BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 479
                                                                  Page 1

          Date of Hearing:  April 13, 2009

                       ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
                                Nancy Skinner, Chair
                 AB 479 (Chesbro) - As Introduced:  February 24, 2009
           
          SUBJECT  :  Solid waste:  diversion. 

           SUMMARY  :  Increases the solid waste diversion rate for local  
          jurisdictions to 60% by 2015 and establishes a statewide  
          diversion goal of 60% by 2015 and 75% by 2020.  Implements  
          recycling requirements for commercial waste generators.   
          Increases the state's tipping fee on solid waste from $1.40 per  
          ton to $3.90 per ton and directs the revenue from the increase  
          back to local jurisdictions.  

           EXISTING LAW  , under the California Integrated Waste Management  
          Act of 1989:

          1) Requires each city or county source reduction and recycling  
             element to include an implementation schedule that shows a  
             city or county must divert 25% of solid waste from landfill  
             disposal or transformation by January 1, 1995, and must  
             divert 50% of solid waste on and after 2000.

          2) Allows the California Integrated Waste Management Board  
             (CIWMB) to grant a time extension to the above diversion  
             requirements for a newly incorporated city.

          3) Allowed CIWMB, until January 1, 2006, to establish an  
             alternative to the 50% diversion requirement under certain  
             conditions.

          4) Allowed CIWMB, until January 1, 2006, to grant time  
             extensions to the 2000 50% diversion requirement under  
             certain conditions.

          5) Required local agencies to adopt an ordinance relating to  
             adequate areas for collecting and loading recyclables in  
             development projects prior to September 1, 1994.  If any  
             local agency had not adopted an ordinance by that date, a  
             model ordinance prepared by CIWMB took effect.  

          6) Beginning July 1, 2005, prohibits local agencies from issuing  
             a building  permit for any development project that fails to  








                                                                  AB 479
                                                                  Page 2

             include adequate areas for collecting and loading recyclable  
             materials. 

           THIS BILL  : 

          1)Requires local jurisdictions to divert 60% of all solid waste  
            by January 1, 2015 through source reduction, recycling, and  
            composting.  

          2)Requires CIWMB to adopt policies and incentives to ensure that  
            statewide diversion reaches 60% by January 1, 2015 and 75% by  
            January 1, 2020.  

          3)Requires owners or operators of businesses that contract for  
            solid waste services and generate more than four cubic yards  
            of solid waste and recyclable materials per week to arrange  
            for recycling services consistent with local and state  
            requirements and to the extent that the service is "reasonably  
            available."  

          4)On or before January 1, 2011, requires each city, county,  
            solid waste authority, or joint powers authority located  
            within a county with a population of 200,000 or more to adopt  
            a commercial recycling ordinance. 

          5)Specifies that the ordinance must include:

             a)   An enforceable requirement that a commercial waste  
               generator source separate recyclable material from solid  
               waste and subscribe to a basic level of recycling service,  
               or subscribe to an alternative type of recycling service,  
               which may include mixed waste processing.  

             b)   Educational, implementation, and enforcement provisions.  
                

          6)Specifies that the bill does not limit the authority of a  
            local agency to adopt, implement, or enforce a local  
            commercial recycling ordinance that is more stringent or limit  
            the authority of a local agency in a county of less than  
            200,000.   

          7)Specifies that the bill does not modify or abrogate a  
            franchise granted by a local agency on or before January 1,  
            2010; a contract, license, or permit to collect solid waste on  








                                                                  AB 479
                                                                  Page 3

            or before January 1, 2010; or, the right of a business to sell  
            or donate their recyclable materials.  

          8)Authorizes a local agency to take into account the adequacy of  
            areas for collecting and loading recyclable materials, and  
            prohibits a local agency from determining noncompliance due to  
            inadequate areas for recycling if the development project was  
            granted prior to September 1, 1994.  

          9)Increases the state tipping fee on solid waste from $1.40 per  
            ton to $3.90 per ton on and after January 1, 2010 and  
            appropriates the increase as follows: 

             a)   Between January 1, 2010 and January 1, 2015, on a per  
               capita basis to jurisdictions for the expansion of source  
               reduction and recycling programs and commercial recycling  
               programs.

             b)   After January 1, 2015, on a per capita basis to  
               jurisdictions that have achieved 60% diversion.  For  
               jurisdictions that have not reached 60%, requires CIWMB to  
               expend the fee revenues on a per capita basis to establish  
               local programs to meet this requirement.  

          10)Makes related technical and clarifying changes. 

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to State Board of Equalization (BOE),  
          over the last three years an average of 40 million tons of solid  
          waste was disposed.  Based on this figure, BOE projects that  
          this bill will increase fee collection by approximately $100  
          million annually.    This bill directs that amount back to local  
          governments on a per capita basis.  





















                                                                  AB 479
                                                                  Page 4

           COMMENTS  :

           1)Background 
           
          California is a national leader in diverting waste from  
          landfills, currently diverting 54% of all waste.  CIWMB has  
          adopted a "zero waste" goal for California.  While a laudable  
          goal, this is unreachable without significant increases in  
          diversion efforts, including requirements for commercial  
          recycling.  According to CIWMB, the commercial sector generates  
          approximately 60% of waste disposed.  The AB 32 Scoping Plan  
          calls for substantial increases in recycling for the commercial  
          sector and states that "this could be implemented, for example,  
          through voluntary or mandatory programs, including protocols,  
          enhanced partnerships with local governments, and provision of  
          appropriate financial incentives."

          Recycling provides significant benefits.  Not only does it  
          conserve natural resources, energy, and water, it also creates  
          jobs and builds California's economy.  According to Californians  
          Against Waste, the recycling industry accounts for more than  
          85,000 jobs and generates nearly $4 billion annually in wages  
          and produces $10 billion worth of goods and services annually.   
          Moreover, recycling helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions from  
          landfills and manufacturing.  According to the AB 32 Scoping  
          Plan, adopted by ARB in December 2008 in response to the  
          California Global Warming Solutions Act, 5.6 million metric tons  
          carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2E), of the state's total GHG  
          emissions are from solid waste landfills.  If left unaddressed,  
          that number will reach 7.7 MMTCE by the year 2020.  The Scoping  
          Plan calls for reductions in methane emissions from landfills  
          through increased diversion/recycling, composting, and  
          commercial recycling.

           2)This bill 
           
          According to the author, this bill provides a new standard for  
          recycling and waste reduction in California by moving the state  
          from the current 50% diversion requirement to 60% by 2015 and  
          75% by 2020 and establishes "shared responsibility" for reaching  
          these goals by requiring local governments to achieve 60% with  
          the remaining responsibility placed on CIWMB to achieve a  
          statewide rate of 75%.  

          Additionally, this bill establishes commercial recycling  








                                                                  AB 479
                                                                  Page 5

          requirements, which closes a significant loophole in the state's  
          diversion efforts.   

          This bill attempts to provide funding for local governments  
          reach the 60% goal by increasing the state's tipping fee by  
          $2.50 and redirecting that money back to locals on a per capita  
          basis.  

           3)Arguments in opposition

           This bill faces opposition from local governments, who state  
          that much has changed recently to make increased diversion  
          infeasible.  The most significant of which is the collapse of  
          the recycled materials markets.  The value of these materials,  
          including plastic, cardboard, and glass, has dropped as much as  
          80%.  As a result, these materials are being stockpiled.  Should  
          the market fail to rebound in the near future, many of these  
          materials may be landfilled.  Opponents also point out that  
          landfills have experienced a drop in disposal by as much as 20%.  
           This has resulted in a decrease in disposal fee revenues to  
          local governments.  Increasing the state disposal fee will not  
          alleviate this problem and will raise disposal costs.  

          Local governments state that additional tools are needed before  
          they can comply with an increased diversion rate.  These tools  
          include improved product design and producer responsibility;  
          meaningful market development for recycled materials; assistance  
          for siting compost facilities; better organics management; and  
          efforts to enhance conversion technology.    

           4)Previous and related legislation 

              a)   SB 25 (Padilla) requires CIWMB to develop a plan and to  
               adopt policies, programs, and incentives to reach a  
               statewide diversion rate of 75% by an unspecified date.    
               This bill is currently in the Senate Environmental Quality  
               Committee. 
              
              b)    AB 2866 (Huffman), introduced in 2008, increased the  
               tipping fee from $1.40 per ton to $2 per ton beginning July  
               1, 2009 and directs the additional funding to be used for  
               air emission reduction technologies for solid waste  
               vehicles; diversion programs for compostable organics,  
               including energy generation; and, to establish a trust fund  
               to protect the state from liability associated with closed  








                                                                  AB 479
                                                                  Page 6

               and abandoned solid waste disposal sites.  This bill was  
               held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.  
              
              c)   AB 2640 (Huffman), introduced in 2008, required CIWMB to  
               develop a compostable organics management program and a  
               grant and loan program for organics management projects.   
               Additionally, this bill established a fee of $1.40 per ton  
               (the same amount as the state's tipping fee) on organics  
               used for alternative daily cover (ADC) in the operations of  
               a solid waste facility.  This bill was held on the Senate  
               Appropriations Suspense File.  
              
              d)   SB 1020 (Padilla), introduced in 2007, required CIWMB to  
               develop a plan to achieve a 75% statewide rate of solid  
               waste diversion from landfills and other disposal  
               facilities by January 1, 2020.  This bill was held in the  
               Assembly Appropriations Committee. 
              
              e)   AB 1610 (Nu?ez), introduced in 2007, increased the  
               maximum solid waste tipping fee from $1.40 to $2 per ton.   
               This bill was gutted and amended to address oil refineries.  
                
              
              f)   AB 712 (De Leon), introduced in 2007, established the  
               Off-Road Solid Waste and Recycling Vehicle Clean Air  
               Program and imposed a new tipping fee of $0.50 on each ton  
               of solid waste disposed in California to fund air quality  
               compliance for off-road solid waste vehicles and to fund a  
               grant program for projects that produce renewable energy  
               from solid waste.  This bill was held on the Senate  
               Appropriations Suspense File.  
              
          5)Suggested amendment 
           
          Section 6 of the bill (page 8, beginning on line 12) is unclear  
          as to how the fee is apportioned.  The committee may wish to  
          adopt the following amendment: 

                  48001.5.   The fee revenues collected by the State Board  
               of Equalization pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section  
               48000      The amount of two dollars and fifty cents ($2.50)  
               per ton of the fee collected by the board, pursuant to  
               subdivision (d) of section 48000,  shall be available to the  
               board, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for  
               expenditure by the board according to the following:








                                                                  AB 479
                                                                  Page 7

                (a) Between January 1, 2010, and January 1, 2015, the fee  
               revenue shall be apportioned on a per capita basis to  
               jurisdictions for the expansion of source reduction,  
               recycling, and composting programs, including residential  
               recycling programs and commercial recycling programs, as  
               well as the development of new and expanded recycling and  
               composting infrastructure.
                (b) On and after January 1, 2015, the fee revenues shall  
               be apportioned on a per capita basis to jurisdictions that  
               have achieved the diversion rate specified in paragraph (3)  
               of subdivision (a) of Section 41780 for use pursuant to  
               subdivision (a) of this section. For jurisdictions that  
               have not reach the diversion rate required in paragraph (3)  
               of subdivision (a) of Section 41780, the board shall expend  
               the fee revenues to establish local programs to help the  
               jurisdictions achieve the diversion rate required by  
               paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of Section 41780.

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           
          American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees,  
          AFL-CIO
          California Senior Legislature 
          Californians Against Waste

           Opposition 
           
          Cal-Tax
          California State Association of Counties
          County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County
          League of California Cities
          Regional Council of Rural Counties
          Solid Waste Association of North America
           

          Analysis Prepared by  :  Elizabeth MacMillan / NAT. RES. / (916)  
          319-2092