HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 4.07 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