BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1063
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 6, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Jimmy Gomez, Chair
AB
1063 (Williams) - As Amended April 20, 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Policy |Natural Resources |Vote:|7 - 1 |
|Committee: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: NoReimbursable: >
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SUMMARY: | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
| | | | |
| | | | |
AB 1063
Page 2
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This bill requires CalRecycle to develop a proposal to revise
the state's solid waste tipping fee. Specifically, this bill:
1)On or before July 1, 2016, requires CalRecycle to hold a
public hearing and a workshop to develop a proposal for the
Legislature regarding a new solid waste management fee to
provide CalRecycle adequate funding to:
a) Develop financial incentives to promote the recycling of
organic material.
b) Provide resources to develop infrastructure and
incentives necessary to achieve the statewide diversion
goal of 75%; and,
c) Provide a sustainable funding structure that ensures
CalRecycle's ability to carry out its responsibilities
under the California Integrated Waste Management Act.
2)Requires CalRecycle to seek public input from interested
groups, including, but not limited to, representatives of the
solid waste industry, local government, disadvantaged
communities, and environmental groups.
3)Requires CalRecycle to submit the proposal to the Legislature
within six months of the public hearing.
AB 1063
Page 3
FISCAL EFFECT:
Abosorbale costs for CalRecycle to develop the proposal and
report to the Legislature.
COMMENTS:
1)Rationale. Current law establishes a policy goal of diverting
75% of generated solid waste from landfill disposal by 2020
through source reduction, recycling, or composting. While
increasing diversion has significant environmental benefits,
it results in decreasing revenues.
Specifically, achieving 75% recycling will reduce CalRecycle's
current revenue by $29 million annually. The immediate
revenue loss is in addition to the future statewide investment
needed to develop the infrastructure and capacity necessary to
recycle an additional 22 million tons of material by 2020.
CalRecycle estimates that at least $125 million will be needed
annually to develop the market and infrastructure necessary to
achieve the 75% goal. Finally, CalRecycle will need an
additional $11 million to properly manage and regulate the new
infrastructure. Calreycle will likely need various revenue
sources to meet this need.
This bill begins the process of determining what level the
tipping fee will be to contribute to meeting the future
funding needs of CalRecycle.
2)Background. The current cap on the tipping fee was established
over two decades ago in 1993. At that time, the tipping fee
was set at $1.34 per ton, and authorized the California
Integrated Waste Management Board (now CalRecycle) to increato
AB 1063
Page 4
increase the fee as needed, to a maximum of $1.40, beginning
with the 1995-1996 fiscal year. The Board acted on this
authority six years later, and raised the state tipping fee to
the maximum $1.40 on July 1, 2001.
3)Other States. The total median tipping fee in California for
landfill disposal is $45 per ton, which includes the state fee
of $1.40, local fees, and landfill charges. (California's
average landfill charge is $54 per ton, but according to
CalRecycle that figure is "inflated due to skewed data" based
on the survey methods used. CalRecycle states that the median
cost is more representative of the state as a whole.) While
this is fairly consistent with the national average of $49 per
ton, California's recycling rate of 66% far exceeds states
with similarly low disposal costs. For example, the New
England area has average tipping fees of $77 per ton and a 76%
diversion rate. Areas of the country with disposal fees
similar to California's have much lower rates of recycling;
the Great Lakes area has average disposal costs of $45 per
ton, and a recycling rate of only 24%.
Several states have higher state tipping fees, including
Pennsylvania ($7.25 per ton), Wisconsin ($7.00 recycling fee
assessed on each ton of solid waste disposed), Ohio ($4.75 per
ton), and Missouri ($2.11 per ton).
Analysis Prepared by:Jennifer Galehouse / APPR. / (916)
319-2081
AB 1063
Page 5