Manufacturers Threatened No E-Waste Lawsuit, Washington State Says
Lawyers for CTX Technology, DPI Inc., Fujitsu General America, ToteVision and ViewSonic contacted the Washington Department of Ecology in March asking the state to change its “E-Cycle Washington” program “to find a more cost-effective means for the recycling of electronics,” department spokesman Miles Kuntz told us in an e-mail Wednesday. But the manufacturers “did not threaten a lawsuit and there are no ongoing activities or communications on this subject,” though they did argue that E-Cycle Washington violated the Constitution “by imposing a significant financial burden on out-of-state economic interests,” Kuntz said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Violation of the Constitution’s dormant commerce clause was one of the grounds CE makers cited in filing a lawsuit that seeks a preliminary injunction to stop New York City’s e-waste program from taking effect. Natural Resources Defense Council attorney Kate Sinding has alleged in a sworn declaration opposing the injunction that CE manufacturers have threatened lawsuits in several states that have enacted e-waste laws. When we asked her to elaborate, she urged us to contact officials in Maine, Minnesota and Washington for proof. Maine and Minnesota officials haven’t responded to our requests for comment, nor did Sinding reply to our queries about Kuntz’s e-mail.
According to Kuntz, the manufacturers who contacted his department in March wanted the state to roll back its program registration fees, partly because E-Cycle Washington “includes a substantial subsidy for local recyclers and associated industries.” The companies also told the department that the global economic crisis and “tight competition within the electronics industry has resulted in slim or no profits for manufacturers and the costs for recycling were creating a significant financial hardship on manufacturers,” Kuntz said.
ToteVision told the U.S. District Court pretty much the same thing in a sworn declaration filed on CEA’s behalf in the New York City lawsuit. “I can say with virtual certainty that if other cities and states throughout the United States were to adopt similar laws and regulations” to those in New York City, “we would be forced out of business,” ToteVision President William Taraday said in his Aug. 3 declaration. “The fees alone (a $1,500 fee for submitting a required e- waste management report and a $1,250 fee each time we submit an annual report), would vastly exceed company income, and would force us to close our business. ToteVision already is grappling with electronics take back laws in various parts of the country, including my home state of Washington. Many of these other programs impose significant burdens (in the form of registration fees and the like) on small companies like ToteVision, but none of them come close to what New York City is doing.”