State E-Waste Bills Start Showing Bias Toward Market Share Cost Obligations

There appears to be sustained interest in the e-waste issue in the states this year, with as many as eight considering legislation. That was about the same number that had legislation introduced in 2009, according to environmental groups. Most of the 2010 bills prescribe some form of producer responsibility and none is “going toward the advanced recycling fee model,” said Jason Linnell of the National Center for Electronics Recycling. Twenty states and New York City have enacted e-waste laws.

One noticeable trend in e-waste legislation this year is the move toward market share-based financing obligations for CE makers rather than return share, said Linnell. “Rather than counting what the brands are that are coming back into the system,” the more recent bills are based on market share financing obligations, like the Vermont bill (S-77) that recently passed the House, he said. Oregon passed a bill (HB-3606) to amend the state law to incorporate market share obligations, he said. Under current Oregon law, only those TV makers who were in the state-run program were charged their cost based on market share. “So it created an imbalance for those TV manufacturers who wanted to opt out of the program where they only took responsibility for the return share,” he said. NCER runs the state program.

In addition to states that considered bills last year, new ones like Utah and Arizona also have proposed legislation, he said. In terms of numbers, “it’s pretty much on target with last year,” when only two bills passed, he said. He said he expects five states to pass e-waste bills this year. Bills in Massachusetts and Vermont have been out for a long time, and they're getting closer to passage, he said. Some of the newer states like Utah and Arizona might pass a bill in a “little bit watered down” form to “make the requirements minimal on both the state and the manufacturers,” Linnell said. Those weighing study bills like Nevada and Colorado might do full-fledged e-waste bills only in 2011, he said.

States’ interest in tackling the e-waste problem is still high, given the number of bills in play this year, said Barbara Kyle, national coordinator of the Electronics TakeBack Coalition. States where legislation has been out for a couple of years are the most likely to pass this year, she said, and newer ones could take a couple of years to enact. Environmental groups want market share obligation not just for the cost to manufacturers but for collection as well, she said. “What they are doing now, and this is driven mostly by the TV companies, is you just have to divvy up the cost of handling whatever comes back,” Kyle said. “We like to see market share obligations or market share goals that act as drivers to higher levels of collection."

With energy and renewable energy issues grabbing attention in states, e-waste may not figure as high on the agenda this year as it did in the past, said Adam Schafer, executive director of the National Caucus of Environmental Legislators. With climate change and energy issues dominant and having shorter sessions because of elections, “most of the bills are not going to go anywhere,” he said.

CEA is discussing with its members about whether the trend toward market share cost obligation is the “direction they want to go,” said Amy Dempster, CEA manager of environmental policy. As for green groups’ push for market share collection goals for CE makers, she said manufacturers have “no sense of when consumers are going to return the products” and so it’s “difficult to set a hard number or hard target,” she said. The CEA has been focused “internally” to devise a “single, unified voice” for the industry, she said, referring to longstanding fissures in the industry over financing mechanisms. “We are very close” to getting a unified industry position on e-waste, she said, saying a “better idea of the direction we are headed in” could come in the spring.