light; Kathleen Collins, AWC; Steve McLellan; Jerry Goodwin, EGH Recycle; Jan Gee, Washington Retail Association (pro); B. J. Krafft, Council for Land Care and Planning; Gary Smith, IBA

Senate Committee - Testified: WAYS & MEANS:  Jan Gee, Washington Retail Association (pro); Barney McClure, Department of Revenue; Randy Scott, Washington State Association of Counties (pro); Jim Halstrom, Pacific Northwest Chapter, Inst. Scrap Recycling Industries (pro); Nancy Pearson, Washington Citizens for Recycling, League of Women Voters (pro); Terry Husseman, Department of Ecology (pro); Kathleen Collins, AWC; Mike Ryherd, Joint Council of Teamsters