States Call HP Model E-Waste Bill Significant Step
Hewlett-Packard unveiled a model e-waste bill that it said would require companies to run their own recycling programs or accept a “tax"-based approach. The bill is being circulated in state legislatures and “there is interest,” HP Dir.-Govt. Policy David Isaacs told us. Despite concerns, state officials called the HP proposal a significant step.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Differences between PC majors such as HP and TV makers over financing a recycling system stalled negotiations for national legislation in the EPA- sponsored National Electronics Products Stewardship Initiative (NEPSI). With national consensus elusive, Cal., Me. and Md. have enacted varying e-waste laws and at least 26 other states are looking at legislative fixes. With industry expressing concern over a patchwork of state laws, Congress stepped in and there were committee hearings in both houses.
HP is trying with the model legislation to allow flexibility for companies to pursue their own recycling programs, said Isaacs. That would promote innovation, he said. Under the bill, a state govt. would determine an “equivalent share” of CRT devices each manufacturer would have responsibility to recycle. Companies could recycle their own products or accept a fee on their products to finance recycling. “Our view is that in any system, where there’s a fee or not, there needs to be some sort of calculation as to how much funds you need to raise to cover the cost of recycling,” said Isaacs.
Asked about prospects for federal legislation, he said that while he hoped Congress would act, “as a practical matter there is not a bill yet, let alone being seriously considered.” He said “outreach” efforts are underway in state legislatures and “we are hopeful that something along these [HP proposals] will be considered in several states.” Asked if HP pursuing its own proposals means an end to negotiations with TV manufacturers, Isaacs said HP still was open to different approaches and “we hope we can reconcile with them.” But, he said, HP’s proposals don’t “force anyone to do anything they don’t want to do.”
The HP bill is a “real attempt at providing a significant and prime role for manufacturers” in managing their waste products, said Scott Cassel, exec. dir. of the Product Stewardship Institute, which advises states on recycling legislation. But states have some concerns, he said. The bill limits the scope of products covered to CRT devices, he said. The “starting place” for govt. agencies is products covered in NEPSI, he said, “so it should be expanded.” HP may be underestimating the role state govts. would have to play, Cassel said. Govts. will have to pass CRT disposal bans that will be a prime driver in the HP system. The govt. will also have to determine the fee for companies that don’t do their own recycling as well as run a grant program. “Those responsibilities seem significant,” he said, because they're on top of enforcement and planning.
He said states should consider the HP model as “part of a mix.” Because the proposals come from a major player, he said, govts. should consider them carefully. “It may not be accepted as is. There may be recommendations for change or there may be ways to incorporate components of different systems to develop a better one.”