Washington State's Electronics Recycling Law: A Producer Responsibility System

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
DC Responses Received WA OR ID MT WY CA NV UT CO AZ NM AK HI TX ND SD NE KS OK MN IA MO AR LA WI IL MI IN OH KY TN MS AL GA FL SC NC VA WV PA NY VT NH.
Advertisements

Overview of State E-Waste Laws Barbara Kyle Electronics TakeBack Coalition June 2, 2009.
Mobility Update as of February 15, WA OR CA NV ID MT ND SD WY UT CO AZ NM AK HI TX OK KS NE MN IA MO AR LA MS ALGA FL WI IL MI IN KY TN SC NC VA.
NICS Index State Participation As of 12/31/2007 DC NE NY WI IN NH MD CA NV IL OR TN PA CT ID MT WY ND SD NM KS TX AR OK MN OH WV MSAL KY SC MO ME MA DE.
National Journal Presentation Credits Producers: Katharine Conlon Director: Jessica Guzik Senate Committee Maps Updated: January 15, 2015.
National Journal Presentation Credits Producers: Katharine Conlon Director: Afzal Bari House Committee Maps Updated: March 19, 2015.
MD VT MA NH DC CT NJ RI DE WA
Medicaid Enrollment of New Eligibles in Expansion States, by Party Affiliation of Governor New Eligibles as a Percent of Total Medicaid Enrollment, FY.
Essential Health Benefits Benchmark Plan Selection, as of October 2012
House Price
Medicaid Enrollment of New Eligibles in Expansion States, by Party Affiliation of Governor New Eligibles as a Percent of Total Medicaid Enrollment, as.
Train-the-Trainer Sessions 240 sessions with 8,187 participants
Medicaid Enrollment of New Eligibles in Expansion States, by Party Affiliation of Governor New Eligibles as a Percent of Total Medicaid Enrollment, as.
House price index for AK
WY WI WV WA VA VT UT TX TN SD SC RI PA OR* OK OH ND NC NY NM* NJ NH
The State of the States Cindy Mann Center for Children and Families
Current Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
Current Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
Expansion states with Republican governors outnumber expansion states with Democratic governors, May 2018 WY WI WV◊ WA VA^ VT UT TX TN SD SC RI PA OR OK.
Expansion states with Republican governors outnumber expansion states with Democratic governors, January WY WI WV◊ WA VA VT UT TX TN SD SC RI PA.
Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
Non-Citizen Population, by State, 2011
Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
Share of Women Ages 18 – 64 Who Are Uninsured, by State,
Percent Change in Average Nongroup Premium Following Implementation of a State Individual Mandate, 2019 WA –15.1% NH: –13.7% ME –10.7% MT –11.1% ND –15.4%
WY WI WV WA VA VT UT TX TN1 SD SC RI PA OR OK OH1 ND NC NY NM NJ NH NV
WY WI WV WA VA* VT UT TX TN SD SC RI PA OR* OK OH ND NC NY NM* NJ NH
WY WI WV WA VA VT UT TX TN SD SC RI PA OR* OK OH ND NC NY NM* NJ NH
WA –16.9% NH: –18.8% ME –14.1% MT –23.7% ND –22.0% VT: –12.6% OR
Mobility Update and Discussion as of March 25, 2008
Current Status of the Medicaid Expansion Decision, as of May 30, 2013
IAH CONVERSION: ELIGIBLE BENEFICIARIES BY STATE
WAHBE Brokers / QHPs across the country as of
Current Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
State Health Insurance Marketplace Types, 2015
State Health Insurance Marketplace Types, 2018
HHGM CASE WEIGHTS Early/Late Mix (Weighted Average)
Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
PRACTICA & ONLINE ED AUTHORIZATION STATUS
Train-the-Trainer Sessions 394 sessions with 11,460 participants
Percent of Women Ages 19 to 64 Uninsured by State,
Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
Current Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
State Health Insurance Marketplace Types, 2017
Current Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
S Co-Sponsors by State – May 23, 2014
WY WI WV WA VA VT UT* TX TN SD SC RI PA OR* OK OH ND NC NY NM* NJ NH
Seventeen States Had Higher Uninsured Rates Than the National Average in 2013; Of Those, 11 Have Yet to Expand Eligibility for Medicaid AK NH WA VT ME.
Employer Premiums as Percentage of Median Household Income for Under-65 Population, 2003 and percent of under-65 population live where premiums.
Train-the-Trainer Sessions 396 sessions with 11,504 participants
Employer Premiums as Percentage of Median Household Income for Under-65 Population, 2003 and percent of under-65 population live where premiums.
Average annual growth rate
Percent of Children Ages 0–17 Uninsured by State
Executive Activity on the Medicaid Expansion Decision, May 9, 2013
Current Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
Current Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
How State Policies Limiting Abortion Coverage Changed Over Time
Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
Employer Premiums as Percentage of Median Household Income for Under-65 Population, 2003 and percent of under-65 population live where premiums.
Percent of Adults Ages 18–64 Uninsured by State
Train-the-Trainer Sessions 401 sessions with 11,639 participants
Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
WY WI WV WA VA VT UT* TX TN SD SC RI PA OR* OK OH ND NC NY NM* NJ NH
WY WI WV WA VA VT UT* TX TN SD SC RI PA OR* OK OH ND NC NY NM* NJ NH
Train-the-Trainer Sessions 416 sessions with 11,878 participants
Current Status of State Individual Marketplace and Medicaid Expansion Decisions, as of September 30, 2013 WY WI WV WA VA VT UT TX TN SD SC RI PA OR OK.
Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions
Presentation transcript:

Washington State's Electronics Recycling Law: A Producer Responsibility System Second International Workshop: Shared Responsibility for the Disposal of Computers in Latin America and the Caribbean Brasilia, Brazil Lunes 26 de Junio de 2006

U.S.A. National Negotiations Fail National Electronics Product Stewardship. Initiative (NEPSI) started in June 2001 with 48 stakeholders representing: 15 manufacturers 15 state, local & federal government reps 18 others including recyclers, NGOs, retailers, etc. Final meeting February 2004. Manufacturers could not reach agreement.

States Forced to Act State Legislation Introduced in 2004 Of 14 substantive introduced measures: 7 Producer Responsibility 3 Consumer fees 1 Shared responsibility 3 Advisory committees Several disposal bans

2006 State Recycling Legislation CANADA (as of 04/01/06) WA MT OR ND ME ID MN VT NH SD WY WI NY MI MA CT NV RI NE IA NJ UT PA IL OH CA MD CO IN DE WV KS MO KY VA AZ NC NM OK TN HI AR SC MS AL GA TX LA FL MEXICO Puerto Rico Recycling law activity in 2005 Producer Responsibility Bill Electronics/Computer Task Force Landfill ban ARF or 1st Seller Bill Recycling law adopted

Fourth State to Pass Law California 2003 Financed by fee on customers collected by retailers (advance recovery fee – ARF) State administers program Payments made to processors and collectors Maine 2004 Partial Producer Responsibility Local governments pay for collection Manufacturers pay for consolidation and processing Maryland 2005 Manufacturers pay small fee to state (insufficient) Local governments provide program

Washington State broke the ice on full producer responsibility in the United States!

This is Full Producer Responsibility Manufacturers fully responsible for financing ENTIRE system, not just some part. Local and state governments NOT stuck with costs. Local governments NOT forced to collect electronics. Puts responsibility where it matters – with producers.

Why Cost Internalization? Manufacturers finance the program. Recycling cost included in product price. Recycling is a cost of doing business. Prices should tell the truth. Recycling becomes a product feature. Incentive to decrease recycling costs in order to decrease product price. Impact on green design.

Why Cost Internalization? Shifts cost from local government. Cost passed on to consumer (not taxpayer). Less state government bureaucracy. No additional paperwork for retailers. Eliminates consumer confusion about ARF.

E-Waste Study 18 Month Study Process. Diverse Stakeholders Representing: Manufacturers - Retailers Governments - Recyclers Haulers - Business Association Charities Environmental Groups

E-Waste Study 2005 Washington Department of Ecology: Recommendations for Producer Responsibility Approach to the Legislature “Cost internalization relies on the private sector to do what it does best – compete fairly in the open market to provide the best available products and services at the lowest possible cost.”

Legislation Proponents A group formed around a producer-pays system Hewlett Packard Retailers Goodwill (reuse charity) Environmental groups A number of local governments (advisory) Common Interests Stakeholder Interests & Compromises

Support From Many Many Diverse Interests Supported Bill Environmental community legislative priority Many small and rural governments School districts Religious and health organizations Amazon.com Haulers, recyclers, processors

The Vote Democrats and Republicans Vote YES House: yes – 69, no - 29 Senate: yes – 38, no – 11 Governor Christine Gregoire signed into law on March 24, 2006 Vetoed section restricting export Strongly supports intent More work to be done to address that issue

The Basics Product manufacturers provide free recycling services throughout the state at no charge to the product owner. No state tax or fee charged to the consumer at point of purchase or end of life. Covered products - computers, computer monitors, laptop computers and televisions. Implementation Date - January 1, 2009. 16

Service Level Any household, charity, school district, small business, or small government located in Washington State. Minimum: one collection point in every city with a population of 10,000 or more and at least one in every county. Collection, transportation and processing costs are covered for electronic products from households/small quantities. Processing costs are covered, at a minimum, for larger quantities from charities, school districts, small businesses and small governments. 17

Manufacturer Responsibility Manufacturer Pays - Cost internalization. Manufacturer Registration – All manufacturers must register annually and participate in an approved plan. Manufacturer Plans – All manufacturers selling into the state must be members of the standard program or may participate in an approved independent plan. State Costs - Covered by manufacturer registration & plan fees.

The Standard Program Operated by the Materials Management and Financing Authority Quasi-governmental Third Party Organization Board appointed by Department of Ecology Cost of program shared among member manufacturers All “new entrants” must participate in standard plan

Independent Programs Independent programs are allowed if approved by State. Must have minimum of 5% return share by brand (can be multiple manufacturers). Must have sold branded computers in State for minimum of 5 years, 10 years for TVs. Must meet same service and other requirements as Standard Program.

Shared Responsibility Consumers will typically deliver equipment to collection sites. Retailers, local governments, recyclers, haulers, & charities may voluntarily serve as collection sites. Manufacturers pay (including retailers for their own house brands). State government provides oversight & enforcement. Shared education.

Material & Money Flow

Other Highlights Reuse Encouraged - Programs working with non-profit reuse organizations get additional 5% credit for poundage from those charities. Enforcement - Non–participating manufacturers cannot sell products in or into the state.

Other Highlights No Disposal Ban - 43% population currently under local disposal bans and more coming. Labor - Prison labor can not be used to process collected products. Processing Standards – required.

Myth Busting Manufacturers will not just pay fines and do no program. If don’t participate, they can’t sell in state. Collectors will not have to sort by brand. There will not be lots of different programs by different manufacturers to confuse the public and frustrate collectors. Governments and retailers are not required to provide collection. Decision is voluntary.

The Washington State Approach Puts businesses in driver’s seat for business decisions. Uses incentives, competition and the market economy to drive system, not prescriptive targets. Addresses majority of stakeholder concerns. A fair, progressive approach that will get the job done!

What’s Next? Pharmaceuticals Paint Mercury-containing devices Other electronics Batteries Cell phones Containers General Product Legislation

Recommendations Only accept a complete system: Collection, Transport and Processing! A Producer Responsibility Approach is best! Simplify – it can be easier than Washington State approach! Learn from British Columbia, Canada’s Stewardship Law!

Exporting Harm Video by Basel Action Network Portrays Chinese recycling operations extremely harmful to human health and environment What is happening in your country? What is my country causing?

Additional Information Sego Jackson, Snohomish County, Washington State U.S.A. sego.jackson@co.snohomish.wa.us, 425-388-6490 WA State Department of Ecology E-waste information http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/swfa/ewaste/ Washington’s Electronics Recycling Bill http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=6428 http://www.productstewardship.us/supportingdocs/WA_Electronics_Law.doc Northwest Product Stewardship Council http://www.productstewardship.net/ Product Stewardship Institute http://www.productstewardship.us/ Basel Action Network (Exporting Harm) http://www.ban.org Washington Citizens for Resource Conservation http://www.wastenotwashington.org 30