1. June 19, 2014 CONTROL OF TRASH ENTERING WATERWAYS IN CALIFORNIA DRAFT WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD POLICY

2. Presentation Outline Issue Overview Political / Legislative Challenges Draft Water Board Policy Potential Industry Impacts Next Steps

3. Issue Overview Plastics related challenges have existed in CA for decades: 1990’s --- Focus on solid waste & recycling 2000’s --- Litter & marine debris become policy driver for NGOs Plastic bags / polystyrene food containers State legislative proposals Container fees, recycling programs, bans Local government actions Bans on PS foam food containers and plastic bags have been adopted in several communities throughout CA.

4. Issue Overview In California, there are over 70 water bodies listed as being “impaired” due to the presence of large amounts of trash.’ Currently, the State Water Board – and regional boards – control trash through permits and regulatory limits such as TMDLs --- Total Maximum Daily Loads. Los Angeles Trash TMDL approved in 2002 (LA River and Ballona Creek) SF Regional Board is developing a trash component for its federal Clean Water Act permit Varying regional approaches led State Water Board to seek consistency by establishing a statewide policy.

5. Water Board Trash Policy Process was initiated in 2010 with release of initial scoping documents Between 2011 and 2013 a “Public Advisory Group” was created NGOs Local Gov’t Cal Trans One industry rep – ACC Encouraged Water Board to reach out to the public March/April 2013 – 14 stakeholder meetings held throughout the state ACC, WPA recruited members/customers/local chambers to participate

6. Water Board Trash Policy What does the policy do? Objective: Provide consistent approach to protect aquatic life and public health – no trash shall accumulate in state waters in amounts that would either adversely affect beneficial uses or cause nuisance. Prohibition of Discharge: applies to both permitted and non-permitted dischargers: (waters within LA regional board exempt) Municipalities, Cal Trans, industrial facilities and construction sites regulated by the water board’s industrial storm water permits Specific prohibition of pre-production plastic by all manufacturers and transporters. Expands discharge prohibition beyond those facilities currently subject to AB 258

7. Water Board Trash Policy Proposal includes 2 “Tracks” for achieving compliance: Track 1 – Install, operate and maintain full capture systems in storm drains Track 2 – Develop and implement a plan with any combination of controls such as: Full capture systems Partial capture devices/green infrastructure Institutional controls (e.g. street sweeping, trash collection, public education and regulatory source controls. Time schedule for compliance: 10 years from the effective date of the implementing permits but no longer than 15 years. Focus on high trash generation areas.

8. Water Board Trash Policy What are “regulatory source controls?” Defined as “controls that are enforced by an ordinance of the municipality to stop and/or reduce pollutants at their point of generation so that they do not come into contact with storm water. Regulatory source controls could consist of, but not be limited to, bans of single-use consumer products.” Examples in the policy specifically reference bans on polystyrene and plastic bags. Enactment of local ordinances could result in an extension of the compliance deadline from 1-3 years. Draft policy only suggests this as an “option” for the water board to consider.

9. Water Board Trash Policy Industry has traditionally objected to incentives that encourage restrictions on individual products and/or materials. Bay Area gov’ts urged the SF Regional Board to give them a partial percentage credit toward meeting their trash reduction obligations. Credit proposal shelved. Do bans on one product/material reduce overall “trash” loads or litter? Policy references a 2008 study in SF which showed “eliminating all food-related polystyrene would simply change the type of litter found on our streets and waterways.” “No overall reduction in litter (or trash to the waterways.” Long term impact: potential proliferation of bans on plastic products.

10. Water Board Trash Policy Regulatory source controls should demonstrate effectiveness in reducing overall trash loads. Continued political pressure to include this option is likely. Requirement that policies demonstrate trash reduction is reasonable. Expand potential “source controls” to include recycling initiatives? Other options?

11. Public Workshop – July 16, 2014 Cal EPA Building, Sacramento Public Hearing – August 5, 2014 Cal EPA Building, Sacramento Written Comments Due – August 5, 2014 What’s Next? Tentative Fall 2014 adoption

12. Next Steps Develop written response Continued coalition outreach Encourage industry engagement Meetings with board members Explore policy alternatives that industry could suggest