An Overview of the Key Aspects & Differences of the 25 State Laws Jason Linnell, Executive Director, NCER

An Overview of the Key Aspects & Differences of the 25 State Laws Jason Linnell, Executive Director, NCER

Non-profit 501c3 Located in Parkersburg, WV Involved in Federal, State & Association Projects Conduct Research, Run Collection Programs Partner with NERC on Electronics Recycling Coordination Clearinghouse Manage Oregon State Contractor Program Our Mission: Dedicated to the development and enhancement of a national infrastructure for the recycling of used electronics in the U.S.

States highlighted in orange have some type of electronics recycling program law

2003: California 2004: Maine 2005: Maryland 2006: Washington 2007: Connecticut, Minnesota, Oregon, Texas, North Carolina 10 8 6 4 2 0 Number of New Laws Number of New Laws 2008*: New Jersey, Oklahoma, Virginia, W. Virginia, Missouri, Hawaii, Rhode Island, Illinois, Michigan 2009: Indiana, Wisconsin 2010: Vermont, South Carolina, New York, Pennsylvania 2011: Utah Percentage of Population Covered by E-Waste Law 2003 2005 2007 2009 % Covered % Not Covered

States With Landfill Bans One or More Electronic Devices NOT all Program Law States Have Bans! And Vice Versa Red - have active landfill bans. Yellow not in effect (PA effective as of Jan 2013). Green (NY) - has a staged ban partially in effect.

Minimum: Monitors, Laptops Maximum: + TVs, Computers, Printers, Keyboards, Mice, Small Servers, Personal Audio, VCR/DVD, DVRs, cable/satellite boxes Most in between with big five TVs, desktops, laptops, monitors, and printers

Who can use the (free) recycling system? All Cover Households/Consumers, then variations on: Small businesses fewer than 10 or 50 or 100 Schools K-12 or all Non-profit organizations 501c3 or all Government agencies small local or all Rarely All large businesses

Advanced recovery fee CA only Producer Responsibility (PR): Annual fee or own program MD & WV PR: Return share WA only* PR: Market share - 7 PR: Return & market share 7 PR: None specified, but manufacturers run their own programs 7

1. Pounds sold/share: (HI), IL, IN, [MI], MN, NJ, NY, WI, (NC), PA, (SC) 2. Default and opt-out: OR, RI, VT, WA 3. Limited take-back programs: (HI), MD, MO, (NC), (MI), (SC), OK, TX, UT, VA, WV 4. State recycler approval: CT, ME 5. Advanced Recycling Fee: CA ( ) = fits more than 1 category, usually due to separate programs for TV and IT [ ] = voluntary goals

OEM individual lbs goals, based on sales First states allowed lbs from anywhere in state, with incentives for rural areas Recyclers bid for OEM/group contracts, then work with collectors Key Differences Geographic/convenience goals strict in NY/NJ soft in MI; others none Some require plans PA, NY, NJ LBs sold or LBs sold/unit share? Makes difference for overall collection goal

Manufacturers by default in one program, but can opt-out under certain conditions Usually with convenience goals (1 per county/city, etc), small # of collective programs (1 in VT/WA) Recyclers win contracts with collectives; program managers or recyclers contract collectors Key Differences Return share & market share responsibilities (Only WA all return share) Collection goal set by state/law, or retroactive (Only WA)

Manufacturers choose plan type to meet requirements Many allow mail-back to suffice No strict collection goals (except *MI, SC, NC), limited convenience goals Recycler contracts with individual or groups of manufacturers Key Differences MD and WV allow fee only with no plan NC higher fees for just on IT mail-back, lower if more offered; goal for TV manufacturers TVs not covered in MO, VA, MO

State approves recyclers, they service collectors Approved recyclers bill all manufacturers (return or market share) No collection goals, pay costs of all lbs collected by municipalities Key Differences Product scope differences (desktops, video game consoles, frames) Return or market share Model 5: Advanced Recycling Fee Fee charged on sales, state pays standard rate for collection and recycling

5 The first few, holding steady 2010 2011 2012 NOT a True Comparison Products/Entities Differ! 6.7 6.8 6.6 6.4 6.2 6.2 6.3 5.9 5.6 5.3 5.3 5.2 6.9 4 CA ME MN WA OR

0 0 2.4 2.5 2.5 3 3.7 4.1 4.5 4.6 6.3 6.4 OTHER STATES WITH 2-3 YEARS OF DATA 2010 2011 2012 IL WI RI IN

0.3 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.9 1.7 1.7 2.4 NO TVS IN TX/VA/MO 2011 2012 TX VA MO MI WV

0 0 0 2.7 2.5 3.1 3.9 4.4 5.3 7.7 SOME TBD FOR 2012 2011 2012 CT NC NJ NY VT

Key Issue #1: Products New products challenging definitions in laws, increasing in sales: o E-readers, Media Tablet, phablets o Digital Picture Frames, GPS units, ANY display Key Issue #2: Targets/Pounds Push and Pull of Pounds and Targets o Regulators want results, targets achieved o Recyclers want more pounds entering their facilities o Manufacturers want compliance, but more lbs = more $

Leakage from collection o Brokers pay more than PR systems Some reports of diversion of valuable items Diverted devices may never get to qualified, certified recyclers Diversion raises costs (less valuable items left), distorts true collection rates, & could lead to environmental harm Solution? Best Management Practices baseline for collectors from Electronics Recycling Coordination Clearinghouse (ERCC)

Forum for coordination and info exchange, joint decision-making Voting and Affiliate Members Reduce administrative overlap Offer covered stakeholders a one-stop shop for information on state laws Coordinate data gathering and information sharing Formalize joint, but non-binding, responses on key implementation issues

Best Management Practices intended for collection sites accepting electronics from covered entities under state electronics recycling laws May also be used by collection sites outside of state programs Collector Definition: Entity offering site for receiving &/or consolidating electronics prior to sending to recyclers or consolidators. A collector is not involved in the disassembly, demanufacture, or recycling of electronics Available on ERCC site

Stuck on 25 since 2011, when will we have #26? o Fewer states w/ active (program) legislation 2013 o More industry programs Will Congress move on legislation addressing patchwork? o Unlikely in short term o Export bill likely to be introduced, but move? More data in 2013 o Most states will have at least 2 years of results o Standardized metrics help compare performance o Look beyond lbs as only measure of performance

Jason Linnell, NCER Phone: (304) 699-1008 jlinnell@electronicsrecycling.org Visit us on the web: www.electronicsrecycling.org and www.ecycleclearinghouse.org Multi-State Manufacturer Registration: www.ecycleregistration.org