Stakeholders Agree Congressional Involvement in E-Waste Will Make Difference
The bipartisan Congressional E-Waste Working Group doesn’t envision introducing legislation soon, an aide told us: “I don’t think that is the route.” The group began working toward consensus legislation with a meeting Wed. of representatives of industry, CE companies, state govts., environmental groups, retailers and retailers. The lawmakers have begun a listening exercise, the aide said, and will hold a series of meetings to flesh out the concerns of those interested.
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.
He said Wed.’s meeting examined the projected cost of a national e-waste recycling system, and considered the product types that need to be covered. Also discussed were state laws and environmental concerns, he added. The group will convene regularly, he said, and will “develop or identify a grid that highlights a timeframe” for an effective e-waste legislation. The next meeting will be scheduled in about 2 weeks, he added. The group is committed to introducing legislation next year, said a spokeswoman for Rep. Thompson (D-Cal.).
Asked if the legislators will try to narrow industry differences over financing a national system, the aide said the failure of efforts in the past resulted from lack of representation for all stakeholders: “A lot of voices weren’t heard from.” So there wasn’t support for a “radical piece of legislation,” he said. At EPA’s request, the National Electronics Product Stewardship Initiative (NEPSI) tried without success for more than 2 years to develop national e-waste legislation. The efforts ended because industry factions couldn’t agree on how to pay for collecting, transporting and recycling of used electronics.
There’s “potential” for the congressional group’s initiative to lead to federal legislation, said Scott Cassel, exec. dir. of the Product Stewardship Institute, which advises states on legislation. But introducing legislation in the next session is an “aggressive timeline,” he said. Cassel, who attended the Wed. meeting as a representative of state and local govts., said the congressional group is moving quickly to reach agreement on “some of the basic elements” of a national e-waste system. “The key is for the manufacturers to reach an agreement in concept on some of the ideas and proposals discussed at the meeting.”
Financing was a central theme at the meeting, he said: “There was interest in exploring alternatives that would lead us to consensus.” Many manufacturers and other participants were “genuinely interested” in pursuing a consensus, he added. State and local agencies believe federal legislation is “preferable but not critical,” Cassel said: “They will continue to move on state legislation whether or not this group is active.” The states need to see “significant changes of position” among manufacturers and “real signs of an emerging consensus,” he said.
Unlike NEPSI, the congressional group has “different dynamics,” said Cassel. Besides the involvement of lawmakers, the situation on the ground has changed with 4 states enacting laws and 20 others actively considering legislation. “There is a real recognition that the longer that we wait, the more disparate systems that will be developed in the states and the more difficult it will be to develop a federal framework around those states with existing laws.”
Although financing was discussed, “we didn’t talk specifics,” said CEA Environmental Counsel Parker Brugge: “Manufacturers and brand owners really need to discuss that issue first.” Financing has many “different components,” he said, because the issue involved historic waste, new products and IT products that are sold different from TVs and other CE products, he said. There was a lot of discussion about whether a one-size-fit-all solution works, he said: “Maybe there needs to be a bifurcation or trifurcation of the issue, treating different product types differently.”
The CEA will bring together manufacturers and brand owners before the next congressional group meeting to see if “we can come to some consensus on an approach to deal with financing,” Brugge said, because if there can’t be a consensus on financing “then it doesn’t make sense to discuss all these other issues.” He said the direct involvement of members of Congress does make a difference. With 4 state laws on the books, he said, “people are now looking at this issue as what can we live with as opposed to what’s the optimal solution for my company.” He said he’s optimistic about “fruitful and intense” discussion, but “whether that results in an entire industry coming together and saying this is how we need to do it -- a one-size-fits-all -- I am not sure that will happen.” What’s likely to emerge is different ways to deal with different types of issues and products, Brugge said.