BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2579
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 18, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Das Williams, Chair
AB 2579
(Low) - As Amended April 13, 2016
SUBJECT: Food service packaging products: study
SUMMARY: Requires the Department of Resources Recycling and
Recovery (CalRecycle) to conduct a study to establish baseline
data relating to food service packaging.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Requires, under the Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989
(IWMA), cities and counties to divert 50% of their solid waste
by 2000. The IWMA provides various programs to reduce litter
and educate consumers about the importance of recycling.
2)Provides, under the California Beverage Container Recycling
and Litter Reduction Act of 1986, funding and education
programs to reduce beverage container litter.
3)Prohibits a person from selling a plastic bag or a plastic
food or beverage container that is labeled as "compostable" or
"marine degradable" unless that plastic bag or container meets
American Society for Testing and Materials standards or a
standard adopted by CalRecycle.
AB 2579
Page 2
THIS BILL:
1)On or before January 1, 2018, requires CalRecycle to conduct a
study to establish baseline data relating to food service
packaging for their customers for food that is prepared
onsite.
2)Specifies that the study contain the following:
a) The amount of food service packaging, by material type,
used in California and the disposition of the products,
including the percentages recycled, composted, and disposed
and an estimate of the percentage littered;
b) The facilities located in the state that accept food
service packaging for recycling or composting, the cities
they serve, and the infrastructure needed to increase the
recycling rate;
c) The current and potential markets for recycled and
composted food service packaging materials; and,
d) Barriers to increased recycling and composting of food
service packaging and steps that may be taken to remove
those barriers.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
AB 2579
Page 3
1)Plastic seas. Marine debris is a significant problem along
shorelines and in coastal waters, estuaries, and oceans
throughout the world. Marine debris can be life threatening
to marine organisms and can adversely affect coastal
communities and the fishing industry. In general, there are
two types of marine debris that pollute our ocean and
coastline in California. The first is from ocean sources, and
includes waste discharged by ships, recreational boaters and
fishermen, and offshore oil and gas exploration and production
facilities. The second, and by far more environmentally
destructive, type of marine debris is from land. This type of
debris includes stormwater runoff, solid waste, floating
structures, and poorly maintained garbage bins and is
transmitted to the marine environment by waterways.
Land-based litter constitutes nearly 80% of the marine debris
found on our beaches and in our oceans, and 90% of it is
plastic.
A decade ago, this issue gained prominence when the Algalita
Marine Research Foundation and the Southern California Coastal
Water Research Project found that the average mass of plastics
in the seawater off the coast of Long Beach was two and a half
times greater than the average mass of plankton. After storms
with excessive runoff, the mass of plastics is even greater.
A similar study of seawater 1,000 miles west of San Francisco
found the mass of plastics was six times the mass of plankton
in drifts where marine animals congregate for feeding on
plankton. In 2014, a global study of plastic pollution in the
world's oceans estimated that 5.25 trillion particles weighing
268,940 tons are adrift in the sea. The North Pacific Central
Gyre is the ultimate destination for much of the marine debris
originating from the California coast. A study by the
Algalita Marine Research Foundation found an average of more
than 300,000 plastic pieces per square mile of the Gyre and
that the mass of plastic was six times greater than
zooplankton floating on the water's surface. Earlier this
year, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation released a report at the
World Economic Forum states that plastic production is
AB 2579
Page 4
expected to double in the next 20 years, and quadruple by
2050. In spite of this growth in production, we only recycle
about 5% worldwide and approximately one-third ends up in the
ocean. The report gained headlines due to its prediction that
by 2050, there will be more plastic than fish in the world's
oceans.
Most plastic marine debris exists as small plastic particles.
Even large pieces of plastic break down into small particles
due to photo-degradation. These plastic pieces are confused
with small fish, plankton, or krill and ingested by aquatic
organisms. Over 600 marine animal species have been
negatively affected by ingesting plastic worldwide. Last
year, scientists at the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral
Reef Studies at James Cook University found that corals are
also ingesting small plastic particles, which remain in their
small stomach cavities and impede their ability to consume and
digest normal food.
In addition to the physical impacts of plastic pollution,
hydrophobic chemicals present in the ocean in trace amounts
(e.g., from contaminated runoff and oil and chemical spills)
have an affinity for, and can bind to, plastic particles where
they enter and accumulate in the food chain.
2)Packaging disposal. In 2011, California established a 75%
recycling goal statewide by 2020. In order to achieve the
goal, CalRecycle identified six areas of focus: 1) Moving
organics out of the landfill; 2) Continuing reform of the
Beverage Container Recycling Program; 3) Expanding recycling
and manufacturing infrastructure; 4) Exploring new models for
state and local funding of materials management; 5) Promoting
a state procurement policy for postconsumer recycled content
products; and, 6) Promoting extended producer responsibility.
Based on projected waste disposal, an additional 22 million
tons of source reduction, recycling, and composting must occur
in order to meet the 75% goal. CalRecycle staff estimates
that packaging (generally, not limited to food service)
AB 2579
Page 5
comprises about 9.5 million tons, or about 25% of California's
disposed waste stream.
3)State and local actions to address plastic debris. In 2007,
the Ocean Protection Council (OPC) adopted a resolution on
"reducing and preventing marine debris." A year later, OPC
released the Implementation Strategy for the [OPC] Resolution
to Reduce and Prevent Ocean Litter, which established four
broad objectives to reduce marine debris: 1) Reduce single-use
packaging and promote sustainable alternatives; 2) Prevent and
control litter and plastic debris; 3) Clean up and remove
ocean litter; and, 4) Coordinate with other jurisdictions in
the pacific region.
In 2014, CalRecycle began a "manufacturer's challenge" to
increase collection and recovery of packaging generated in
California. The challenge is for packaging manufacturers, on
an industry level, to achieve a goal of 50% reduction in
packaging disposed in California by 2020. The challenge is
focused on "priority packaging products," which include:
uncoated corrugated cardboard; aseptic containers and cartons;
other miscellaneous paper; plastic containers; degradable
plastics; pouches; and, plastic films. CalRecycle held
workshops with industry in 2015 and 2016, which included a
discussion about how to develop a baseline for packaging
generated in California by which to measure a 50% disposal
reduction goal.
Many local governments have adopted single-use plastic bag
bans and polystyrene food packaging bans to curb plastic
pollution. In California, there are approximately 65 local
ordinances that ban polystyrene in restaurants, including
Alameda, Marin County, San Mateo County, Monterey County, and
Los Angeles County. California communities have adopted
nearly 120 local ordinances banning single-use plastic bags.
AB 2579
Page 6
4)Author's statement: "AB 2579, by requiring baseline data
relating to food service packaging, will not only help capture
the magnitude of food service packaging waste, but it will
also provide baseline data to better provide the
infrastructure for proper end-of-use waste management. "
5)Previous legislation:
AB 904 (Feuer) of 2008 would have prohibited a takeout food
provider from distributing single-use food service packaging
to a consumer unless the single-use food service packaging is
either compostable packaging or recyclable packaging as
defined in the bill. This bill died in the Senate
Appropriations Committee.
AB 1329 (Brownley) of 2009 would have prohibited the sale or
distribution of a rigid polyvinyl chloride packaging
container. This bill was amended on the Senate Floor to
address another policy matter.
AB 1358 (Hill) of 2009 would have prohibited a food vendor,
restaurant, or retail food vendor from dispensing prepared
food to a customer in a disposable expanded polystyrene food
container, a disposable nonrecyclable plastic food container,
or a disposable nonrecycled paper container. The bill would
have authorized a food vendor, restaurant, or retail food
vendor to dispense prepared food in a compostable plastic
container in a jurisdiction where organic waste is controlled
curbside for composting and to dispense prepared food in a
recyclable plastic container or a recycled paper container.
This bill was amended on the Assembly Floor to address another
policy matter.
AB 2138 (Chesbro) of 2010 would have prohibited a food service
provider from distributing a disposable food service packaging
AB 2579
Page 7
or a single-use carryout bag, as defined, unless the packaging
or bag meets the criteria for either compostable packaging of
recyclable packaging. The bill would have prohibited a food
provider from distributing a disposable food service packaging
or a single-use carryout bag to a consumer, unless the
department determines the packaging or bag is recovered for
composting or recovered for recycling at a rate of twenty-five
percent (25%) or more. This bill died in the Assembly
Appropriations Committee.
SB 568 (Lowenthal) would have prohibited a food vendor from
dispensing prepared food to a customer in a polystyrene foam
food container after January 1, 2016 (July 1, 2017 for school
districts) unless the local government or school district
adopted a recycling program that can recycle at least 60% of
its polystyrene foam food containers. This bill failed
passage on the Assembly Floor.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Californians Against Waste
Opposition
None on file
AB 2579
Page 8
Analysis Prepared by:Elizabeth MacMillan / NAT. RES. / (916)
319-2092