BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                      



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   AB 845|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                                 THIRD READING


          Bill No:  AB 845
          Author:   Ma (D)
          Amended:  8/14/12 in Senate
          Vote:     21

           
           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  Not relevant 

           NOTE:  Senate Floor Amendments of 8/14/12 place 
                 substantial provisions of the July 13th version of 
                 AB 1178 (Ma).

                  The Senate Environmental Quality Committee approved 
                 AB 1178 (4-3) on July 6, 2011.  AB 1178 was amended 
                 August 24, 2011, and re-referred to the Senate 
                 Environmental Quality Committee pursuant to Senate 
                 Rule 29.10.  AB 1178 was held in committee because 
                 the author wanted to continue working with various 
                 interests and a bill re-referred to committee 
                 pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10 cannot be amended.  


           SUBJECT  :    Solid waste:  place of origin

           SOURCE  :     California Refuse Recycling Council


           DIGEST  :    This bill prohibits an ordinance enacted by a 
          city or county, including an ordinance enacted by 
          initiative by the voters of a city or county, from 
          otherwise restricting or limiting the importation of solid 
          waste into a privately owned solid waste facility in that 
          city or county based on place of origin.  This bill 
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                AB 845
                                                                Page 
          2

          provides that this prohibition does not require a privately 
          owned or operated solid waste facility to accept certain 
          waste, does not allow a privately owned solid waste 
          facility to abrogate certain agreements, does not prohibit 
          a city, county, or regional agency from requiring a 
          privately owned solid waste facility to guarantee permitted 
          capacity to a host jurisdiction, and does not otherwise 
          supersede or affect the land use authority of a city or 
          county.

           Senate Floor Amendments  of 8/14/12 delete the prior version 
          of the bill covering high-speed rail, and add the above 
          language which is substantially similar to the July 13th 
          version of AB 1178 which was sent back to the Senate 
          Environmental Quality Committee on a Senate Rule 29.10.

           ANALYSIS  :    The existing California Integrated Waste 
          Management Act of 1989 allows each county, city, or 
          district to determine aspects of solid waste handling that 
          are of local concern and the means by which the services 
          are to be provided.

           Waste management is a state and regional issue  .  Prior to 
          1989, the state did not have a coherent policy to ensure 
          that its solid waste was managed in an effective and 
          environmentally sound manner.  Over 90 percent of the 
          state's solid waste was disposed into landfills, some of 
          which posed a threat to groundwater, air quality, and 
          public health.  In 1989, the Legislature passed the 
          California Integrated Waste Management Act (Act) 
          acknowledging that there was an urgent need for state and 
          local agencies to enact and implement an aggressive new 
          integrated waste management program. 

          As part of the Act, the Legislature declared that "it is in 
          the public interest for the state?Ýto] require local 
          agencies to make adequate provisions for solid waste 
          handling, both within their respective jurisdictions and in 
          response to regional needs" (emphasis added). 

           Measure E and Potrero Hills  .  This bill is in response to 
          Measure E, a 1984 Solano County initiative that "limitÝs] 
          the amount of solid waste imported into Solano County to a 
          maximum of 95,000 tons per year."  At the time of this 







                                                                AB 845
                                                                Page 
          3

          initiative, Solano County was importing approximately 
          500,000 tons of solid waste annually from San Francisco. 

          In 1992, the Legislative Counsel of California and the 
          County Counsel of Solano County opined that Measure E 
          violated the commerce clause of the United States 
          Constitution because it discriminates against interstate 
          commerce.  In light of these opinions, the Solano County 
          Board of Supervisors (Board) announced that it would not 
          enforce Measure E.  Without Measure E, Solano County has 
          been able to import large amounts of solid waste from other 
          areas of the state for disposal at facilities like the 
          Potrero Hills Landfill. 

          The Potrero Hills Landfill in Solano County currently 
          receives approximately 900,000 tons of solid waste 
          annually, including 600,000 tons originating from outside 
          of the county.  The landfill is expected to reach capacity 
          by 2016.  There are plans to expand the Potrero Hills 
          Landfill from 320 acres to 580 acres and to increase the 
          maximum height from 220 feet to 345 feet, which will extend 
          the life of the landfill for another 35 years.  The project 
          contains habitat mitigation that includes preserving and 
          enhancing approximately 994 acres of grassland, wetland, 
          and water features.  The cost of the project is 
          approximately $110 million. 

          On June 9, 2009, the Board voted in favor of certifying a 
          final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Potrero 
          Hills Landfill Expansion project-due to legal challenges, 
          this was the third time in four years that the Board 
          certified the final EIR.  On October 21, 2010, the San 
          Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission 
          approved a permit for the project with a few additional 
          conditions. 

          On June 10, 2009, the day after the Board certified the 
          final EIR, the opponents of the project filed a lawsuit in 
          the Solano County Superior Court to enforce Measure E. 

          On May 12, 2010, the court issued an opinion acknowledging 
          that Measure E as drafted raises valid commerce clause 
          concerns because it would limit the importation of waste 
          from out of state.  However, the court invoked a rarely 







                                                                AB 845
                                                                Page 
          4

          used judicial authority to actually rewrite Measure E to 
          make it constitutional.  The court explained that "Measure 
          E, if rewritten to apply only to waste generated within 
          other counties in California, would not offend the commerce 
          clause."  The court ruling has been appealed to the 
          California Court of Appeal. 

          If the ultimate outcome of the case is in support of 
          Measure E, the Potrero Hills Landfill's current waste load 
          would be cut by as much as 85 percent, and could be even 
          lower depending on how much of the 95,000-ton quota imposed 
          by Measure E would be allocated to the facility.  Counties 
          in the Bay Area and other parts of Northern California rely 
          on the Potrero Hills Landfill for its solid waste 
          management.  These counties would have to find alternative 
          ways to manage their solid waste that would otherwise go to 
          the Potrero Hills Landfill. 

          This bill will essentially nullify Measure E and the Solano 
          County Superior Court ruling by prohibiting a local 
          government from restricting or limiting the importation of 
          solid waste based on the place of origin. 

           Anti-Trust issues  .  Beginning in 2008, then-California 
          Attorney General Jerry Brown and the United States 
          Department of Justice investigated the merger of two of the 
          three largest waste-hauling companies in the country, 
          Republic Services, Inc. (Republic) and Allied Waste 
          Industries, Inc. (Allied), for antitrust-law implications.  
          The investigation found that before the merger Republic's 
          Potrero Hills Landfill, Allied's Keller Canyon facility in 
          Contra Costa County, and Republic's Vasco Road site in 
          Alameda County were the primary competitors in the waste 
          disposal industry in the San Francisco Bay Area.  Moreover, 
          the Attorney General determined that competition between 
          these three landfills kept the price charged for disposal 
          (i.e., tipping fees) to competitive levels.  To address the 
          loss of competition that would occur if one company 
          controlled all three landfills, the Attorney General 
          entered into a consent decree that allowed Allied and 
          Republic to merge, but required the divestiture of the 
          Potrero Hills Landfill.  The Potrero Hills Landfill is now 
          owned by Waste Connections, Inc. 








                                                                AB 845
                                                                Page 
          5

          Attorney General Brown filed an amicus brief in the Measure 
          E litigation explaining that if Measure E was enforced, the 
          Potrero Hills Landfill would only be able to accept a very 
          limited amount of out-of-county waste and the competitive 
          benefits of the divesture required by the Attorney General 
          and the U.S. Department of Justice will be lost. 

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  No   
          Local:  No

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  8/24/11) (per AB 1178 Senate Floor 
          Analyses analysis)

          California Refuse Recycling Council (source)
          Atlas Disposal Industries
          Blue Line Transfer, Inc.
          Bridgeport Sales and Service
          Burrtec Waste Industries
          Calasian Chamber of Commerce
          California Association of Sanitation Agencies
          California Teamsters
          City of Fairfield 
          City of Vacaville
          Commercial Fleet Services, Inc.
          Consolidated Fabricators Corp.
          County of Sacramento Board of Supervisors
          Davis Waste Removal
          Desert Valley Disposal
          East Bay Sanitation Company
          EDCO Waste and Recycling Services
          Elk Grove Waste Management
          Freeman and Williams, LLP.
          Fremont Recycling and Transfer Station
          Garaventa Enterprises
          Garden City Sanitation, Inc.
          Gilton Solid Waste Management, Inc.
          Heffernan Insurance Brokers
          John R. Knight, El Dorado County Supervisor
          Livermore Sanitation, Inc.
          Marin Resource Recovery
          Marin Sanitary Service
          Napa Recycling and Waste Services, LLC.
          National Solid Waste Management Association
          Olympic Wire and Equipment, Inc.







                                                                AB 845
                                                                Page 
          6

          Palm Springs Disposal Services
          Palo Verde Valley Disposal Service
          Recology Waste Zero
          Recology, Inc.
          Rehig Pacific Company
          Sacramento Recycling and Transfer Station
          Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority
          San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste Management 
          Authority
          Soft-Pak
          Solano County Board of Supervisors
          Solid Waste Insurance Managers
          South Lake Refuse and Recycling
          South San Francisco Scavenger Co.
          Southern California Disposal and Recycling Co., Inc.
          SSI Schaefer Systems International
          Stockton Tri Industries, Inc.
          Truck Lubrication Co., Inc.
          Turlock Scavenger Company
          Upper Valley Disposal and Recycling
          Vacaville Chamber of Commerce
          Varner and Sons, Inc.
          Varner Bros., Inc.
          Vence Consulting
          Waste Connections, Inc.
          Westhoff, Cone and Holmstedt

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  8/24/11) (per AB 1178 Senate 
          Floor Analyses analysis)

          Alameda County
          Barbara Kondylis, Solano County Supervisor
          California League of Conservation Voters
          California Resource Recovery Association
          Californians Against Waste
          Center of Biological Diversity
          City of Glendale
          Kern County Board of Supervisors
          League of California Cities
          Linda Seifert, Solano County Supervisor
          Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors (5 members)
          Los Angeles County Solid Management Authority
          Merced County Regional Waste Management Authority
          Natural Resources Defense Council 







                                                                AB 845
                                                                Page 
          7

          North Valley Coalition
          Northern California Recycling Association
          Orange County Board of Supervisors
          Riverside County Waste Management Department
          Sierra Club California
          Solano County Orderly Growth Commission
          Solid Waste Association of North America
          Stopwaste.org
          Sustainability, Parks, Recycling and Wildlife Legal Defense 
          Fund
          Western Placer Waste Management Authority
          Yuba Group Against Garbage
          City of Los Angeles (Verified 8/21/12)

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    Supporters generally contend that 
          limiting importation and exportation of waste conflict with 
          the goals of the Act and obstruct the flow of waste 
          throughout the state.  They contend that many local 
          jurisdictions depend on state-of-the art regional 
          facilities for their recycling needs and flow restrictions 
          prevent effective and environmentally sound facilities from 
          being utilized.  Supporters state that this bill preserves 
          local authority to site, permit, and oversee waste 
          activities while preserving the regional waste system 
          established by the Act.  Also, they note that in the past 
          10 years over 100 landfills have closed while no new 
          landfills have opened.

           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    Opponents state that this bill 
          interferes with judicial matters, usurps local authority 
          and hinders local jurisdictions' solid waste planning 
          activities.  They also contend that this bill will have 
          unintended consequences by eliminating local jurisdictions' 
          flexibility to manage their long-term community needs.  
          Opponents from the area around the Potrero Hills Landfill 
          state that Measure E should be enforced to limit 
          out-of-jurisdiction waste.  They state that expansion of 
          Potrero Hills is not needed as there is adequate regional, 
          as well as statewide, capacity.   
           

          DLW:k  8/25/12   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE







                                                                AB 845
                                                                Page 
          8


                                ****  END  ****