BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Senator Wieckowski, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 655
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Quirk |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|-----------+-----------------------+-------------+----------------|
|Version: |6/15/2016 |Hearing | June 29, 2016 |
| | |Date: | |
|-----------+-----------------------+-------------+----------------|
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|Joanne Roy |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Rendering: inedible kitchen grease: registration
fee: additional fees.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1) Pursuant to the Integrated Waste Management Act (Public
Resources Code (PRC) §40000):
a) Establishes a state recycling goal of 75% of solid
waste generated be diverted from landfill disposal by 2020
through source reduction, recycling, and composting.
b) Requires each local jurisdiction to divert 50% of solid
waste from landfill disposal through source reduction,
recycling, and composting.
c) Requires CalRecycle and local agencies to promote waste
management practices in order of the following priority
(PRC §40051):
i) Source reduction.
ii) Recycling and composting.
iii) Environmentally safe transformation and
environmentally safe land
disposal.
d) Defines "source reduction" as any action which causes a
AB 655 (Quirk) Page 2
of ?
net reduction of solid waste. "Source reduction"
includes, but is not limited to, reducing the use of
nonrecyclable materials, replacing disposable materials
and products with reusable materials and products,
reducing packaging, reducing the amount of yard waste
generated, establishing garbage rate structures with
incentives to reduce the amount of wastes that generators
produce, and increasing the efficiency of the use of
paper, cardboard, glass, metal, plastic, and other
materials. "Source reduction" does not include steps
taken after the material becomes solid waste or actions
which would impair air or water resources in lieu of land,
including, but not limited to, transformation. (PRC
§40051).
e) Requires a commercial waste generator to arrange for
recycling services and requires local governments to
implement commercial solid waste recycling programs
designed to divert solid waste from businesses.
f) Requires generators of specified amounts of organic
waste (i.e. food waste and yard waste) to arrange for
recycling services for that material.
g) Requires the California Environmental Protection Agency
(CalEPA), in coordination with the California Department
of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), and
California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), to
develop and implement policies to aid in diverting organic
waste from landfills. (PRC §42649.87).
i) Requires CalEPA, through CalRecycle, to promote
the goal of reducing at least five million metric
tons of GHG emissions reductions per year through the
development and application of compost on working
lands; and requires CalEPA and CDFA to ensure proper
coordination of agency regulations and goals.
ii) Requires CalEPA and CDFA to assess the state's
progress towards developing organic waste processing
and recycling infrastructure necessary to meet the
goals specified in AB 341 (Chesbro), Chapter 476,
Statutes of 2011), AB 1826 (Chesbro), Chapter 727,
Statutes of 2014, the State Air Resources Board's May
AB 655 (Quirk) Page 3
of ?
2015 Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction strategy
concept paper, and CDFA's Healthy Soils Initiative.
2) Requires the State Air Resources Board (ARB), under the
California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (commonly
referred to as AB 32), to determine the 1990 statewide
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions level and approve statewide
GHG emissions limit that is equivalent to that level, to be
achieved by 2020, and to adopt GHG emissions reductions
measures by regulation. (Health and Safety Code §38500 et
seq.)
3) Provides for the regulation of holding, segregation, and
disposal of animals unfit for human food purposes such as
requiring licensing of renderers and collection centers and
registration of inedible kitchen grease (IKG) transporters.
(Food and Agriculture Code (FAC) §19051 et seq.)
4) Defines "rendering" as recycling, processing, and conversion
of animal and fish materials and carcasses and IKG into fats,
oils, proteins, and other products that are used in the
animal, poultry, and pet food industries and other
industries. (FAC §19213).
5) Requires every person engaged in the business of rendering to
obtain a license from CDFA for each rendering plant. (FAC
§19300).
This bill:
1) Makes findings and declarations regarding rendering as an
effective tool to eliminate pathogens, protect air and
groundwater resources, and reduce GHG emissions compared to
other alternative disposal options; and describes rendering.
2) To the extent feasible, requires CDFA to consider the
regional "highest and best use" of unprocessed waste animal
material and inedible kitchen grease (IKG) from inspected
establishments, retail stores, custom slaughterers, and
custom processors when developing regulations and policies
governing the handling and recycling of these regulated
materials and establishments.
3) Increases the maximum annual fee charged to licensed
AB 655 (Quirk) Page 4
of ?
renderers and collection centers and the registration fee for
transporters of IKG.
Background
1) Statewide waste diversion goals. CalRecycle is tasked with
diverting at least 75% of solid waste statewide by 2020.
Currently, an estimated 35 million tons of waste are disposed
of in California's landfills annually, of which 32% is
compostable organic materials, 29% is construction and
demolition debris, and 17% is paper.
In addition, CalRecycle is charged with implementing Strategic
Directive 6.1, which calls for reducing organic waste
disposal by 50% by 2020. According to CalRecycle,
significant gains in organic waste diversion (through
recycling technologies of organic waste, including composting
and anaerobic digestion) are necessary to meet the 75% goal
and to implement Strategic Directive 6.1.
2) Mandatory commercial organics recycling. According to
CalRecycle, AB 1826 (Chesbro, Chapter 727, Statutes of 2014)
requires businesses to recycle their organic waste on and
after April 1, 2016, depending on the amount of waste they
generate per week. AB 1826 also requires that on and after
January 1, 2016, local jurisdictions across the state
implement an organic waste recycling program to divert
organic waste generated by businesses. Mandatory recycling
of organic waste is a component in achieving the state's
recycling and GHG emission goals.
3) Food scraps management. According to CalRecycle,
Californians throw away nearly 6 million tons of food scraps
or food waste each year. This represents about 18% of all
the material that goes to landfills. In order for California
to reach its goal of 75% source reduction, recycling, and
composting, food waste must be addressed. Options for
recycling food waste include:
a) Rendering. According to CalRecycle, rendering refers
to the processing of grease, fat, meat, or bone into
usable products. Rendering companies process animal
by-products into saleable commodities. Collection service
areas, costs, and types of materials accepted vary.
AB 655 (Quirk) Page 5
of ?
Grease from restaurants is a common by-product collected
and processed by rendering or tallow companies, but many
companies will also collect or accept meat, fat, bone, and
dead animal carcasses.
b) Anaerobic digestion. According to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), anaerobic
digestion is a process where microorganisims break down
organic materials, such as food scraps, manure, and sewage
sludge. This is done in the absence of oxygen. Recycled
food waste through anaerobic digestion produces biogas and
a soil amendment - biogas is made primarily of methane and
carbon dioxide and the solids remaining from the anaerobic
digestion process can be land applied or composted and
used as a soil amendment.
Food waste can be processed at facilities specifically
designed to digest the organic portion of municipal solid
waste. It can also be co-digested at wastewater treatment
facilities and manure digesters. Co-digestion is a
process whereby additional, energy-rich organic materials
(e.g. food scraps or fats, oils, and grease) are added to
dairy or wastewater digesters. Co-digestion uses existing
infrastructure to divert food scraps and fats, oil, and
grease from landfills.
c) Composting. According to CalRecycle, compost is the
controlled decomposition of organic material such as
leaves, twigs, grass clippings, and food scraps. A wide
range of materials may be composted, but they must consist
of principally organic components (i.e. carbon-containing
remnants of residues of life processes). Compost products
may vary since the properties of any given compost depend
on the nature of the original feedstock and the conditions
under which it was decomposed.
Composting is a means of controlling and accelerating the
decomposition process. An overabundance of soil organisms
is responsible for transforming the organic matter in
compost into carbon dioxide, water, humic substances
(components of soil that affect physical and chemical
properties and improve soil fertility) and energy in the
form of heat. Most composting facilities use a
thermophilic process, which breaks down the waste with
AB 655 (Quirk) Page 6
of ?
heat-loving bacteria, and relies on high temperatures to
meet pathogen reduction standards.
Composting diverts organic materials out of landfills and
turns it into a product that is useful for soil
restoration. In addition to improving the quality of
soil, compost prevents soil erosion, reduces the need for
chemical fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides, and
enables better soil water retention.
However, composting of animal tissue may raise concern due to
potential public health and safety risks related to
composting's effectiveness in destroying disease
pathogens. Also, federal regulations prohibit feeding
"ruminants to ruminants" and possible grazing of cattle on
land that has had compost containing animal tissue applied
to it may increase the risk of diseases such as mad cow.
Comments
1) Purpose of Bill. According to the author, "The rendering
industry is critical to the health and safety of California.
Rendering is an effective tool in eliminating many human and
animal disease pathogens, protecting our groundwater and air
resources, and greatly reducing [GHG] emissions compared to
other alternative disposal options?More funds are needed to
maintain an effective enforcement system for [the IKG]
program."
2) Rendering and GHG emissions reductions compared to other
options. AB 655 provides that "rendering is an effective
tool to?greatly reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to
other alternative disposal options." A question arises as to
what alternative disposal options that rendering is being
compared to, and under what circumstances. Compared to
composting, anaerobic digestion, or landfilling?
Such a conclusion should be based on life cycle analyses.
Factors may include: how and where the material is sourced,
how it is processed and transported, and the end use.
Because there are a variety of end uses of rendering as noted
in the bill, such as "soaps, paints, varnishes, cosmetics,
explosives, toothpaste, pharmaceuticals, leather, textiles,
and lubricants used daily in most households," saying
AB 655 (Quirk) Page 7
of ?
definitively that rendering is better in terms of GHG
emissions reductions requires life cycle analyses of those
uses.
The Committee may wish to consider whether it may be
inappropriate to unequivocally say that rendering reduces GHG
emissions significantly when life cycle analyses for all of
these options have not been conducted.
3) §19300.1(b). §19300.1(b) of AB 655 states, "Therefore, to
the extent feasible, the department shall consider the
regional "highest and best use" of unprocessed mammalian,
poultry, fish material, and inedible kitchen grease from
inspected establishments, retail stores, custom slaughterers,
and custom processors when developing regulations and
policies governing the handling and recycling of these
regulated materials and establishments."
a) What does "regional 'highest and best use'" mean?
i) Regional. The term "regional" is unclear and
not defined. What is considered a region? How many
regions are in the state? Can regions overlap one
another? What factors go into determining the
borders of a region? Is it based on city or county
limits? Or distance from a generator to a rendering,
anaerobic digester, or composting facility? If so,
what is an appropriate number of miles to consider
feasible for transportation? Should economic or GHG
emissions from transporting the material be factored
in? Does the number of generators in an area help
determine a region? Should a minimum number of
options for disposal be considered to help determine
the size of a region? This bill does not provide any
parameters on how to determine what "regional" means.
ii) "Highest and best use." The term "highest and
best use" is not defined in the bill. However, it is
referenced in quotation marks - What does this refer
to? Does this refer to a provision in statute? From
whose perspective is the use considered highest and
best? What factors should be considered when
determining highest and best use - public health
issues, GHG emissions reductions, economic impacts,
AB 655 (Quirk) Page 8
of ?
or environmental benefits and protections such as air
or water quality?
Is "highest and best use" referring to the following food
recovery hierarchy recommended by the US EPA?
(1) Source reduction - Reduce
the volume of surplus food generated.
(2) Feed people - Donate excess
to food banks, soup kitchens and shelters.
(3) Feed animals - Divert food
scraps to animal feed.
(4) Industrial uses - Provide
waste oils for rendering and fuel
conversion and food scraps for digestion to
recover energy.
(5) Composting - Create a
nutrient-rich soil amendment.
(6) Landfill/incineration -
Last resort to disposal.
If so, then it may be noted that for "industrial
uses," the US EPA specifies, "waste oils for
rendering and fuel conversion and food scraps for
digestion to recover energy." It appears that the US
EPA may recommend anaerobic digestion over rendering
for food scraps, which would likely include meat
scraps - it may be noted that anaerobic digestion is
under the purview of CalRecycle, not CDFA. This
seems somewhat incongruous with the findings and
declarations about rendering in this bill.
If the bill is requiring CDFA to consider "highest
and best use" when developing regulations and
policies governing the handling and recycling of meat
scraps, and is referencing the food recovery
hierarchy recommendations by the US EPA, a question
arises as to why the bill requires CDFA to consider
options outside of its jurisdiction.
b) CDFA as sole determiner. This bill requires CDFA to
consider regional "highest and best use" when developing
regulations and policies governing the handling and
recycling of meat scraps. The handling and recycling of
AB 655 (Quirk) Page 9
of ?
meat scraps is not solely a CDFA issue. CDFA regulates
renderers and the rendering process. CalRecycle regulates
waste haulers, anaerobic digestion, composting, and
landfill facilities. The State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB) regulates advanced wastewater treatment
facilities that may recycle food wastes.
The wording of the bill emphasizes the importance and value
of rendering compared to other alternative disposal
options (that are not within the purview of CDFA) and
concludes with "therefore" CDFA, to the extent feasible,
must consider "regional 'highest and best use'" when
developing regulations and policies governing the handling
and recycling of specified materials. Handling and
recycling are broad terms. Concern has been raised that
the wording implies a possible overreach of CDFA in areas
of handling and recycling meat scraps that may go beyond
its jurisdiction, such as anaerobic digestion and
composting. Also, the bill contains no requirements for
CDFA to work or consult with its sister agencies in making
such considerations.
c) "Unprocessed." AB 655 pertains to "unprocessed
mammalian, poultry, fish material." The term
"unprocessed" is not defined. At what point does animal
material transform from being unprocessed to processed?
It is unclear what "unprocessed" animal material means.
d) Technical error. The findings and declarations should
not contain §19300.1(b) because mandating CDFA to act in a
specified manner is a directive, which is not a finding
nor a declaration.
4) What's the beef about? Some clear lines exist as to who may
transport and receive waste meat, poultry, and fish materials
based on the type of generator. For example, US Department
of Agriculture or CDFA Meat Inspection Program (MIP)
facilities, such as slaughterhouses and meat/poultry
processors, use registered transporters to take the materials
to rendering facilities - these are governed by CDFA in the
Food and Agriculture Code. On the other hand, the materials
from restaurants and residences are transported by solid
waste haulers and can end up at anaerobic digestion,
composting, or landfill facilities - these are governed by
AB 655 (Quirk) Page 10
of ?
CalRecycle in the Public Resources Code.
However, there seems to be a long-standing dispute regarding
authority/jurisdiction (and market share) over transporting
and end use of waste meat, poultry, and fish material from
retail establishments such as delicatessens, grocery stores,
super markets, butcher shops, and other retail stores that
sell fresh or frozen meat. In addition, in recent years, as
the state has looked more at increasing renewable energy,
decreasing fossil fuel consumption, and reducing GHG
emissions, there seems to be more of an interest in looking
at meat scraps from retail stores as organic waste materials
for anaerobic digestion or composting. Are retail stores and
their meat scraps more like restaurants, which are governed
by CalRecycle, or more akin to meat/poultry processors, which
are governed by CDFA? Or is this
material a combination of both?
5) Conclusion. Meat scraps are generally thought of as waste to
the general public, but they are a valuable commodity.
Although some waste meat, poultry, and fish materials from
specified generators are clearly governed by either CDFA or
CalRecycle, a bone of contention is present over meat scraps
from retail establishments. The various methods for dealing
with waste meat, poultry, and fish materials all have merit
and serve a variety of purposes - statutorily choosing one as
the king of all other options would be imprudent.
Because of the issues raised above, the Committee may wish to
consider amending AB 655 to remove and replace §19300.1 with
an uncodified section to do the following:
a) Require CalRecycle and CDFA, in consultation with the
State Water Resources Control Board, the Air Resources
Board, and Department of Public Health, to work together
to address issues related to the regulations and policies
governing the handling and recycling of waste meat,
poultry, and fish materials from retail establishments,
including, but not limited to, grocery stores,
supermarkets, and delicatessens, butcher shops, and other
retail stores that sell fresh or frozen meat.
b) Among the factors that shall be considered are:
AB 655 (Quirk) Page 11
of ?
i) Environmental protection and benefits, e.g., air
and water quality;
ii) Public health considerations, e.g., prevention of
human and animal disease pathogens;
iii) Reduction of GHG emissions; and,
iv) Economic considerations and impacts.
c) Hold a minimum of three public workshops with at least
one held in northern, central, and southern California.
d) Report findings and make recommendations to the
Legislature no later than July 1, 2018.
Related/Prior Legislation
AB 1045 (Irwin, Chapter 596, Statutes of 2015) required CalEPA
to establish policies and goals to encourage recycling of
organic waste and coordinate oversight and regulation of organic
waste recycling facilities.
AB 1826 (Chesbro, Chapter 727, Statutes of 2014) required
generators of specified amounts of organic waste, including
green material, to arrange recycling services for that material.
AB 1566 (Holden, Chapter 595, Statutes of 2014) increased the
authority of CDFA and the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to
oversee and enforce laws related to the collection,
transportation, storage, and rendering of inedible kitchen
grease. Among other things, extended the sunset for the
collection of annual fees charged by CDFA by five years, from
July 1, 2015 to July 1, 2020.
SB 25 (Padilla, 2010) would have specified that "renderer" and
"rendering" do not include facilities or activities that are
already licensed by CalRecycle.
DOUBLE REFERRAL:
This measure was heard in Senate Agriculture Committee on June
21, 2016, and passed out of committee with a vote of 4-0.
SOURCE: California Grain and Feed Association
Pacific Coast Rendering Association
AB 655 (Quirk) Page 12
of ?
SUPPORT:
None received
OPPOSITION:
California Compost Coalition
California Refuse Recycling Council
Californians Against Waste
Inland Empire Disposal Association
League of California Cities
Los Angeles County Waste Management Association
Recology
Republic Services, Inc.
Rural County Representatives of California
Solid Waste Association of Orange County
Waste Connections, Inc.
ARGUMENTS IN
SUPPORT:
According to support, "Rendering is the process of turning
animal tissue from the livestock, food processing, and food
service industries into valuable by-products?The rendering
industry provides critical health and safety infrastructure in
California. The process of recycling animal tissue into stable,
value-added by-products is important for the state's economy.
The rendering industry also provides necessary disposal
alternatives which include a sterilization step, eliminating
dangerous pathogens and bacteria, as a safe management
alternative. Every year, the industry recycles over 60 billion
pounds of organic material and turns it into useful ingredients
such as biofuels, industrial lubricants, various soaps, paints
and varnishes, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, leather, and textiles
used daily in most households?[T]his measure will direct
administrative agencies to consider, to the maximum extent
feasible, the 'highest and best use' of materials regulated by
the department within the rendering program which includes
livestock carcasses, offal, animal tissue, expired meat, [IKG],
and interceptor trap grease."
ARGUMENTS IN
OPPOSITION:
AB 655 (Quirk) Page 13
of ?
According to opposition, "Our concerns are focused on a
longstanding dispute over the regulatory jurisdiction of fully
inspected animal byproducts from retail establishments. This is
an important feed stock for composting and anaerobic digestion.
These materials are currently fully and effectively regulated by
CalRecycle and the California Public Resources Code. [AB 655]
establishes a 'highest and best use' standard. Such a hierarchy
already exists in §40051 and §40196 of the California Public
Resources Code. We, therefore, believe that inserting a new
standard in the Food and Agriculture Code will not only be
duplicative, it will result in further conflict and confusion.
The sponsor, in testifying in favor of this measure before the
Senate Agriculture Committee, stated that this language was
taken directly from CalRecycle regulations. We are unaware of
any such language in CalRecycle regulations. Further, when
asked the author's office for that language in CalRecycle's
regulations, they did not provide us any regulations, rather
they provided us with a document titled, 'Safely Disposing of
Waste Meat, Poultry and Fish Material Guidance and FAQs.'
Nowhere in that document is there language regarding 'highest
and best use.'"
-- END --