BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó




                   Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
                            Senator Kevin de León, Chair


          SB 529 (Leno) - Recycling: fast food facilities.
          
          Amended: April 8, 2013          Policy Vote: EQ 5-3
          Urgency: No                     Mandate: No
          Hearing Date: May 23, 2013      Consultant: Marie Liu
          
          SUSPENSE FILE. AS PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED.
          
          
          Bill Summary: SB 529 would require fast food facilities to only  
          distribute food in recyclable or compostable packaging beginning  
          on July 1, 2014.

          Fiscal Impact: 
              Ongoing costs of at least $600,000 from the Integrated  
              Waste Management Fund (special fund) beginning in FY 2013-14  
              for the collection and reporting of recycling and composting  
              rates and availability of residential collection programs.
              Likely minor ongoing costs to enforce the packaging and bag  
              prohibition.

          Proposed Law: Beginning July 1, 2014, this bill would prohibit  
          fast food facilities from distributing disposable food service  
          packaging or a single-use carryout bag to a consumer except if  
          the packaging or bag is compostable or recyclable. 

          Beginning July 1, 2016, the exemption would only apply to  
          packaging or bags that have demonstrated to the Department of  
          Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to have a rate of  
          recovery for composting or recycling of 25% or more. This  
          requirement increases to 50% on July 1, 2018 and to 75% on July  
          1, 2020.

          This bill also defines compostable and recyclable packaging  
          based on whether that packaging is accepted for composting or  
          recycling in a residential collection program available to at  
          least 60 percent of the households in the jurisdiction in which  
          the packaging is distributed, as determined by CalRecycle.

          Violators of this bill would be subject to civil penalties of up  
          to $100 for each day the person is in violation up to an annual  
          maximum of $10,000. Penalty or fines would be deposited into the  








          SB 529 (Leno)
          Page 1


          Marine Pollution Reduction Account within the Integrated Waste  
          Management Fund and may be expended, upon appropriation by the  
          Legislature, to provide public education, assist local  
          government's efforts to reduce plastic waste and marine debris,  
          and for CalRecycle's costs in implementing this bill. 

          Staff Comments: This bill would require CalRecycle to collect a  
          large amount of data both to determine the availability of  
          residential collection programs for each "jurisdiction" in the  
          state the purpose of defining compostable and recyclable  
          packaging and to determine actual composting or recovery rates  
          for compliance with the bill's recovery goalposts. The bill is  
          unclear whether the recovery rates are statewide or by  
          jurisdiction and what is the definition of jurisdiction. As the  
          data will need to be collected in a manner that allows for local  
          analysis, the definition for jurisdiction will impact costs.  
          This would be new data collection as CalRecycle has no existing  
          datasets from which this information can be derived. Data  
          collection and reporting will likely cost at least $600,000. 

          This bill specifies that the recovery rates are based packaging  
          or bag type. However, it is unclear whether the intent is for  
          the rates to be based on the recovery of all materials of that  
          type or just fast food packaging of that type. For example, take  
          thermoformed PET which is used to make items including clam  
          shells, bakery trays, and cups. For example, if all thermoformed  
          PET containers, regardless of where it was distributed, was  
          recovered at a rate of 30%, but thermoformed PET containers  
          distributed at fast food facilities were only recovered at a  
          rate of 5%, would there be compliance with the bill? 

          CalRecycle's enforcement responsibilities, and therefore  
          enforcement costs, under this bill are unclear. The bill does  
          not explicitly require CalRecycle to conduct any enforcement  
          activities nor does it explicitly give CalRecycle the authority  
          to take enforcement actions such as conducting inspections,  
          ordering audits, requiring self-certification. Assuming the  
          author's intent is for CalRecycle to only respond to complaints,  
          similar to the existing statutory requirement that large  
          retailers operate plastic bag recycling programs, than  
          enforcement costs are likely to be minor. 

          The penalties assessed for violations of this bill would be  
          placed in the Marine Pollution Reduction Account in the  








          SB 529 (Leno)
          Page 2


          Integrated Waste Management Fund where it would be available to  
          fund CalRecycle's implementation costs as well as public  
          education and local government assistance to reduce plastic  
          waste and marine debris. Staff notes that allowing program  
          implementation to be paid for by fines and penalties can be a  
          perverse incentive for CalRecycle to be overly aggressive in  
          enforcing these provisions. However, requiring the Legislature  
          to appropriate these monies does create some separation between  
          penalty revenues and program funding.

          Proposed Author Amendments: Expand allowable types of packaging,  
          delay implementation until 2015, require a fast food franchise  
          to demonstrate compliance with packaging requirements.