The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About4.07 PlasticContainRecycleCITY CLERK FILE # 660-40 AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: August 21, 2001 SUBJECT: Legislation to establish a 50% recycling goal for all plastic containers effective January 1, 2005 Report Prepared By: Jason Behrmann, Administrative Analyst ATTACHMENTS: RECOMMENDATION: 1)' Letter urging support for SB 1069 2) Californians Against Waste Request for SB 1069 Support 3) SB 1069 Legislative Counsel's digest and full text. ~Authorize the Mayor to execute the attached letter expressing the City's support for SB 1069-Plastics Recycling FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None DESCRIPTION: The City recently received a request from Californians Against Waste (CAW), a non-profit waste prevention organization, to urge the City's support of SB 1069 -plastics recycling. Attached is the letter urging support of SB 1069 from CAW, SB 1069 teXt and support letter. Current plastics recycling law requires every rigid plastic packaging container sold in California to meet at least one of 7 specified criteria, including being made from 25% post-consumer material or having a recycling rate of 25%. SB 1069 would increase the required recycling rate to 50% and would require manufacturers to pay a plastic pollution prevention fee to the California Integrated Waste Management Board for every plastic container of a resin type that fails to equal or exceed a recycling rate of 50% on or before January 1, 2005. The fee would be equal to the difference between the scrap value and the cost of recycling for each resin type. Fees would be deposited in a Plastic Pollution Account to promote recycling of plastic containers, including payments to recyclers and local governments to offset the cost of recycling plastic containers. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council Authorize the Mayor to execute the attached letter expressing the City's support for SB 1069 -plastics recycling. H/cc-forms/agdastmt.doc COPIES TO: ITEM NO. ~_~ CITY OF DUBLIN 1 O0 Civic Plaza, Dublin, California 94568 Website: http://www.ci.dublin.ca.us Augu~t 21,2001 The Honorable Dede Alpert 'Senate Appropriations Chair State Capitol, Room 5050 Sacramaneto, CA 95814 RE: Support for SB 1069 (Chesbro) Plastics Recycling Dear Senator Alpert: Lightweight, cheap and flexible plastics are one of the fastest growing materials in California's waste stream and one of the most costly to manage. Currently the cleanup and disposal of plastic waste in California cost local agencies and ratepayers an estimated $340 to $500 million annually. Local curbside programs and other recycling efforts all over California are losing money on plastic recycling because of inconsistent markets, multiple and changing resin types, high handling costs and low scrap values. Senate Bill 1069 is badly needed and will help local agencies to provide services at lower cost as well as protect our state's valuable resources. If adopted, SB 1069 would require a 50% recycling goal for all plastic containers by 2005. If these goals are not achieved the bill establishes a "Plastic Pollution Prevention Fee" on any plastic container (resin) type that fails to achieve the 50% recycling goal. The revenue generated by this fee would then be used to promote plastic recycling as well as provide payments to local agencies and recyclers to help offset the cost of plastic recycling. With your help this bill can become a reality. I urge you to support SB 1069. Sincerely, Guy S. Houston Mayor CC: Senator Tom Torlakson Assemblymember Lynne Leach Area Code (925) · City Manager 833-6650 - City Council 833-6650 · Personnel 833-6605 · Finance 833-6640 · Public Works/Engineering 833-6630 · Parks & Community Services Planning/Code Enforcement 833-6610 · Building Inspection 833-6620 · Fire Prev6 Printed on Recycled Paper ATTACHMENT 1 City o£Dublin C/O Mr. Richard Arnbrose City Manager 100 Civic' Plaza~ Dublin, CA 94568 Californians Aga~ust Waste C/O Mr, Scott J~bble Policy Associate. 926 J Street, Suite 606, Sacramento, CA 95814 Tuesday August 14' 2001 RE: Support for Senate Bill 1069 Dear Mr. Ambrose, On behalf of Californians Against Waste, I would like to ask for your support of Serrate Bill 1069 (Chesbro Plastic Recycling). SB 1069 is currently held-up in suspense in the Senate Appropr/ations Committee. Your support is critical to keeping this bill alive. Along with a sample letter I have also included a brief descript/oa of the bill itself as well as a list of supporters. Should you decide to support SB 1069, please send your support letter to Senator Dede Alpert, Appropriations Committee Chair, State Capitol, Room 5050, Sacramento, CA 95814. I' would also appreciate it if you could please FAX a copy to my office (916) 443-3912 for my personal records as well. Thank you for taking the time to consider supportiahg this desperately needed piece of legislation. Very Cordially Scott Ribble Policy dssociat¢, Californians 2tgainst Waste 926 d Street, Suite 606, Sacramento, C~I 95814 Phone: (916) 443-5422 FAX: fgl6fl 443-3912 Scotttibble@Jaotmail. eom RibblecawrecgelesC~yahoo.com .,926 J STREET * SUITE 606 · SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814 - (916) 443-5, Printed on reevctcd oaner with 75o/~ ~UG-14-~O~I 10:53~ TEL)91S44~91~ ID)DUBLIN CITY ATTACHMENT 2 CA W LEGISLATiVE ACTiON ALERT: Support $B 1069 (Chesbro) Pi s i¢$ Recy¢fing CAW's Plastics Recycling Legislation has been amended and will be heard in the Senate Appropriations Committee this month. Support Letters are urgently needed and should be faxed to the Appropriations Committee at (916) -~Z~ .'2. t~g' $~U mmary of ,S,B 1069 (Chesbro) Plastics Recyclin¢~ Legislation: 1) SB 1069 would establish a 50% recycling goal for all plastic ·containers effective January 1, 2005. 2) The bill would establish a Plastic Pollution Prevention Fee on any plastic container (resin) type that fails to achieve the 50% recycling goal. 3) The Fee Would be equal to the net cost of recycling the plastic container type. 4) Fee revenue would be used to promote plastic recycling, including providing payments to. local agencies and recyclers to help offset the cost of plastic recycling. rnmary of California's Plastic Problem: ;> Lighhveight, cheap and flexible, plastic is one of the fastest growing materials in California's waste stream, and one of the most costly to manage. > Californian's annually dispose of more than 3 million tons of plastic waste. ~> The cleanup and disposal of plastic waste in California costs local agencies and · ratepayers and estimated $340 to $500 million annually. ;> Plastic recycling is failing'in California and across the country. Since 1995, plastic container recycling rates have actually declined, from 24.6% to 17.9% in 1999. > Markets for recycled plastic do not support the cost of plastic collection and processing. Unlike the paper, glass and metals industries, plastic resin producers and contain=f manufacturers have generally failed to invest in the development of infrastructure and markets for plastic recycling. ~ Local curbside programs and other recycling efforts lose money on plastic recycling due to inconsistent markets, multiple and changing resin types, high handling costs, and Iow scrap values. > California's existing plastic recycJing law exempts food, drug, personal cam and cosmetic packaging--the majority of the container market. ~t You Can do: FAX SB '1069 Letters to the Senate EQ Cornm'.~ttee by Wedne,s. da)[ Senator Dede Alpert, ChaJr~ Senate Appropriaticas Commiffee State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 FAX (91 O) -'~'z~ -7_,1'~ Wh, RU6-03-;='001 10:32RH TEL)916443391;=' ID)DUBLIN CITY ~,i6R OF~ Senate Bill 1069 (Chesbro) Plastic"ReeyelJng Supporters I ~ Cities .... Co_unties ................................................ nj League of California CEies California State Association of Counties -H ITl I-- 1~. Glendale San Die(jo Millbrae Mitpitas Morgan Hill South San Francisco Sunny'vale P/co Rivera Santa Monica Manhattan Beach Burbank Long Beach Pomona Claremount Downey Menlo Park Alhambra Inglewood Burbank Azusa Hawthorne El Caion Poway Ha/ward Union City Reedley Lompoc Tiburo~ Santa Aha Manteca Palm Springs San Luis Obispo County Waste Management West Contra Costa Fnte§rated Management Authority Ventura Solid Waste Management Dept. Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority Del Node Solid Waste Management Authority Sonoma County Waste Management Agency Santa Cruz Santa Clara Castro Valley Sanitary District San Frartcisco Fairfield-Suisun Sewer District Waste Management,/nc Norca[ Waste Systems Allied Waste MarBorg Indus[des Summit pulp and Paper, Ir~c San Francisco Community Re, cyclers Solana Recyclers Peninsula San{tary Service, Inc. Stanford Recycling Cer~ter Potential industries, Inc. Pan Pacit~c Fiber, [nc. Main Street Fibers Eco Plast. City Fibers, Inc. Recycling and Waste Management, Unlverr~ o~ California, Satn Diego Northern California Recyclirtg Recycling Association C~lifomM A~socia[ion of Rei:ycting' of Recycling Ma~,,et Develc~mer'A Zones Community ReoycEng and Resorce Recovery, rnc. American Waste Industries Oakland/Berkeley Recycling Market Development Zone EDCO, Waste and Recycli~tg Services, Inc. S4:llid Wa.~e Management Program- San Frarmi~c~ Rec~jcling Program AIlan Company Greater Los Angeles Sol~d Waste Management Association Association of California Recycling IndusMes Arceta Community Recycling Center .~ Environmental Organizations Labor ............................................................................................................................................... ~ I ............... -i~- --7 ...... ~ ..........................................'-- ....... ~1 re i~lif6m~ar~s Against Waste United Food and Commemial Wo~ers International, Lo~l 1442 ' ~ ~ California League of Conse~ation Votem Se~ice Employes rntematronal Un[on, Lo~i 347 ~ California Resorce Recoveery Association Community Ehvironmehtal Council National Resource De[ense Council Sierra Ctub of Calil~ornia Urban Corps ol~ San Diego Heal the Bay California Collegiate Recycling Council Haight-Ashbury Neighborhood Council, (H.A.N,C.) California Association of Local Ca3servatior~ Corps Environmental Defer~se Center for Community, Acl~on snd En¥1mmentar Justice Ballona Wetland Foundation Coalition for Clean Air Center for Earth Concerns Sou~h Bay Business and Environmental Coalitior~ Eerth Communicatior~s Oifice Norih East Trees Algalita Marine Research Found~tion Commun~ies for a Better Environment Friends of the River Global Green USA Ecology Action The Tuolumne River Preservation Trust Sea Shephercl Conservation Society m SB 1069 Senate Bill - AMENDED BILL NUMBER: SB 1069 BILL TEXT AMENDED AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 30, 2001 AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 19, 2001 AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 16, 2001 INTRODUCED BY Senator Chesbro FEBRUARY 23, 2001 An act to add Sections 42360.1, 42360.2, 42375, 42376, and 42377 to the Public Resources Code, relating to solid wastD. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 1069, as amended, Chesbro. Plastic pollution prevention fee. The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 requires, except as specified, every rigid plastic packaging container, as defined, that is sold or offered for sale in the state to meet, on average, at least one of 7 specified criteria, including being made from 25% postconsumer material or having a specified recycling rate of 25%, based on annual reports published by the California Integrated Waste Management Board. Certain rigid plastic packaging containers are exempted from meeting those criteria, including those containers that contain food or cosmetics. This bill would require any manufacturer, as defined, of a product sold or offered for sale in a plastic container, as defined, to pay a plastic pollution prevention fee to the board for every plastic container of a resin type that fails to equal or exceed a recycling rate of 50% or more on or before January 1, 2005. The bill would require the board to set the plastic pollution prevention fee in an amount equal to the difference between the scrap value and the cost of recycling for each resin type, except as specified. The bill would require the board to deposit the fees in the Plastic Pollution Account, which the bill would create in the Integrated Waste Management Fund in the State Treasury. The bill would authorize the board to expend the moneys deposited in the Plastic Pollution Account to promote the recycling of plastic containers, including but not limited to, payments to recyclers and local governments to offset the cost of recycling plastic containers. The bill would authorize the board to adopt regulations to implement the bill. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION to The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: (a) A decade ago, in order to reduce waste and conserve natural resources, the Legislature committed to cutting solid waste disposal in this state in half. {b) While this effort remains incomplete, the state, in partnership with local government, the private sector, and the public, has developed a comprehensive recycling infrastructure~ achieved one of the nation's highest waste diversion rates. ATTACHMENT 3 http://www.lira.net/billtexts/c~O 102/sen/sb_1069_bi11_20010430_amended_sel SB 1069 Senate Bill - AMENDED (c) DOzens of jurisdictions, along with several categories of materials, have already equaled or exceeded 50 percent recycling. (d) Amidst this recycling success, one category of materials--plastic packaging--stands out as a recycling failure. While plastic packaging remains one of the fastest growing components of California's waste stream, recycling rates for plastic packaging lag behind those for virtually every other packaging material. (e) According to reports from the California Integrated Waste Management Board, recycling rates for rigid plastic packaging containers have actually been in decline, dropping from nearly 25 percent in 1995, to 23 percent in 1996, 22 percent in 1997, 19 percent in 1998~ and less than 18 percent in 1999. (f) According to a report from the California Integrated Waste Management Board, California disposed of more than 2 million tons of plastic packaging in 1999. The total cost to local governments and ratepayers of collecting and disposing of this plastic waste is estimated at three hundred forty million dollars ($340,000,000) annually. SEC. 2. Section 42360.1 is added to the Public Resources Code, to read: 42360.1. "Manufacturer" means the producer or generator of a product that is sold or offered for sale in the state and that is stored inside a plastic container. SEC. 3. Section 42360.2 is added to the Public Resources Code, to read: 42360.2. "Plastic container" means any plastic package having a relatively inflexible finite shape or form, with a minimum capacity of eight fluid cunccs gallons or its equivalent volume, and a maximum capacity of five fluid ounces or its equivalent volume, which is capable of maintaining its shape while holding other products, including, but not limited to, bottles, cartons, cups, bowls, clamshells, and other receptacles, for sale or distribution in the state. SEC. 4. Section 42375 is added to the Public Resources Code, to read: 42375. (a) It is the intent of the Legislature that this state pursue a path of shared responsibility between product producers, container manufactures, local governments, and private recyclers to ensure that, by 2005 and beyond, at least 50 percent of plastic containers are diverted from this state's solid waste and litter stream and recycled into new products. (b) It is the intent of the Legislature that manufacturers of products sold in plastic containers shall be responsible for offsetting costs associated with the recycling of those plastic containers. (c) It is the intent of the Legislature that operators of curbside recycling programs in this state accept for recycling any plastic container for which they receive revenue from scrap value, product manufaCturers, or the state, the total of which is equal to or greater than the cost of recycling. SEC. 5. Section 42376 is added to the Public Resources Code, to read: 42376. (a) On and after January 1, 2006, any manufacturer of a product sold or offered for sale in a plastic container shall pay a plastic pollution prevention fee to the board, as determined pursuant to subdivision (b), for every plastic container of a resin type that fails to equal or exceed a recycling rate of 50 percent or more on or before January 1,. 2005. (b) (1) The board shall set the amount of the plastic pollution prevention fee equal to the difference between the average cost of recycling and the average scrap value for each resin type as determined by the board. (2) For plastic containers that are not recyclable, the board shall set the plastic pollution prevention fee in an amount equal to http://www.lira.net/billtexts/ca/0102/sen/sb_1069_bi11_20010430_amended_sen.html 8/3/01 SB 1069 Senate Bill - AMENDED the average cost of collection and 'disposal of the container as solid waste. (c) The provisions of this section shall not apply to a beverage or beverage container, as defined in Sections 14504 and 14505 respectively SEC. 6. Section 42377' is added to the Public Resources Code, to read: 42377. (a) The board shall deposit all fees collected pursuant to this article in the Plastic Pollution Account, which is hereby created in the Integrated Waste Management Fund in the State Treasury. The board may expend the moneys deposited in the Plastic Pollution Account to promote the recycling of plastic containers, including, but not limited to, payments to recyclers and local governments to offset the cost of recycling plastic containers. (b) The board may adopt regulations to implement this article. http://www.lira.net/billtexts/ca/0102/sen/sb_1069_bi11_20010430_amended_sen.html 8/3/01