BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1016|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1016
Author: Wiggins (D)
Amended: 4/10/06
Vote: 21
SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE : 6-0, 4/16/07
AYES: Simitian, Runner, Florez, Kuehl, Lowenthal,
Steinberg
NO VOTE RECORDED: Aanestad
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
SUBJECT : Solid waste reporting
SOURCE : California Integrated Waste Management Board
DIGEST : This bill authorizes the California Integrated
Waste Management Board to allow a city or a county that has
diverted more than 50 percent of solid waste through source
reduction recycling, and composting activities to submit
the required annual report on a biennial basis.
ANALYSIS : Existing law, under the California Integrated
Waste Management Act of 1989:
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 percent of
solid waste from landfill disposal or transformation by
January 1, 1995, through source reduction, recycling, and
CONTINUED
SB 1016
Page
2
composting activities, and must divert 50 percent of
solid waste on and after January 1, 2000.
2.Requires each city, county, or regional agency to
annually submit a report to the CIWMB summarizing its
progress in reducing solid waste, and requires the report
to contain certain information (e.g., calculations of
annual disposal reduction, information on changes in
waste generated or disposed, progress in diverting
construction and demolition waste material).
This bill:
1.Authorizes the CIWMB to allow a city or county to submit
certain information in the annual report on a biennial,
rather than an annual, basis if the CIWMB determines the
city or county has diverted more than 50 percent of solid
waste from landfill disposal through source reduction,
recycling, and composting activities. This CIWMB
authorization cannot be effective if the city or county
subsequently fails to divert 50 percent of the solid
waste or if the CIWMB rescinds the authorization.
2.Contains legislative intent regarding the diversion
rates, adjusting the solid waste diversion compliance
system to simplify the system while improving its
accuracy, examining new methods to streamline accounting
of disposal quantification, and continuing implementation
of diversion programs.
3.Makes corresponding technical and clarifying amendments.
Comments
According to the CIWMB, "California diverted more than 46
million tons of solid waste away from landfills into
recycling, composting and transformation programs in 2005,
for an estimated statewide diversion rate of 52 percent.
Diversion has increased nine-fold since the Integrated
Waste Management Act was passed in 1989." The CIWMB notes
that almost 70 percent of jurisdictions have received
SB 1016
Page
3
approval for their diversion rates while about 30 percent
have either been granted a time extension or are on
compliance orders.
This bill provides an incentive to cities and counties with
a diversion rate that exceeds 50 percent by authorizing
fewer reporting requirements in their annual reports to the
CIWMB.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 4/24/07)
California Integrated Waste Management Board (source)
Allied Waste Services, Inc.
Regional Rural Council of Rural Counties (if amended)
Waste Management
OPPOSITION : (Verified 4/24/07)
Lassen Regional Solid Waste Management Authority
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to Waste Management,
"This bill will simplify and streamline the complex system
now used to annually track and report the management of
more than 40 million tons of solid waste produced each year
and to calculate the solid waste diversion rates achieved
by hundreds of local agencies."
Waste Management states that, "Since the passage of AB 939,
local governments and the state's solid waste and recycling
industry have led the nation in implementing effective
programs to divert more than 50 percent of all solid waste
from landfills and incinerators. Yet the complicated
annual disposal reporting system developed to ensure
compliance has frustrated all stakeholders and represents a
serious obstacle to achieving higher diversion rates."
Waste Management believes, "SB 1016 offers an important
vehicle to develop an alternative compliance system that
will advance the broad diversion goals of AB 939 while
simplifying the extraordinarily burdensome waste tracking
SB 1016
Page
4
and reporting system."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : According to the Lassen
Regional Solid Waste Management Authority (LRSWMA), "In our
view, Section 41826(a)(4) is a precursor to implement a
waste disposal cap rather than having waste diversion
compliance be determined as a percentage of the total
amount of solid waste generated. A cap on the total amount
of solid waste disposal will create problems for all
California counties. Rural counties, such as Lassen
County, will be especially hard hit.
"Many rural jurisdictions are having difficulty meeting the
existing 50 percent diversion requirement. The
difficulties usually involve poor economies of scale and
distance to markets for diverted commodities. In Lassen
County we are at 50 percent diversion, but we struggle to
maintain relatively low disposal fees to encourage people
to use our landfills and transfer stations and not dispose
of wastes illegally. It's important to note that our waste
diversion programs are subsidized by disposal fees at our
main landfill in Susanville.
"To prevent an increase in total waste disposal in Lassen
County, our disposal fees would have to increase to
subsidize additional diversion programs. With increased
disposal fees, illegal dumping will also increase. In
Lassen County, prevention of illegal dumping to reduce the
negative impact to human health and the environment is of
greater importance than capping lawful waste disposal."
TSM:do 4/25/07 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****