Federal Law Won’t Slow State E-Waste Legislation, Officials Say

The Electronic Waste Recycling, Promotion & Consumer Protection Act (CED March 4 p8) introduced last week by Sens. Wyden (D-Ore.) and Talent (R-Mo.) has drawn notice from state and local govt. groups and environmentalists, mainly due to its bipartisan status. Among other things, the bill would impose a national e-waste landfill disposal ban, provide business and consumer tax credits for recycling and have the EPA study and report to Congress on a national recycling program that would preempt any state plan. The National Computer Recycling Act introduced in Jan. by Reps. Thompson (D-Cal.) and Slaughter (D-N.Y.) takes a fee-based approach. Under it, manufacturers would have to assess a fee up to $10 on new computers to pay for recycling grant programs for local govts. and organizations. HB-320 by Cunningham (R-Cal.) also takes a tax incentive approach to encouraging recycling of computers, cellphones and TVs.

“The profile of the issue has certainly been elevated at the federal level,” said Rick Goss, EIA dir. of environmental policy. Besides the congressional measures, he said, the Dept. of Commerce is set to report on e- waste, and several senators have asked the Govt. Accountability Office to analyze the issue. He said he wasn’t sure if heightened federal attention would slow state action. With so many states weighing legislation, he said, some may pause to see what happens in Washington. But others won’t, he added.

The Wyden bill is bipartisan, lending it a “little more weight,” said Adam Schafer, program dir. of the National Caucus of Environmental Legislators. “It’s a good start,” he said, adding that it’s important for the federal govt. to be seen as actively combating e-waste. However, he said, states should have a say in crafting any national program. “I would hope that states would still be given the ability to set up stronger systems if they felt it was needed to protect the public health.” Congress probably won’t act this year, he said, noting that in recent years e-waste bills couldn’t even get a hearing.

Environmentalists like what they call the “sophisticated” Wyden bill. “I don’t think Congress is going to act this year,” said Mark Murray, exec. dir. of Californians Against Waste (CAW). “But it’s an important first step that we are seeing more sophisticated bills being introduced.” He said Wyden’s proposal doesn’t go far enough, since it doesn’t provide private sector recyclers and public agencies with resources to deal with e-waste. But “they are at least talking about it,” he added. CAW was the prime sponsor of the e-waste law in Cal., the first state to enact legislation.

The bill doesn’t reflect discussions at the National Electronics Product Stewardship Initiative (NEPSI), said Scott Cassel, exec. dir. of the Mass.-based Product Stewardship Initiative (PSI), which advises state agencies on environmental policies and legislation. Cassel called it “surprising” that the measure proposes using tax dollars to subsidize e-waste recycling. NEPSI tilted toward working recycling costs into products’ purchase prices, so consumers would pay the freight, he added. Manufacturer discord over financing forced the EPA- sponsored NEPSI to wind up last year without reaching agreement. While encouraging recycling, the bill doesn’t provide funds for existing infrastructure operated by local govts., added Cassel.

Referring to the differences among industry sectors on imposing a fee on products to finance recycling, EIA’s Goss said a tax incentive approach would be an “interesting 3rd way” to break the logjam. “Clearly, there is an interest among industry in exploring the tax incentive approach that potentially is a win-win for everybody involved.”

There’s no state unanimity on a national landfill ban, Cassel said. A ban would make sense only if an infrastructure to deal with additional waste was created, he added. Govt. officials fear “a very big crisis” if they must cope with a flood of used materials without the infrastructure or funds to build it, he said. But any e- waste legislation should be bipartisan and take a national approach, he said: “So the legislators [Wyden and Talent] are commended for getting into the fray and putting a system on the table.” With Congressional action unlikely this year, he said, attention would turn again to the states.

Cassel said the PSI would advise states against suspending efforts to pass legislation: “My message to state officials will be, ‘Go full steam ahead to solve your own problem.'” The more states develop systems, he said, the more their impact on federal legislation. “So there is testing going on in the states. We are going to learn from that and the more bills that are passed, the more data we will have for federal legislation.”

Cassel said Minn. has 5 bills -- 3 producer responsibility, one fee-based and one retail take-back. N.C. will soon introduce a revised advanced recovery fee (ARF) bill, he said; Ore. will have hearings this month on an ARF bill. A Wash. legislative committee is to make e-waste recommendations in Dec. A model regional e-waste bill is being written by the Eastern Regional Council of State Govts. and the Northeast Recycling Council. Legislation based on that model was expected to be introduced in states before Nov., Cassel added.