Transcript Presentation - Product Stewardship Institute

Product Stewardship
Framework Legislation
Sego Jackson
Snohomish County Solid Waste Division, Principal Planner
Northwest Product Stewardship Council, Policy Committee Chair
[email protected]
425.388.6490
PSI Forum/NW NAHMMA Conference
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Wasteful
2
Toxic
3
Dangerous
4
Frustrating
…when addressed on a product by product basis!
5
Don’t Get Frustrated!
Get Framework!
Think Framework!
6
A Pattern
for EPR Policy
• Producers Have Primary Responsibility
– Independent or Collective Programs
• Use Stewardship Organization
– Responsible for financing and organizing collection
through processing (remove costs from
governments)
– Develop and submit plans and annual reports
• Shared Responsibility – others have roles
• No legislated fees – costs are internalized
7
The Goal:
Framework Approach
 Government sets level field,
performance standards, prioritizes
products
 Government ensures transparency,
accountability
 Why not make this approach
standardized for multiple products?
 What would framework legislation,
such as British Columbia has, look
like for a state?
8
A Better Way:
Product Stewardship
1. Producer Responsibility
1.
All producers selling a covered product into the State are
responsible for designing managing, and financing a
stewardship program that addresses the lifecycle impacts of
their products including end-of-life management.
Producers have flexibility to meet these responsibilities by
offering their own plan or participating in a plan with others.
In addressing end-of-life management, all stewardship
programs must finance the collection, transportation, and
responsible reuse, recycling or disposition of covered
products. Stewardship programs must:
2.
3.


4.
5.
Cover the costs of new, historic and orphan covered products.
Provide convenient collection for consumers throughout the State.
Costs for product waste management are shifted from
taxpayers and ratepayers to producers and users.
Programs are operated by producers with minimum
government involvement.
How to Use Framework
Approach?
A few options:
• Pass framework legislation that empowers state
agency to designate additional products over
time.
• Pass framework legislation that allows
legislature to easily add additional products
over time.
• Use “template” model legislation on a productby-product basis - future harmonization
13
Framework EPR Trends
• CA waste agency adopts Framework
EPR policy 1/08
• Washington State Climate Action Team
Recommendation, 11/08
• National Association of Counties Framework EPR resolution, 7/08
•
•
•
•
•
Minnesota Framework Study bill 2008
Extensive stakeholder processes in Oregon, California, Minnesota
Coordination calls between states working on Framework
EPA Region 9 and 10 Climate Work Groups
ASTWMO Product Stewardship Committee, Etc.
15
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/publications/lrw-ps-1sy09.pdf
Framework EPR Legislation
•
Study Bill in 2008
•
Three U.S. states introduce
full Framework EPR bills
in 2009
Rhode Island
•
Study Bill modeled from
MN Study Bill in 2009
Washington
•
Framework included in
Washington Omnibus “for
discussion” climate
legislation in 2009
Minnesota
Oregon, California, Minnesota
Washington
Washington:
• 2007 - Governor’s Climate Advisory Team:
– recommends framework policy development
• 2008 - Governor’s Climate Action Team
– Beyond Waste Implementation Work Group
develops sample framework from NWPSC draft
• applies to initial set of products
• uses as template for lighting legislation sample
• 2009 - included in omnibus climate change “for
discussion” legislation (HB 1718) and lighting legislation
also introduced (as well as pharmaceuticals)
• 2010 – Focus on product specific legislation likely
18
California
2009 Bills of Interest
Framework
EPR Framework
(AB 283)
www.ciwmb.ca.gov/EPR
Product-specific
• Carry-out Bags
(AB68, AB87,
AB 1141, SB531)
• Lamps containing
mercury (AB 1173)
• Paint (AB1343)
• Pharma (SB26)
AB 283 (Chesbro)
CA Product Stewardship Act of 2009
CIWMB
Producers
• Adopt regulations by
July 1, 2011
• Establish processes for
product selection,
performance goals,
plan development, &
penalties
• Monitor progress &
enforce
• Report to legislature
• Submit a product
stewardship plan to
achieve goals
• Fund implementation of
plan
• Pay those performing
services to implement
plan
• Submit annual reports to
board
Oregon
Product Stewardship
Framework
Set up a framework and process to:
Select products
Require producers to be responsible for products at endof-life
Increase convenient and free collection and recycling
Provide incentives to design products for the environment
Set performance goals
Context for OR Legislation
 Grew out of 2007 E-waste Legislation
 Key Legislator Interest – saw need if future
products added
 Strong support form State Environmental
Quality Commission and Dept. of
Environmental Quality Senior Management
 Harmonization with neighboring states –
California and Washington
Stakeholder Process
Key Issues
 Which products and product selection criteria
 Delegation of product selection
 Definition of Producer
Legislative Challenges
 Framework concept hard to grasp
 Industry push-back all sectors
 Democratic governor and legislature –
conservative democrats no votes
 Economy limited consideration of bills with
fiscal impact
 Economic issues dominated session – limited
time for other issues
Producer Voiced Concerns
 Concerned government will dictate product
design
 Expensive for producers
 Grows government bureaucracy
 One size fits all
 “Job Killer”
 Product selection issues – which, why, how and
by whom?
Benefits to Producers
 Harmonization between states to streamline
compliance
 Industry in the driver’s seat – not prescriptive,
much flexibility
 Predictability of what is expected - develop plans,
perform
 Level playing field - producers held to same
standards as other producers
 Market/economic design drivers – not government
dictating design
 Minimal government involvement, bureaucracy and
costs
Additional Resources
California Legislation,
http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0251-0300/ab_283_bill_20090212_introduced.html
Minnesota Legislation,
https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/bin/bldbill.php?bill=H2407.0.html&session=ls86
Oregon Legislation, http://www.deq.state.or.us/lq/sw/productstewardship.htm
Rhode Island Legislation, http://www.rilin.state.ri.us//BillText09/SenateText09/S0854.pdf
Washington Sample Framework Policy and Omnibus Climate Change Legislation,
http://www.productpolicy.org/content/climate-change-epr and
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=1718&year=2009 (sect. 318-361)
California Integrated Waste Man. Board EPR, http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/EPR/
California Product Stewardship Council, http://www.calpsc.org/
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, http://www.pca.state.mn.us/oea/stewardship/index.cfm
Northwest Product Stewardship Council, www.productstewardship.net
Product Policy Institute, www.productpolicy.org
Product Stewardship Institute, www.productstewardship.us
27