BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1594|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1594
Author: Williams (D)
Amended: 8/22/14 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE : 5-1, 6/25/14
AYES: Hill, Hancock, Jackson, Leno, Pavley
NOES: Gaines
NO VOTE RECORDED: Fuller
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-0, 8/14/14
AYES: De Le�n, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
NO VOTE RECORDED: Walters, Gaines
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 57-21, 5/29/14 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Waste management
SOURCE : California Compost Coalition
Californians Against Waste
DIGEST : This bill re-classifies the use of green material as
alternative daily cover (ADC) at a landfill as disposal instead
of diversion through recycling beginning January 1, 2020, and
requires the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery
(CalRecycle) to provide in its annual report, an update on the
adequacy of funding from the Integrated Waste Management Fund
(Fund) for their programs implemented pursuant to the California
Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (Act).
CONTINUED
AB 1594
Page
2
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/22/14 require CalRecycle to provide
an update on the adequacy of funding from the Fund for their
programs and authorize CalRecycle to make funding mechanism
recommendations.
ANALYSIS : Existing law, under the Act:
1.Requires each city or county source reduction and recycling
element to include an implementation schedule that shows a
city or county must divert 25% of solid waste from landfill
disposal or transformation by January 1, 1995, and must divert
50% of solid waste on and after January 1, 2000 through source
reduction, recycling, and composting activities.
2.Establishes a state policy goal that 75% of solid waste
generated be diverted from landfill disposal through source
reduction, recycling, or composting by 2020.
3.Provides that the use of solid waste for beneficial reuse in
the construction and operation of a solid waste landfill,
including the use of ADC, constitutes diversion through
recycling and is not considered disposal.
4.Requires each operator of a disposal facility to pay a
quarterly fee based on the amount of all solid waste disposed
of at each disposal site, and sets the fee for solid waste at
$1.34 per ton.
5.Requires CalRecycle to file an annual report, on or before
March 1 of each year, with the Legislature, regarding the
administration of the Act during the prior calendar year.
This bill:
1.Defines "green material" as any plant material that is either
separated at the point of generation, or separated at a
centralized facility that employs methods to minimize
contamination, and specifies that green waste does not include
treated wood waste, materials left over from the composting or
material recovery process or construction and demolition
waste.
2.Specifies that on and after January 1, 2020, the use of green
material as ADC does not constitute diversion and shall be
AB 1594
Page
3
considered disposal.
3.Requires jurisdictions, commencing August 1, 2018, to include
in their annual reporting, information on how they intend to
divert green material that is currently being used as ACD.
4.Provides that beginning in 2020, if the reclassification of
green material used as ADC result in a local jurisdiction
missing its diversion targets under the Act, then that local
jurisdiction must include in its annual report an
identification of barriers to recycling green materials and a
plan to address those barriers.
5.Exempts green waste used as ADC from the tipping fee required
for other solid waste disposal.
6.Requires CalRecycle to include in the annual report, on or
before March 1, 2015, a status update on the adequacy of
funding from the Fund for programs implemented pursuant to the
Act and pursuant to other specified provisions regulating
waste management facilities.
7.Authorizes CalRecycle to recommend alternative funding
mechanisms for the programs, as specified.
Background
ADC . Landfill operators are required to cover all solid waste
at the end of each day to control odors, vectors, fires, litter,
and scavenging. Federal regulations require that cover consist
of six inches of earthen materials, but also permit operators to
use alternative measures, generally referred to as ADC.
CalRecycle has 11 approved ADC material types. Generally, these
materials must be processed so that they do not allow gaps in
the exposed landfill face. Specific types of ADC authorized in
California include: geosynthetic fabric (tarps); sewage sludge;
ash and cement kiln dust; treated auto shredder waste (auto
fluff); foam products; contaminated sediment, dredge soils,
foundry sands, and energy exploration and production waste;
compost materials; processed construction and demolition waste;
shredded tires; and green materials.
Solid waste diversion . Existing law requires local
jurisdictions to divert 50% of solid waste from landfilling by
AB 1594
Page
4
source reduction, recycling and composting.
AB 1647 (Bustamante, Chapter 978, Statutes of 1996) established
that local jurisdictions may use ADC as a strategy to achieve
their waste diversion goals by deeming ADC recycling, and
therefore counting towards the 50% diversion requirement for
jurisdictions.
While a large number of jurisdictions use green materials as
ADC, only 11 of the state's 416 jurisdictions would drop below
their required diversion rate if green materials used as ADC no
longer counted as diversion.
In 2012 (the most recent data available), approximately 1.6
million tons of green material was used as ADC. Use has
gradually decreased since 2005, when it peaked at approximately
three million tons.
75% Directive . CalRecycle is tasked with diverting at least 75%
of solid waste statewide by 2020. Currently, organic materials,
including green waste, make up one-third of the waste stream
(approximately 11 million tons) and food continues to be the
highest single category of disposal at over 15%. Green
materials, such as lumber, cardboard, and leaves and grass
comprise over 20%.
CalRecycle is also charged with implementing its 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 for
organic waste including composting and anaerobic digestion) are
necessary to meet the 75% goal and to implement Strategic
Directive 6.1. Anaerobic digestion, which produces biogas that
can be processed to biomethane fuel, is particularly suited to
handle food waste. Green waste is more efficiently processed
through composting. Compost, in addition to improving the
quality of soil, prevents soil erosion, reduces the need for
chemical fertilizers and pesticides, and enables better soil
water retention.
Tip fees . The Act requires that each ton of solid waste
deposited in a landfill be subject to a fee of $1.40 per ton.
Tipping fees are generally used to fund daily operational and
closure costs of a landfill, but may also be used to fund
AB 1594
Page
5
recycling programs, litter abatement, public education efforts
and other programs. A local tipping fee can act as an incentive
to encourage certain practices or disincentive so as to
discourage other practices. Previous legislation capped the
tipping fee at this level.
The application of ADC is considered recycling under California
law and is not subject to CalRecycle's $1.40 per ton disposal
fee.
Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) and Green Material ADC . Landfill gas is
generated by the anaerobic decomposition of organic materials
such as food, paper, wood, and green material. 50% of landfill
gas is methane, a GHG that is 25 times more efficient at
trapping heat than carbon dioxide (CO2).
Under AB 32 (Nunez, Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006), landfill
methane capture regulations were adopted as a discrete early
action item, and requires owners and operators of certain
uncontrolled municipal solid waste landfills to install gas
collection and control systems, and requires existing and newly
installed gas and control systems to operate in an optimal
manner. Often, these systems involve a combustion step as a way
to reduce the emissions of methane and other organics. However,
significant amounts of methane from landfills continue to escape
into the atmosphere. According to Air Resources Board's updated
Scoping Plan, approximately eight million tons of CO2 equivalent
are released annually by landfills. That number is expected to
increase to 8.5 million tons of CO2 equivalent by 2020.
Recycling organic waste provides significant GHG reductions over
landfilling. Composting and other organics processing
technologies, including anaerobic digestion, reduce GHGs by
avoiding the emissions that would be generated by the material's
decomposition in a landfill.
Good Faith Effort . Under existing law, CalRecycle reviews
disposal information from jurisdictions at regular intervals.
If a jurisdiction is not able to comply with the 50% diversion
mandate, CalRecycle makes a determination whether that
jurisdiction made a "good faith effort" to meet the requirement.
If a good faith effort is determined by CalRecycle to have been
made by the jurisdiction, they are deemed in compliance. In
order for CalRecycle to pursue enforcement action, they must
AB 1594
Page
6
determine that the city or county failed to make a good faith
effort to meet the state's diversion requirements.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, there will be
potential revenue losses of no more than $2 million, and
possibly significantly less, to the Integrated Waste Management
Fund as a result of excluding green material used as ADC from
the tipping fee.
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/25/14)
California Compost Coalition (co-source)
Californians Against Waste (co-source)
Agromin
American Biogas Council
Association of Compost Producers
Biodegradable Products Institute
Bioenergy Association of California
Breathe California
California Biomass Energy Alliance
California Climate and Agriculture Network
California Coastal Protection Network
California Compost Coalition
California League of Conservation Voters
California Organics Recycling Council
California Refuse Recycling Council
California Releaf
California Resource Recovery Association
Center for Biological Diversity
Cities of Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Thousand Oaks
CleanPower Campaign
CleanWorld
Coalition for Clean Air
Community Alliance with Family Farmers
Costa Mesa Sanitary District Board of Directors
Counties of San Francisco and Santa Barbara
CR&R Environmental Services
Ecology Center
Environment California
Frank M. Booth Design Build Co.
GAIA
AB 1594
Page
7
Global Green USA
Grassroots Recycling Network
Greenaction
Greenwaste Recovery
Integrated Waste Management Consulting
Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy
Napa Recycling and Waste Services
Natural Resources Defense Council
Natureworks, LLC
Northern California Recycling Association
Northern Recycling and Waste Services
Novamont, North America, Inc.
Peabody Engineering
Planning and Conservation League
Quackenbush Mountain Resource Recovery & Compost Facility
Recology
Republic Services
Rethink Waste
Sierra Club California
Sonoma Compost Co.
Tracy Material Recovery and Transfer Facility
Upper Valley Disposal Recycling
US Composting Council
Vasko Electric, Inc.
Waste Management
Z-Best Composting
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/25/14)
Cities of Diamond Bar and Monrovia
Committee/Integrated Waste Management Task Force
Los Angeles County Solid Waste Management
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The Community Alliance with Family
Farmers (CAFF) writes that this bill, "which will reclassify the
use of green waste as daily cover at a landfill as disposal
instead of recycling. CAFF promotes the greater use of compost
by farmers as an excellent tool to improve soil fertility,
reduce fertilizer costs, improve soil water retention, and
reduce environmental impacts.
"While there may have been historical reasons for green waste
ADC as recycling, we believe it is no longer justified. Green
waste is an essential feedstock for the production of compost,
AB 1594
Page
8
and compost as a product and an industry has greatly matured in
the 25 years since ADC was first classified as recycling.
Today's compost industry has an unmet demand for more feedstock
to produce compost. We believe that AB 1594, in conjunction
with AB 1826 (Chesbro), will significantly increase the
availability of green waste as a feedstock for compost
production, and for this reason CAFF supports AB 1594."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Los Angeles County Solid Waste
Management writes:
Elimination of recycling credit for the use of green materials
as a landfill alternative daily cover (ADC) would necessitate
development of new composting and/or anaerobic digestion (AD)
facilities. Currently, the 89 jurisdictions in Los Angeles
County generate over 5 million tons of organics (including
green materials) per year and our preliminary estimates
indicate that County jurisdictions would need over 36
facilities with a processing capability of 250 tons-per-day
each. A similarly sized facility in San Jose cost
approximately $40 million; therefore the total cost to build
this infrastructure in Los Angeles County could be as high as
$2 billion. This is essentially a new industry for Los
Angeles County and there are currently no AD facilities in the
County which are open to the public. We believe
state-administered grant and loan programs are critical to
helping this industry get off the ground and become
successful. Significant funding will be required to build the
necessary processing infrastructure for organics waste
recycling, which should not be limited to one or two
processes.
Many thermal, chemical, biological, and mechanical conversion
technologies could be utilized to process organic material
into a wide spectrum of resources which can be used to produce
electricity and fuels. However, these technologies are
stifled by antiquated legislative and regulatory barriers.
These technologies can diversify our approach to organics
management and help jurisdictions comply with the State's
direction to divert these materials from landfill disposal.
We encourage the State to take a technology neutral position
or, at a minimum, not prohibit technologies that can provide
equal or greater greenhouse gas reductions than anaerobic
AB 1594
Page
9
digestion and composting. Although anaerobic digestion is at
present the most widely used technology in California to
convert biodegradable organic waste to energy, biomass
gasification and other conversion technologies can manage a
broader array of organic waste and have much less residual
that may still need to be disposed. Moreover, the
technologies provide comparable or greater greenhouse gas
reductions, which must be the primary emphasis of the State's
effort to divert organics from landfills through source
separated collection.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 57-21, 5/29/14
AYES: Alejo, Ammiano, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta,
Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau,
Chesbro, Cooley, Dababneh, Daly, Dickinson, Eggman, Fong, Fox,
Frazier, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray,
Hall, Roger Hern�ndez, Holden, Jones-Sawyer, Levine,
Lowenthal, Maienschein, Medina, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian,
Pan, Perea, John A. P�rez, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk,
Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Skinner,
Stone, Ting, Weber, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, Atkins
NOES: Achadjian, Allen, Bigelow, Ch�vez, Conway, Dahle,
Donnelly, Beth Gaines, Grove, Hagman, Jones, Linder, Logue,
Mansoor, Melendez, Nestande,
Olsen, Patterson, Wagner, Waldron, Wilk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Harkey, Vacancy
RM:k 8/25/14 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****