The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, administered by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, generally regulates the disposal, management, and recycling of solid waste. Existing law requires disposal facility operators to submit information to counties from periodic tracking surveys on the disposal tonnages that are disposed of at the disposal facility by jurisdiction or region of origin. Existing law requires solid waste handlers and transfer station operators to provide information to the disposal facility on the origin of the solid waste they deliver to the disposal facility. Existing law requires recycling and composting facilities to submit periodic information to counties on the types and quantities of materials that are disposed of, sold to end users, or sold to exporters or transporters for sale outside of the state, by county of origin. Existing law requires counties to submit periodic reports to the cities within the county, to any regional agency of which the county is a member, and to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery on the amounts of solid waste disposed of by jurisdiction or region of origin, and on the categories and amounts of solid waste diverted to recycling and composting facilities within the county or region. Existing law authorizes the department to adopt regulations in this regard.

This bill would revise these provisions by, among other things, (1) requiring recycling and composting operations and facilities to submit specified information directly to the department, rather than to counties, (2) requiring disposal facility operators to submit tonnage information to the department, and to counties only on request, and (3) deleting the requirement for counties to submit that information to cities, regional agencies, and the department. The bill would delete references to periodic tracking surveys. The bill would require exporters, brokers, and transporters of recyclables or compost to submit periodic information to the department on the types, quantities, and destinations of materials that are disposed of, sold, or transferred inside or outside of the state, and would authorize the department to provide this information, on an aggregated basis, to jurisdictions, as specified. The bill would make the aggregated information, other than that aggregated by company, public information. The bill would make other related changes to the various reporting requirements. The bill would provide for imposition of civil penalties on any person who refuses or fails to submit information required by the governing regulations, and on any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, refuses to permit the department to inspect or examine associated records, or alters, cancels, or obliterates entries in the records, as specified. The bill would provide that the civil penalties may be imposed either in a civil action or administratively pursuant to procedures specified in the bill. The bill would specify the types of waste disposal records that are subject to inspection and copying by the department, and also by an employee of a government entity, as defined, with respect to tonnage received at a disposal facility on or after July 1, 2015, that originates within the government entitys geographic jurisdiction. The bill, with respect to those records, would prohibit a government entity from disclosing the name of a waste hauler using a specific landfill unless necessary as part of an administrative or judicial proceeding, as specified. The bill would also authorize a government entity to petition the superior court for injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce these provisions. The bill would require recovered civil penalties to be deposited in the Integrated Waste Management Account.

The California Public Records Act provides that public records are open to inspection at all times during the office hours of the state or local agency that retains those records, and that every person has a right to inspect any public record, but exempts certain records from those requirements. Existing law, upon the request of any person furnishing any report, notice, application, plan, or other document required by the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, provides that neither the department nor an enforcement agency shall make available for inspection by the public any portion of the report, notice, application, plan, or other document that contains a trade secret, as specified.

This bill would exempt certain waste disposal records subject to inspection and copying by the department or a government entity from disclosure under certain California Public Records Act provisions. The bill would also make certain waste disposal records subject to nondisclosure under the trade secrets provisions.

The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, administered by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, generally regulates the disposal, management, and recycling of solid waste. Existing law requires disposal facility operators to submit information to counties from periodic tracking surveys on the disposal tonnages that are disposed of at the disposal facility by jurisdiction or region of origin. Existing law requires solid waste handlers and transfer station operators to provide information to the disposal facility on the origin of the solid waste they deliver to the disposal facility. Existing law requires recycling and composting facilities to submit periodic information to counties on the types and quantities of materials that are disposed of, sold to end users, or sold to exporters or transporters for sale outside of the state, by county of origin. Existing law requires counties to submit periodic reports to the cities within the county, to any regional agency of which the county is a member, and to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery on the amounts of solid waste disposed of by jurisdiction or region of origin, and on the categories and amounts of solid waste diverted to recycling and composting facilities within the county or region. Existing law authorizes the department to adopt regulations in this regard.

This bill would revise these provisions by, among other things, (1) requiring recycling and composting operations and facilities to submit specified information directly to the department, rather than to counties, (2) requiring disposal facility operators to submit tonnage information to the department, and to counties only on request, and (3) deleting the requirement for counties to submit that information to cities, regional agencies, and the department. The bill would delete references to periodic tracking surveys. The bill would require exporters, brokers, and transporters of recyclables or compost to submit periodic information to the department on the types, quantities, and destinations of materials that are disposed of, sold, or transferred inside or outside of the state, and would authorize the department to provide this information, on an aggregated basis, to jurisdictions, as specified. The bill would make the aggregated information, other than that aggregated by company, public information. The bill would make other related changes to the various reporting requirements. The bill would provide for imposition of civil penalties on any person who refuses or fails to submit information required by the governing regulations, and on any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, refuses to permit the department to inspect or examine associated records, or alters, cancels, or obliterates entries in the records, as specified. The bill would provide that the civil penalties may be imposed either in a civil action or administratively pursuant to procedures specified in the bill. The bill would specify the types of waste disposal records that are subject to inspection and copying by the department, and also by an employee of a government entity, as defined, with respect to tonnage received at a disposal facility on or after July 1, 2015, that originates within the government entitys geographic jurisdiction. The bill, with respect to those records, would prohibit a government entity from disclosing the name of a waste hauler using a specific landfill unless necessary as part of an administrative or judicial proceeding, as specified. The bill would also authorize a government entity to petition the superior court for injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce these provisions. The bill would require recovered civil penalties to be deposited in the Integrated Waste Management Account.

The California Public Records Act provides that public records are open to inspection at all times during the office hours of the state or local agency that retains those records, and that every person has a right to inspect any public record, but exempts certain records from those requirements. Existing law, upon the request of any person furnishing any report, notice, application, plan, or other document required by the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, provides that neither the department nor an enforcement agency shall make available for inspection by the public any portion of the report, notice, application, plan, or other document that contains a trade secret, as specified.

This bill would exempt certain waste disposal records subject to inspection and copying by the department or a government entity from disclosure under certain California Public Records Act provisions. The bill would also make certain waste disposal records subject to nondisclosure under the trade secrets provisions.

The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, administered by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, generally regulates the disposal, management, and recycling of solid waste. Existing law requires disposal facility operators to submit information to counties from periodic tracking surveys on the disposal tonnages that are disposed of at the disposal facility by jurisdiction or region of origin. Existing law requires solid waste handlers and transfer station operators to provide information to the disposal facility on the origin of the solid waste they deliver to the disposal facility. Existing law requires recycling and composting facilities to submit periodic information to counties on the types and quantities of materials that are disposed of, sold to end users, or sold to exporters or transporters for sale outside of the state, by county of origin. Existing law requires counties to submit periodic reports to the cities within the county, to any regional agency of which the county is a member, and to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery on the amounts of solid waste disposed of by jurisdiction or region of origin, and on the categories and amounts of solid waste diverted to recycling and composting facilities within the county or region. Existing law authorizes the department to adopt regulations in this regard.

This bill would revise these provisions by, among other things, (1) requiring recycling and composting operations and facilities to submit specified information directly to the department, rather than to counties, (2) requiring disposal facility operators to submit tonnage information to the department, and to counties only on request, and (3) deleting the requirement for counties to submit that information to cities, regional agencies, and the department. The bill would delete references to periodic tracking surveys. The bill would require exporters, brokers, and transporters of recyclables or compost to submit periodic information to the department on the types, quantities, and destinations of materials that are disposed of, sold, or transferred inside or outside of the state, and would authorize the department to provide this information, on an aggregated basis, to jurisdictions, as specified. The bill would make the aggregated information, other than that aggregated by company, public information. The bill would make other related changes to the various reporting requirements. The bill would provide for imposition of civil penalties on any person who refuses or fails to submit information required by the governing regulations, and on any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, refuses to permit the department to inspect or examine associated records, or alters, cancels, or obliterates entries in the records, as specified. The bill would provide that the civil penalties may be imposed either in a civil action or administratively pursuant to procedures specified in the bill. The bill would specify the types of waste disposal records that are subject to inspection and copying by the department, and also by an employee of a government entity, as defined, with respect to tonnage received at a disposal facility on or after July 1, 2015, that originates within the government entitys geographic jurisdiction. The bill, with respect to those records, would prohibit a government entity from disclosing the name of a waste hauler using a specific landfill unless necessary as part of an administrative or judicial proceeding, as specified. The bill would also authorize a government entity to petition the superior court for injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce these provisions. The bill would require recovered civil penalties to be deposited in the Integrated Waste Management Account.

The California Public Records Act provides that public records are open to inspection at all times during the office hours of the state or local agency that retains those records, and that every person has a right to inspect any public record, but exempts certain records from those requirements. Existing law, upon the request of any person furnishing any report, notice, application, plan, or other document required by the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, provides that neither the department nor an enforcement agency shall make available for inspection by the public any portion of the report, notice, application, plan, or other document that contains a trade secret, as specified.

This bill would exempt certain waste disposal records subject to inspection and copying by the department or a government entity from disclosure under certain California Public Records Act provisions. The bill would also make certain waste disposal records subject to nondisclosure under the trade secrets provisions.

The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, administered by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, generally regulates the disposal, management, and recycling of solid waste. Existing law requires disposal facility operators to submit information to counties from periodic tracking surveys on the disposal tonnages that are disposed of at the disposal facility by jurisdiction or region of origin. Existing law requires solid waste handlers and transfer station operators to provide information to the disposal facility on the origin of the solid waste they deliver to the disposal facility. Existing law requires recycling and composting facilities to submit periodic information to counties on the types and quantities of materials that are disposed of, sold to end users, or sold to exporters or transporters for sale outside of the state, by county of origin. Existing law requires counties to submit periodic reports to the cities within the county, to any regional agency of which the county is a member, and to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery on the amounts of solid waste disposed of by jurisdiction or region of origin, and on the categories and amounts of solid waste diverted to recycling and composting facilities within the county or region. Existing law authorizes the department to adopt regulations in this regard.

This bill would revise these provisions by, among other things, (1) requiring recycling and composting operations and facilities to submit specified information directly to the department, rather than to counties, (2) requiring disposal facility operators to submit tonnage information to the department, and to counties only on request, and (3) deleting the requirement for counties to submit that information to cities, regional agencies, and the department. The bill would delete references to periodic tracking surveys. The bill would require exporters, brokers, and transporters of recyclables or compost to submit periodic information to the department on the types, quantities, and destinations of materials that are disposed of, sold, or transferred inside or outside of the state, and would authorize the department to provide this information, on an aggregated basis, to jurisdictions, as specified. The bill would make other related changes to the various reporting requirements. The bill would provide for imposition of civil penalties on any person who refuses or fails to submit information required by the governing regulations, and on any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, refuses to permit the department to inspect or examine associated records, or alters, cancels, or obliterates entries in the records, as specified. The bill would provide that the civil penalties may be imposed either in a civil action or administratively pursuant to procedures specified in the bill. The bill would specify the types of waste disposal records that are subject to inspection and copying by the department, and also by an employee of a government entity, as defined, with respect to tonnage received at a disposal facility on or after July 1, 2015, that originates within the government entitys geographic jurisdiction. The bill, with respect to those records, would prohibit a government entity from disclosing the name of a waste hauler using a specific landfill unless necessary as part of an administrative or judicial proceeding, as specified. The bill would also authorize a government entity to petition the superior court for injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce these provisions. The bill would require recovered civil penalties to be deposited in the Integrated Waste Management Account.

The California Public Records Act provides that public records are open to inspection at all times during the office hours of the state or local agency that retains those records, and that every person has a right to inspect any public record, but exempts certain records from those requirements. Existing law, upon the request of any person furnishing any report, notice, application, plan, or other document required by the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, provides that neither the department nor an enforcement agency shall make available for inspection by the public any portion of the report, notice, application, plan, or other document that contains a trade secret, as specified.

This bill would exempt certain waste disposal records subject to inspection and copying by the department or a government entity from disclosure under certain California Public Records Act provisions. The bill would also make certain waste disposal records subject to this provision, including waste disposal records subject to inspection and copying by the department or a government entity. nondisclosure under the trade secrets provisions.

The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, administered by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, generally regulates the disposal, management, and recycling of solid waste. Existing law requires disposal facility operators to submit information to counties from periodic tracking surveys on the disposal tonnages that are disposed of at the disposal facility by jurisdiction or region of origin. Existing law requires solid waste handlers and transfer station operators to provide information to the disposal facility on the origin of the solid waste they deliver to the disposal facility. Existing law requires recycling and composting facilities to submit periodic information to counties on the types and quantities of materials that are disposed of, sold to end users, or sold to exporters or transporters for sale outside of the state, by county of origin. Existing law requires counties to submit periodic reports to the cities within the county, to any regional agency of which the county is a member, and to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery on the amounts of solid waste disposed of by jurisdiction or region of origin, and on the categories and amounts of solid waste diverted to recycling and composting facilities within the county or region. Existing law authorizes the department to adopt regulations in this regard.

This bill would revise these provisions by, among other things, (1) requiring recycling and composting operations and facilities to submit specified information directly to the department, rather than to counties, (2) requiring disposal facility operators to submit tonnage information to the department, and to counties only on request, and (3) deleting the requirement for counties to submit that information to cities, regional agencies, and the department. The bill would delete references to periodic tracking surveys. The bill would require exporters, brokers, and transporters of recyclables or compost to submit periodic information to the department on the types, quantities, and destinations of materials that are disposed of, sold, or transferred inside or outside of the state, and would authorize the department to provide this information, on an aggregated basis, to jurisdictions, as specified. The bill would make other related changes to the various reporting requirements. The bill would provide for imposition of civil penalties on any person who refuses or fails to submit information required by the governing regulations, and on any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, refuses to permit the department to inspect or examine associated records, or alters, cancels, or obliterates entries in the records, as specified. The bill would provide that the civil penalties may be imposed either in a civil action or administratively pursuant to procedures specified in the bill. The bill would specify the types of waste disposal records that are subject to inspection and copying by the department, and also by an employee of a government entity, as defined, with respect to tonnage received at a disposal facility that originates within the government entitys geographic jurisdiction. The bill, with respect to those records, would prohibit a government entity from disclosing the name of a waste hauler using a specific landfill unless necessary as part of an administrative or judicial proceeding, as specified. The bill would also authorize a government entity to petition the superior court for injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce these provisions. The bill would require recovered civil penalties to be deposited in the Integrated Waste Management Account.

The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, administered by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, generally regulates the disposal, management, and recycling of solid waste. Existing law requires disposal facility operators to submit information to counties from periodic tracking surveys on the disposal tonnages that are disposed of at the disposal facility by jurisdiction or region of origin. Existing law requires solid waste handlers and transfer station operators to provide information to the disposal facility on the origin of the solid waste they deliver to the disposal facility. Existing law requires recycling and composting facilities to submit periodic information to counties on the types and quantities of materials that are disposed of, sold to end users, or sold to exporters or transporters for sale outside of the state, by county of origin. Existing law requires counties to submit periodic reports to the cities within the county, to any regional agency of which the county is a member, and to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery on the amounts of solid waste disposed of by jurisdiction or region of origin, and on the categories and amounts of solid waste diverted to recycling and composting facilities within the county or region. Existing law authorizes the department to adopt regulations in this regard.

This bill would revise these provisions by, among other things, (1) requiring recycling and composting operations and facilities to submit specified information directly to the department, rather than to counties, (2) requiring disposal facility operators to submit tonnage information to the department, and to counties only on request, and would delete (3) deleting the requirement for counties to submit that information to cities, regional agencies, and the department. The bill would delete references to periodic tracking surveys. The bill would require exporters, brokers, and transporters of recyclables or compost to submit periodic information to the department on the types, quantities, and destinations of materials that are disposed of, sold, or transferred inside or outside of the state, and would authorize the department to provide this information, on an aggregated basis, to jurisdictions, as specified. The bill would make other related changes to the various reporting requirements. The bill would provide for imposition of civil penalties on any person who refuses or fails to submit information required by the governing regulations, and on any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, refuses to permit the department to inspect or examine associated records, or alters, cancels, or obliterates entries in the records, as specified. The bill would provide that the civil penalties may be imposed either in a civil action or administratively pursuant to procedures specified in the bill. The bill would provide for local agencies, on request, to be designated by the department to exercise the enforcement authority. specify the types of waste disposal records that are subject to inspection and copying by the department, and also by an employee of a government entity, as defined, with respect to tonnage received at a disposal facility that originates within the government entitys geographic jurisdiction. The bill, with respect to those records, would prohibit a government entity from disclosing the name of a waste hauler using a specific landfill unless necessary as part of an administrative or judicial proceeding, as specified. The bill would also authorize a government entity to petition the superior court for injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce these provisions. The bill would require recovered civil penalties to be deposited in the Integrated Waste Management Account if recovered by action of the department, or to be retained by the local agency taking the enforcement action, as applicable. The bill would require moneys retained by a local agency pursuant to these provisions to be expended on specified solid waste activities. Account.

The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, administered by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, generally regulates the disposal, management, and recycling of solid waste. Existing law requires disposal facility operators to submit information to counties from periodic tracking surveys on the disposal tonnages that are disposed of at the disposal facility by jurisdiction or region of origin. Existing law requires solid waste handlers and transfer station operators to provide information to the disposal facility on the origin of the solid waste they deliver to the disposal facility. Existing law requires recycling and composting facilities to submit periodic information to counties on the types and quantities of materials that are disposed of, sold to end users, or sold to exporters or transporters for sale outside of the state, by county of origin. Existing law requires counties to submit periodic reports to the cities within the county, to any regional agency of which the county is a member, and to the Department of Resources, Resources Recycling and Recovery on the amounts of solid waste disposed of by jurisdiction or region of origin, and on the categories and amounts of solid waste diverted to recycling and composting facilities within the county or region. Existing law authorizes the department to adopt regulations in this regard.

This bill would revise these provisions by, among other things, requiring recycling and composting operations and facilities to submit specified information directly to the department, rather than to counties, and would delete the requirement for counties to submit that information to cities, regional agencies, and the department. The bill would delete references to periodic tracking surveys. The bill would make other related changes to the various reporting requirements. The bill would provide for imposition of civil penalties on any person who refuses or fails to submit information required by the governing regulations, and on any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, refuses to permit the department to inspect or examine associated records, or alters, cancels, or obliterates entries in the records, as specified. The bill would provide that the civil penalties may be imposed either in a civil action or administratively pursuant to process procedures specified in the bill. The bill would provide for local agencies, on request, to be designated by the department to exercise the enforcement authority. The bill would require recovered civil penalties to be deposited in the Integrated Waste Management Account if recovered by action of the department, or to be retained by the local agency taking the enforcement action, as applicable. The bill would require moneys retained by a local agency pursuant to these provisions to be expended on specified solid waste activities.

The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, administered by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, generally regulates the disposal, management, and recycling of solid waste. Existing law requires disposal facility operators to submit information to counties from periodic tracking surveys on the disposal tonnages that are disposed of at the disposal facility by jurisdiction or region of origin. Existing law requires solid waste handlers and transfer station operators to provide information to the disposal facility on the origin of the solid waste they deliver to the disposal facility. Existing law requires recycling and composting facilities to submit periodic information to counties on the types and quantities of materials that are disposed of, sold to end users, or sold to exporters or transporters for sale outside of the state, by county of origin. Existing law requires counties to submit periodic reports to the cities within the county, to any regional agency of which the county is a member, and to the Department of Resources, Recycling and Recovery on the amounts of solid waste disposed of by jurisdiction or region of origin, and on the categories and amounts of solid waste diverted to recycling and composting facilities within the county or region. Existing law authorizes the department to adopt regulations in this regard.

This bill would revise these provisions by, among other things, requiring recycling and composting operations and facilities to submit specified information directly to the department, rather than to counties, and would delete the requirement for counties to submit that information to cities, regional agencies, and the department. The bill would delete references to periodic tracking surveys. The bill would make other related changes to the various reporting requirements. The bill would provide for imposition of civil penalties on any person who refuses or fails to submit information required by the governing regulations, and on any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, refuses to permit the department to inspect or examine associated records, or alters, cancels, or obliterates entries in the records, as specified. The bill would provide that the civil penalties may be imposed either in a civil action or administratively pursuant to process specified in the bill. The bill would provide for local agencies, on request, to be designated by the department to exercise the enforcement authority. The bill would require recovered civil penalties to be deposited in the Integrated Waste Management Account if recovered by action of the department, or to be retained by the local agency taking the enforcement action, as applicable. The bill would require moneys retained by a local agency pursuant to these provisions to be expended on specified solid waste activities.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 901

Author:(Gordon)

As Amended Ver:September 1, 2015

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: NAT. RES.

SUMMARY: Updates, revises, and expands the information recycling and composting operations and facilities are required to submit to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle).

The Senate amendments:

1. Require solid waste facilities to report specified information to counties upon request.

2. Specify that the information reported may exclude contract terms and conditions, including information on pricing, credit terms, volume discounts, and other proprietary business terms.

3. Require, rather than authorize, CalRecycle to adopt regulations pursuant to this bill, and require that the regulations include procedures to ensure that an opportunity to comply is offered prior to enforcement action and factors to be considered when determining penalty amounts.

4. Delete a provision that authorized CalRecycle to delegate enforcement of this bill's requirements to a local agency.

5. Clarify that information submitted to CalRecycle or inspected by CalRecycle as part of an audit is confidential and not subject to the Public Records Act.

6. Authorize an employee of a government entity to inspect and copy records at a disposal facility relating to tonnage received on or after July 1, 2015, and originating within the government entity's geographic jurisdiction for purposes of enforcing the collection of local fees.

7. Authorize a disposal facility operator to redact confidential pricing information from the records, as specified.

8. Make related technical and clarifying changes.

EXISTING LAW, pursuant to the California Integrated Waste Management Act (Act):

1. Establishes a state recycling goal of 75% by 2020 and requires each local jurisdiction to divert 50% of solid waste from landfill disposal.

2. Requires a commercial waste generator, including multi-family dwellings, to arrange for recycling services and requires local governments to implement commercial solid waste recycling programs designed to divert solid waste from businesses.

3. Requires generators of specified amounts of organic waste (i.e., food waste and yard waste) to arrange for recycling services for that material.

4. Requires cities and counties to report specified information to CalRecycle using the Disposal Reporting System (DRS), which tracks the amount and origin of waste disposed in California and sent from California to out-of-state landfills.

5. DRS information must be submitted by cities and counties at least quarterly to CalRecycle.

6. Requires disposal facilities to report the origins and tonnages of all material accepted at the facility to the county in which it is located.

7. Requires recycling and composting facilities to submit periodic information to counties on the origin, types, and quantities of materials that are disposed of, sold to end users, or that are sold out of state.

8. Requires each county to submit period reports to the relevant cities, regional agencies, and CalRecycle on the origin and amounts of waste disposed in the jurisdiction.

9. Grants CalRecycle regulatory authority to adopt practices and procedures related to waste tracking in the state, as long as the regulations do not impose an "unreasonable burden" on waste handling, processing, or disposal operations.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill has annual fiscal impacts of $168,000 for two years to the Integrated Waste Management Account (special) for increased enforcement by CalRecycle.

COMMENTS: In 2011, the Legislature established a statewide recycling goal of 75% by 2020. According to CalRecycle, achieving the 75% recycling goal will require CalRecycle to successfully collect reliable waste flow data.

The existing lack of enforcement authority for waste flow reporting contributes to a widespread lack of compliance. According to CalRecycle, 65% of 2013 Disposal Reporting System (DRS) reports were late, incomplete, or inaccurate. Inadequate waste flow data comprises California's ability to make informed decisions about how and where to allocate resources to achieve the 75% recycling goal.

Additionally, inaccurate reporting can defraud local jurisdictions and the state out of millions of dollars in revenue and hinder the ability of local jurisdictions to comply with their recycling requirements. Several recent cases in which disposal tonnages were misallocated resulted in criminal action and involved millions of dollars in fraud.

Existing law relating to disposal reporting, established in 1992, is outdated. In 2007, CalRecycle implemented an electronic DRS (eDRS), which simplified the process for disposal facility operators, local governments, and CalRecycle. Under the updated system, disposal facility operators can update DRS directly on an ongoing basis. Currently 22 counties report using eDRS, 30 counties continue to submit paper reports, and six counties are not subject to reporting requirements. This bill requires that all reports be submitted using eDRS.

Moreover, existing law as it relates to reporting requirements for recycling and composting facilities has been in effect since 1992; however, CalRecycle has never implemented the provision that requires recycling facilities to report on the types and quantities of materials that they accept. CalRecycle has indicated that in order to achieve California's 75% recycling goal and ensure compliance with organic waste recycling requirements, it intends to begin implementing these provisions. This bill updates and streamlines the existing requirements to facilitate that process.

While all counties in which solid waste facilities are located are required to submit DRS reports, compliance is a significant issue. Currently 65% of DRS reports received by CalRecycle are not properly filed. Just under 30% (126 facilities) submitted their annual reports to counties late in 2013, and 29 facilities never submitted their 2013 annual report and remain out of compliance.

There have been a number of high profile violations over the last several years. Earlier this year, four former employees of the Ox Mountain Landfill in San Mateo County were charged with grand theft of nearly $1.4 million. The employees are accused of misclassifying construction waste as green waste and illegally collecting fees on the material from landfill customers. The defendants are also accused of misrepresenting the weight of materials disposed of by certain customers and stealing the difference between the amount they charged consumers and the amount paid to the landfill.

In 2014, a jury ordered Recology (a waste management company) to repay $1.3 million to San Francisco ratepayers for bonuses it received in 2008 from the city for meeting recycling goals. The jury found that the bonus was paid based on false information provided by Recology to the city. This case is currently pending appeal.

Also in 2014, the Kern County District Attorney filed suit against Benz Sanitation for illegally disposing of solid waste on property east of the company's Tehachapi recycling facility. This case is pending. In 2012, Benz Sanitation was fined $2.375 million for falsifying records. The company has been accused of collecting residential and commercial solid waste from Los Angeles County, creating fraudulent documents showing that the trash was generated in Kern County and disposed of the material in Tehachapi Landfill in Kern County, thereby avoiding disposal fees for either county.

In 2008, a number of employees of the Kirby Canyon Landfill in San Jose were involved in a bribery scheme in which a waste hauler, Resource Development Services, bribed the workers to allow his trucks to pay reduced landfill fees. Six employees were arrested, and five were fired but not charged. An internal investigation found that Waste Management, the owner of the landfill, lost more than $13 million in revenue.

Analysis Prepared by: Elizabeth MacMillan / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092 FN: 0002334

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 901

Author: Gordon (D), et al.

Amended: 9/4/15 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE: 6-1, 7/15/15

AYES: Wieckowski, Bates, Hill, Jackson, Leno, Pavley

NOES: Gaines

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-1, 8/27/15

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza

NOES: Nielsen

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-2, 6/1/15 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Solid waste: reporting requirements: enforcement

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill changes reporting requirements for disposal facilities, recycling and composting facilities, and local governments; and establishes civil penalties for failing to report or willfully falsify information.

Senate Floor Amendments of 9/4/15 clarify language related to information that disposal facilities must provide to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law, pursuant to the California Integrated Waste Management Act (Public Resources Code §40000 et seq.):

1. Establishes a state recycling goal of 75% of solid waste generated be diverted from landfill disposal by 2020 through source reduction, recycling, and composting.
   
   

2. Requires each local jurisdiction to divert 50% of solid waste from landfill disposal through source reduction, recycling, and composting.
   
   

3. Requires a commercial waste generator, including multi-family dwellings, to arrange for recycling services and requires local governments to implement commercial solid waste recycling programs designed to divert solid waste from businesses.
   
   

4. Requires generators of specified amounts of organic waste (i.e. food waste and yard waste) to arrange for recycling services for that material.
   
   

5. Requires cities and counties to report specified information to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) using the Disposal Reporting System (DRS), which tracks the amount and origin of waste disposed in California and sent from California to out-of-state landfills.
   
   

6. Requires cities and counties to submit DRS information at least quarterly to CalRecycle.
   
   

7. Requires disposal facilities to report the origins and tonnages of all material accepted at the facility to the county in which it is located.
   
   

8. Requires recycling and composting facilities to submit periodic information to counties on the origin, types, and quantities of materials that are disposed of, sold to end users, or that are sold out of state.
   
   

9. Requires each county to submit period reports to the relevant cities, regional agencies, and CalRecycle on the origin and amounts of waste disposed in the jurisdiction.
   
   

10. Grants CalRecycle regulatory authority to adopt practices and procedures related to waste tracking in the state, as long as the regulations do not impose an unreasonable burden on waste handling, processing or disposal operations.
    
    

This bill:

1. Requires disposal facility operators to submit tonnage information to CalRecycle, and to counties upon request.
   
   

2. Requires recycling and composting operations and facilities to submit specified, periodic information directly to CalRecycle instead of to the counties.
   
   

3. Deletes the requirement for counties to submit periodic information, regarding solid waste disposed and diverted, to cities, regional agencies, and the department.
   
   

4. Requires exporters, brokers, and transporters of recyclables or compost to submit periodic information to CalRecycle on the types, quantities, and destinations of materials that are disposed of, sold, or transferred inside or outside of the state. Authorizes CalRecycle to provide this information, on an aggregated basis, to jurisdictions upon request.
   
   

5. Specifies that the aggregated information, other than that aggregated by the company, is public information.
   
   

6. Imposes penalties to any person who refuses or fails to submit waste tracking information of $500 to $5,000 per violation.
   
   

7. Imposes penalties for any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, or any person who refuses to permit CalRecycle to perform an inspection or examination of records of $500 to $10,000 per violation.
   
   

8. Provides that liability may be imposed either through a civil action or administratively.
   
   

9. Specifies the types of waste disposal records that are subject to inspection and copying by CalRecycle and an employee of a governmental entity; and prohibits a government entity from disclosing specified information unless necessary as part of an administrative or judicial proceeding. Authorizes a government entity to petition the superior court for injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce this authority.
   
   

10. Requires recovered civil penalties be deposited in the Integrated Waste Management Account.
    
    

11. Requires that reports in this bill be submitted electronically, using an electronic reporting format system established by CalRecycle.
    
    

Background

Disposal Reporting System (DRS). Disposal reporting requirements were established in 1992. DRS is the set of guidelines that tracks the origin of waste disposed in California’s landfills, and waste sent from California to out-of-state landfills. DRS is used for: calculating per capita disposal rate and measuring goal achievement for jurisdictions; calculating California’s disposal rate; identifying variability in jurisdiction waste disposal over time; identifying changes in the flow of waste disposed over time; tracking waste exported out of state; and tracking the types and amounts of alternative daily cover (ADC) and alternative intermediate cover (AIC) used at landfills.

In 2007, CalRecycle implemented an electronic DRS (eDRS), which simplified the process for disposal facility operators, local governments, and CalRecycle. eDRS was created to capture, store, and display disposal information submitted to CalRecycle. Under the updated system, disposal facility operators can update DRS directly on an ongoing basis, allowing counties the option to submit their quarterly disposal information through an online interface. Currently 22 counties report using eDRS, 30 continue to submit paper reports, and six are not subject to reporting requirements.

Comments

1. Purpose of Bill. According to the author:
   
   

California has set a goal of achieving a recycling rate of 75% by 2020. Many actions will be needed to achieve that goal, but most importantly it will be necessary to have accurate and timely data on waste disposal and recycling.

Currently, data is sent to counties from disposal facilities and then the counties forward that information to CalRecycle.

AB 901 would require waste disposal facilities and recycling and composting operations to report directly to CalRecycle. They would do so using the electronic Disposal Reporting System (DRS) that is already in place at CalRecycle.

AB 901 would also strengthen CalRecycle’s fraud enforcement authority by allowing the imposition of civil penalties against those who falsify or fail to submit timely, complete or accurate waste flow information.

This authority is needed because, according to CalRecycle, two-thirds of DRS reports are late, incomplete, or inaccurate. Timely and accurate reports are needed if we are to achieve our goal of 75% recycling. Furthermore, inaccurate reporting can defraud local jurisdictions and the state out of millions of dollars in revenue.

Finally, AB 901 also streamlines CalRecycle’s authority for requiring recycling facilities to submit information on the final disposition of material those facilities accept and process – by eliminating the requirement that facilities identify the county of origin of the recycled material they handle.

2. Disposal Reporting System (DRS). This bill requires that reports be submitted using eDRS. Existing law, as it relates to reporting requirements for recycling and composting facilities has been in effect since 1992. However, CalRecycle has never implemented the provision that requires recycling facilities to report on the types and quantities of materials that they accept. CalRecycle has indicated that in order to achieve California’s 75% recycling goal and ensure compliance with organic waste recycling requirements, it intends to begin implementing these provisions. This bill updates the existing requirements to ease that process.

3. DRS enforcement. While all counties in which solid waste facilities are located are required to submit DRS reports, compliance is a significant issue. Currently 65% of DRS reports received by CalRecycle are not properly filed. Just under 30% (126 facilities) submitted their annual reports to counties late in 2013, and 29 facilities never submitted their 2013 annual report and remain out of compliance.
   
   According to CalRecycle’s report, “State of Disposal in California” (March 2015), “Statutes and the DRS regulations lack enforcement provisions. The regulations only have very limited options for encouraging compliance with these rules. If a report is late or not submitted, CalRecycle can report this at a public meeting and publish the names of non-submitters on CalRecycle’s website. Currently, there are no penalties or other enforcement options. The instances and long-term patterns of misreporting in DRS highlight the lack of any effective deterrent mechanisms. Authority for investigations, enforcement actions, and monetary penalties would require legislative action.” (p. 19).
   
   A number of high profile violations have occurred over the last several years:

• Earlier this year, four former employees of the Ox Mountain Landfill in San Mateo County were charged with grand theft of nearly $1.4 million (M). The employees misclassified construction waste as green waste and illegally collected fees on the material from landfill customers. The defendants are also accused of misrepresenting the weight of materials disposed of by certain customers and stealing the difference between the amount they charged consumers and the amount paid to the landfill.

• In 2014, a jury ordered Recology (a waste management company) to repay $1.3M to San Francisco ratepayers for bonuses it received in 2008 from the city for meeting recycling goals. The jury found that the bonus was paid based on false information provided by Recology to the city.
  
  

• Also in 2014, the Kern County District Attorney filed suit against Benz Sanitation for illegal disposal of solid waste on property east of the company’s Tehachapi recycling facility. This case is pending. In 2012, Benz Sanitation was fined $2.375M for falsifying records. The company collected residential and commercial solid waste from Los Angeles County, created fraudulent documents showing that the trash was generated in Kern County and disposed of the material in Tehachapi Landfill in Kern County, thereby avoiding disposal fees for either county.
  
  

• In 2008, a number of employees of the Kirby Canyon Landfill in San Jose were involved in a bribery scheme in which a waste hauler, Resource Development Services, bribed the workers to allow its trucks to pay reduced landfill fees. Six employees were arrested, and five were fired but not charged. An internal investigation found that Waste Management, the owner of the landfill, lost more than $13M in revenue.
  
  

CalRecycle is tasked with ensuring the safe management of tires in California, including the upkeep of a waste tire manifest system. The tire manifest system has similar enforcement provisions to those in this bill. CalRecycle is authorized to assess administrative penalties of up to $10,000/day for violations of hauling and manifest requirements. According to CalRecycle, increased administrative penalty authority has resulted in a consistent decrease in violations since 2009. Similar to the success in enforcing waste tire hauling and manifest requirements, this bill proposes to provide CalRecycle with similar tools to enforce DRS requirements in this bill.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, annual impacts of $168,000 for two years to the Integrated Waste Management Account (special) for increased enforcement by CalRecycle.

SUPPORT: (Verified 9/4/15)

California Refuse Recycling Council

California Resource Recovery Association

California State Association of Counties

Californians Against Waste

City of San Francisco, Mayor Edwin Lee

County of San Mateo

Inland Empire Disposal Association

Los Angeles County Waste Management Association

Recology

Republic Services

Rural County Representatives of California

Sierra Club

Solid Waste Association of Orange County

StopWaste/Alameda County Waste Management Authority

Waste Management

OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/4/15)

Waste Connections

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-2, 6/1/15

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins

NOES: Brough, Harper

Prepared by: Joanne Roy / E.Q. / (916) 651-4108

9/8/15 17:22:26

**** END ****

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 901

Author: Gordon (D)

Amended: 9/1/15 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE: 6-1, 7/15/15

AYES: Wieckowski, Bates, Hill, Jackson, Leno, Pavley

NOES: Gaines

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-1, 8/27/15

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, Leyva, Mendoza

NOES: Nielsen

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-2, 6/1/15 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Solid waste: reporting requirements: enforcement

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill changes reporting requirements for disposal facilities, recycling and composting facilities, and local governments; and establishes civil penalties for failing to report or willfully falsify information.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law, pursuant to the California Integrated Waste Management Act (Public Resources Code §40000 et seq.):

1. Establishes a state recycling goal of 75% of solid waste generated be diverted from landfill disposal by 2020 through source reduction, recycling, and composting.
   
   

2. Requires each local jurisdiction to divert 50% of solid waste from landfill disposal through source reduction, recycling, and composting.
   
   

3. Requires a commercial waste generator, including multi-family dwellings, to arrange for recycling services and requires local governments to implement commercial solid waste recycling programs designed to divert solid waste from businesses.
   
   

4. Requires generators of specified amounts of organic waste (i.e. food waste and yard waste) to arrange for recycling services for that material.
   
   

5. Requires cities and counties to report specified information to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) using the Disposal Reporting System (DRS), which tracks the amount and origin of waste disposed in California and sent from California to out-of-state landfills.
   
   

6. Requires cities and counties to submit DRS information at least quarterly to CalRecycle.
   
   

7. Requires disposal facilities to report the origins and tonnages of all material accepted at the facility to the county in which it is located.
   
   

8. Requires recycling and composting facilities to submit periodic information to counties on the origin, types, and quantities of materials that are disposed of, sold to end users, or that are sold out of state.
   
   

9. Requires each county to submit period reports to the relevant cities, regional agencies, and CalRecycle on the origin and amounts of waste disposed in the jurisdiction.
   
   

10. Grants CalRecycle regulatory authority to adopt practices and procedures related to waste tracking in the state, as long as the regulations do not impose an unreasonable burden on waste handling, processing or disposal operations.
    
    

This bill:

1. Requires disposal facility operators to submit tonnage information to CalRecycle, and to counties upon request.
   
   

2. Requires recycling and composting operations and facilities to submit specified, periodic information directly to CalRecycle instead of to the counties.
   
   

3. Deletes the requirement for counties to submit periodic information, regarding solid waste disposed and diverted, to cities, regional agencies, and the department.
   
   

4. Requires exporters, brokers, and transporters of recyclables or compost to submit periodic information to CalRecycle on the types, quantities, and destinations of materials that are disposed of, sold, or transferred inside or outside of the state. Authorizes CalRecycle to provide this information, on an aggregated basis, to jurisdictions upon request.
   
   

5. Imposes penalties to any person who refuses or fails to submit waste tracking information of $500 to $5,000 per violation.
   
   

6. Imposes penalties for any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, or any person who refuses to permit CalRecycle to perform an inspection or examination of records of $500 to $10,000 per violation.
   
   

7. Provides that liability may be imposed either through a civil action or administratively.
   
   

8. Specifies the types of waste disposal records that are subject to inspection and copying by CalRecycle and an employee of a governmental entity; and prohibits a government entity from disclosing specified information unless necessary as part of an administrative or judicial proceeding. Authorizes a government entity to petition the superior court for injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce this authority.
   
   

9. Requires recovered civil penalties be deposited in the Integrated Waste Management Account.
   
   

10. Requires that reports in this bill be submitted electronically, using an electronic reporting format system established by CalRecycle.
    
    

Background

Disposal Reporting System (DRS). Disposal reporting requirements were established in 1992. DRS is the set of guidelines that tracks the origin of waste disposed in California’s landfills, and waste sent from California to out-of-state landfills. DRS is used for: calculating per capita disposal rate and measuring goal achievement for jurisdictions; calculating California’s disposal rate; identifying variability in jurisdiction waste disposal over time; identifying changes in the flow of waste disposed over time; tracking waste exported out of state; and tracking the types and amounts of alternative daily cover (ADC) and alternative intermediate cover (AIC) used at landfills.

In 2007, CalRecycle implemented an electronic DRS (eDRS), which simplified the process for disposal facility operators, local governments, and CalRecycle. eDRS was created to capture, store, and display disposal information submitted to CalRecycle. Under the updated system, disposal facility operators can update DRS directly on an ongoing basis, allowing counties the option to submit their quarterly disposal information through an online interface. Currently 22 counties report using eDRS, 30 continue to submit paper reports, and six are not subject to reporting requirements.

Comments

1. Purpose of Bill. According to the author:
   
   

California has set a goal of achieving a recycling rate of 75% by 2020. Many actions will be needed to achieve that goal, but most importantly it will be necessary to have accurate and timely data on waste disposal and recycling.

Currently, data is sent to counties from disposal facilities and then the counties forward that information to CalRecycle.

AB 901 would require waste disposal facilities and recycling and composting operations to report directly to CalRecycle. They would do so using the electronic Disposal Reporting System (DRS) that is already in place at CalRecycle.

AB 901 would also strengthen CalRecycle’s fraud enforcement authority by allowing the imposition of civil penalties against those who falsify or fail to submit timely, complete or accurate waste flow information.

This authority is needed because, according to CalRecycle, two-thirds of DRS reports are late, incomplete, or inaccurate. Timely and accurate reports are needed if we are to achieve our goal of 75% recycling. Furthermore, inaccurate reporting can defraud local jurisdictions and the state out of millions of dollars in revenue.

Finally, AB 901 also streamlines CalRecycle’s authority for requiring recycling facilities to submit information on the final disposition of material those facilities accept and process – by eliminating the requirement that facilities identify the county of origin of the recycled material they handle.

2. Disposal Reporting System (DRS). This bill requires that reports be submitted using eDRS. Existing law, as it relates to reporting requirements for recycling and composting facilities has been in effect since 1992. However, CalRecycle has never implemented the provision that requires recycling facilities to report on the types and quantities of materials that they accept. CalRecycle has indicated that in order to achieve California’s 75% recycling goal and ensure compliance with organic waste recycling requirements, it intends to begin implementing these provisions. This bill updates the existing requirements to ease that process.

3. DRS enforcement. While all counties in which solid waste facilities are located are required to submit DRS reports, compliance is a significant issue. Currently 65% of DRS reports received by CalRecycle are not properly filed. Just under 30% (126 facilities) submitted their annual reports to counties late in 2013, and 29 facilities never submitted their 2013 annual report and remain out of compliance.
   
   According to CalRecycle’s report, “State of Disposal in California” (March 2015), “Statutes and the DRS regulations lack enforcement provisions. The regulations only have very limited options for encouraging compliance with these rules. If a report is late or not submitted, CalRecycle can report this at a public meeting and publish the names of non-submitters on CalRecycle’s website. Currently, there are no penalties or other enforcement options. The instances and long-term patterns of misreporting in DRS highlight the lack of any effective deterrent mechanisms. Authority for investigations, enforcement actions, and monetary penalties would require legislative action.” (p. 19).
   
   A number of high profile violations have occurred over the last several years:

• Earlier this year, four former employees of the Ox Mountain Landfill in San Mateo County were charged with grand theft of nearly $1.4 million (M). The employees misclassified construction waste as green waste and illegally collected fees on the material from landfill customers. The defendants are also accused of misrepresenting the weight of materials disposed of by certain customers and stealing the difference between the amount they charged consumers and the amount paid to the landfill.

• In 2014, a jury ordered Recology (a waste management company) to repay $1.3M to San Francisco ratepayers for bonuses it received in 2008 from the city for meeting recycling goals. The jury found that the bonus was paid based on false information provided by Recology to the city.
  
  

• Also in 2014, the Kern County District Attorney filed suit against Benz Sanitation for illegal disposal of solid waste on property east of the company’s Tehachapi recycling facility. This case is pending. In 2012, Benz Sanitation was fined $2.375M for falsifying records. The company collected residential and commercial solid waste from Los Angeles County, created fraudulent documents showing that the trash was generated in Kern County and disposed of the material in Tehachapi Landfill in Kern County, thereby avoiding disposal fees for either county.
  
  

• In 2008, a number of employees of the Kirby Canyon Landfill in San Jose were involved in a bribery scheme in which a waste hauler, Resource Development Services, bribed the workers to allow its trucks to pay reduced landfill fees. Six employees were arrested, and five were fired but not charged. An internal investigation found that Waste Management, the owner of the landfill, lost more than $13M in revenue.
  
  

CalRecycle is tasked with ensuring the safe management of tires in California, including the upkeep of a waste tire manifest system. The tire manifest system has similar enforcement provisions to those in this bill. CalRecycle is authorized to assess administrative penalties of up to $10,000/day for violations of hauling and manifest requirements. According to CalRecycle, increased administrative penalty authority has resulted in a consistent decrease in violations since 2009. Similar to the success in enforcing waste tire hauling and manifest requirements, this bill proposes to provide CalRecycle with similar tools to enforce DRS requirements in this bill.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, annual impacts of $168,000 for two years to the Integrated Waste Management Account (special) for increased enforcement by CalRecycle.

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/27/15)

California Resource Recovery Association

California State Association of Counties

Californians Against Waste

City of San Francisco, Mayor Edwin Lee

County of San Mateo

Inland Empire Disposal Association

Los Angeles County Waste Management Association

Recology

Rural County Representatives of California

Sierra Club

Solid Waste Association of Orange County

StopWaste/Alameda County Waste Management Authority

Waste Management

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/27/15)

Waste Connections

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-2, 6/1/15

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins

NOES: Brough, Harper

Prepared by: Joanne Roy / E.Q. / (916) 651-4108

9/1/15 20:25:10

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 901 (Gordon) - Solid waste: reporting requirements: enforcement.

*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM – SUSPENSE FILE ***********

The following information is revised to reflect amendments

adopted by the committee on August 27, 2015

Bill Summary:

AB 901 would alter reporting requirements for disposal facilities, recycling and composting facilities, and local governments and would establish civil penalties for failing to report or willfully filling false information.

Fiscal Impact:

Annual costs of $168,000 for two years to the Integrated Waste Management Account (special) for increased enforcement by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle).

Author Amendments:

Establishes disclosure limitations for information that may be inspected by CalRecycle and local governments and clarifying changes.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 901 (Gordon) - Solid waste: reporting requirements: enforcement.

This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

AB 901 would alter reporting requirements for disposal facilities, recycling and composting facilities, and local governments and would establish civil penalties for failing to report or willfully filling false information.

Fiscal Impact:

Annual costs of $168,000 for two years to the Integrated Waste Management Account (special) for increased enforcement by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle).

Background:

The California Integrated Waste Management Act (PRC §40000 et seq.) requires that each local jurisdiction divert at least 50% of solid waste generated from landfill disposal through source reduction, recycling, and composting. It is the state goal to increase the diversion rate to 75% by 2020. Local governments, disposal facilities, and recycling and composting facilities are required to report specified information to CalRecycle and to each other. CalRecycle tracks the amount of waste disposed and the jurisdictions in which waste was produced using its Disposal Reporting System (DRS). CalRecycle is moving towards electronic reporting through the electronic DRS (eDRS).

According to CalRecycle’s report, “State of Disposal in California” (March 2015), a significant number of the reports submitted by counties and facilities are late, incomplete, or incorrect. Additionally, facilities also sometimes fail to submit reports completely. The report notes that statutes and the DRGS regulations lack enforcement provisions and there are limited options for encouraging compliance. Reporting problems hampers CalRecycle’s efforts to oversee diversion mandates.

CalRecycle has regulatory authority to adopt practices and procedures related to waste tracking in the state, as long as the regulations do not impose an unreasonable burden on waste handling, processing, or disposal operations.

Proposed Law:

This bill would make various changes to reporting requirements regarding solid waste disposal and diversion. Specifically, this bill would:

• Require disposal facility operators and recycling and composting facilities to submit information on disposal tonnages to CalRecycle instead of the counties. Counties would continue to receive the information upon request directly from disposal facility operators or through CalRecycle for recycling and composting facilities.

• Delete the requirement for counties to submit periodic disposal and diversion information to cities, regional agencies, and CalRecycle.

• Require that all records related to solid waste disposal and diversion be kept and be subject to inspection and copying by CalRecycle.

• Authorize an employee of a government entity to inspect and copy records at a disposal facility related to tonnage received at the facility and originating within its geographic jurisdiction, except as specified.

• Regulations regarding the reporting requirements would be obliged to include: (1) opportunity to comply prior to the initiation of enforcement actions, and (2) factors to be considered in determining penalty amounts.

• Impose civil penalties between $500 and $5,000 per violation for refusing or failing to provide required information. This bill would also impose civil penalties between $500 and $10,000 per violation on any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report or refuses to allow CalRecycle to perform an inspection or an examination of records.

• Authorize CalRecycle to conduct audits, perform site inspections, observe facility operations, and otherwise investigate the recordkeeping and reporting of persons subjected to the Integrated Waste Management Act.

• Establish the procedure for CalRecycle to issue an administrative complaint about any person with civil liability under the Integrated Waste Management Act.

• Establish timeframes for orders settling civil liability.

Staff Comments:

CalRecycle anticipates that it will have increased enforcement costs of approximately $168,000 annually for two years as a result of this bill to improve compliance with new and existing reporting requirement costs. CalRecycle anticipates that these costs are temporary because once the affected parties become more familiar with the reporting requirements and the associated penalties, the requirements will mostly be self-enforcing.

While this bill does create penalties, CalRecycle is not anticipating its enforcement costs to be offset by penalty revenues because its goal is to increase compliance, not to raise revenues. Staff notes that this goal is reflected in the bill’s requirement that CalRecycle offer an opportunity for a regulated party to comply before beginning enforcement actions.

No costs to develop regulations are associated with this bill because CalRecycle was already intending to develop a regulation package on reporting in which the changes in this bill can be incorporated.

There are no costs associated with updating the eDRS as the system was designed to anticipate mandatory reporting requirements.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Senator Wieckowski, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: AB 901

SUBJECT: Solid waste: reporting requirements: enforcement

ANALYSIS:

Existing law: Pursuant to the California Integrated Waste Management Act (Public Resources Code §40000 et seq.):

1. Establishes a state recycling goal of 75% of solid waste generated be diverted from landfill disposal by 2020 through source reduction, recycling, and composting.
   
   

2. Requires each local jurisdiction to divert 50% of solid waste from landfill disposal through source reduction, recycling, and composting.
   
   

3. Requires a commercial waste generator, including multi-family dwellings, to arrange for recycling services and requires local governments to implement commercial solid waste recycling programs designed to divert solid waste from businesses.
   
   

4. Requires generators of specified amounts of organic waste (i.e. food waste and yard waste) to arrange for recycling services for that material.
   
   

5. Requires cities and counties to report specified information to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) using the Disposal Reporting System (DRS), which tracks the amount and origin of waste disposed in California and sent from California to out-of-state landfills.
   
   

6. Requires cities and counties to submit DRS information at least quarterly to CalRecycle.
   
   

7. Requires disposal facilities to report the origins and tonnages of all material accepted at the facility to the county in which it is located.
   
   

8. Requires recycling and composting facilities to submit periodic information to counties on the origin, types, and quantities of materials that are disposed of, sold to end users, or that are sold out of state.
   
   

9. Requires each county to submit period reports to the relevant cities, regional agencies, and CalRecycle on the origin and amounts of waste disposed in the jurisdiction.
   
   

10. Grants CalRecycle regulatory authority to adopt practices and procedures related to waste tracking in the state, as long as the regulations do not impose an unreasonable burden on waste handling, processing or disposal operations.
    
    

This bill:

1. Requires disposal facility operators to submit tonnage information to CalRecycle, and to counties upon request.
   
   

2. Requires recycling and composting operations and facilities to submit specified, periodic information directly to CalRecycle instead of to the counties.
   
   

3. Deletes the requirement for counties to submit periodic information, regarding solid waste disposed and diverted, to cities, regional agencies, and the department.
   
   

4. Requires exporters, brokers, and transporters of recyclables or compost to submit periodic information to CalRecycle on the types, quantities, and destinations of materials that are disposed of, sold, or transferred inside or outside of the state. Authorizes CalRecycle to provide this information, on an aggregated basis, to jurisdictions upon request.
   
   

5. Imposes penalties to any person who refuses or fails to submit waste tracking information of $500 to $5,000 per violation.
   
   

6. Imposes penalties for any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, or any person who refuses to permit CalRecycle to perform an inspection or examination of records of $500 to $10,000 per violation.
   
   

7. Provides that liability may be imposed either through a civil action or administratively.
   
   

8. Specifies the types of waste disposal records that are subject to inspection and copying by CalRecycle and an employee of a governmental entity; and prohibits a government entity from disclosing specified information unless necessary as part of an administrative or judicial proceeding. Authorizes a government entity to petition the superior court for injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce this authority.
   
   

9. Requires recovered civil penalties be deposited in the Integrated Waste Management Account.
   
   

10. Requires that reports in this bill be submitted electronically, using an electronic reporting format system established by CalRecycle.
    
    

11. Exempts specified waste disposal records from disclosure under the California Public Records Act.
    
    

Background

1. Statewide waste diversion goals. An estimated 35 million tons of waste are disposed of in California’s landfills annually, of which 32% is compostable organic materials, 29% is construction and demolition debris, and 17% is paper.
   
   CalRecycle is tasked with diverting from landfills at least 75% of solid waste statewide by 2020 through source reduction, recycling and composting. Source reduction, or waste prevention, is designing products to reduce the amount of waste that will later need to be thrown away and also to make the resulting waste less toxic. Recycling is the recovery of useful materials, such as paper, glass, plastic, and metals, from the trash to use to make new products reducing the amount of virgin raw materials needed. Composting involves collecting organic waste, such as food scraps and yard trimmings, and storing it under conditions designed to help it break down naturally. This resulting compost can then be used as a natural fertilizer/soil amendment.
   
   

In addition, CalRecycle is charged with implementing Strategic Directive 6.1, which calls for reducing organic waste disposal by 50% by 2020. According to CalRecycle, significant gains in organic waste diversion (through recycling technologies of organic waste, including composting and anaerobic digestion) are necessary to meet the 75% goal and to implement Strategic Directive 6.1.

By using and reusing materials in the most productive and sustainable ways across their entire life cycle, conserving resources and reducing wastes help slow climate change and minimize the environmental impacts of used materials.

2. Disposal Reporting System (DRS). Disposal reporting requirements were established in 1992. DRS is the set of guidelines that tracks the origin of waste disposed in California’s landfills, and waste sent from California to out-of-state landfills. DRS is used for: calculating per capita disposal rate and measuring goal achievement for jurisdictions; calculating California’s disposal rate; identifying variability in jurisdiction waste disposal over time; identifying changes in the flow of waste disposed over time; tracking waste exported out of state; and tracking the types and amounts of alternative daily cover (ADC) and alternative intermediate cover (AIC) used at landfills.
   
   In 2007, CalRecycle implemented an electronic DRS (eDRS), which simplified the process for disposal facility operators, local governments, and CalRecycle. eDRS was created to capture, store, and display disposal information submitted to CalRecycle. Under the updated system, disposal facility operators can update DRS directly on an ongoing basis, allowing counties the option to submit their quarterly disposal information through an online interface. Currently 22 counties report using eDRS, 30 continue to submit paper reports, and six are not subject to reporting requirements.

Comments

1. Purpose of Bill. According to the author:
   
   

California has set a goal of achieving a recycling rate of 75% by 2020. Many actions will be needed to achieve that goal, but most importantly it will be necessary to have accurate and timely data on waste disposal and recycling.

Currently, data is sent to counties from disposal facilities and then the counties forward that information to CalRecycle.

AB 901 would require waste disposal facilities and recycling and composting operations to report directly to CalRecycle. They would do so using the electronic Disposal Reporting System (DRS) that is already in place at CalRecycle.

AB 901 would also strengthen CalRecycle’s fraud enforcement authority by allowing the imposition of civil penalties against those who falsify or fail to submit timely, complete or accurate waste flow information.

This authority is needed because, according to CalRecycle, two-thirds of DRS reports are late, incomplete, or inaccurate. Timely and accurate reports are needed if we are to achieve our goal of 75% recycling. Furthermore, inaccurate reporting can defraud local jurisdictions and the state out of millions of dollars in revenue.

Finally, AB 901 also streamlines CalRecycle’s authority for requiring recycling facilities to submit information on the final disposition of material those facilities accept and process – by eliminating the requirement that facilities identify the county of origin of the recycled material they handle.

2. Disposal Reporting System (DRS). This bill requires that reports be submitted using eDRS. Existing law, as it relates to reporting requirements for recycling and composting facilities has been in effect since 1992. However, CalRecycle has never implemented the provision that requires recycling facilities to report on the types and quantities of materials that they accept. CalRecycle has indicated that in order to achieve California’s 75% recycling goal and ensure compliance with organic waste recycling requirements, it intends to begin implementing these provisions. This bill updates the existing requirements to ease that process.

3. DRS enforcement. While all counties in which solid waste facilities are located are required to submit DRS reports, compliance is a significant issue. Currently 65% of DRS reports received by CalRecycle are not properly filed. Just under 30% (126 facilities) submitted their annual reports to counties late in 2013, and 29 facilities never submitted their 2013 annual report and remain out of compliance.
   
   According to CalRecycle’s report, “State of Disposal in California” (March 2015), “Statutes and the DRS regulations lack enforcement provisions. The regulations only have very limited options for encouraging compliance with these rules. If a report is late or not submitted, CalRecycle can report this at a public meeting and publish the names of non-submitters on CalRecycle’s website. Currently, there are no penalties or other enforcement options. The instances and long-term patterns of misreporting in DRS highlight the lack of any effective deterrent mechanisms. Authority for investigations, enforcement actions, and monetary penalties would require legislative action.” (p. 19).
   
   A number of high profile violations have occurred over the last several years:

• Earlier this year, four former employees of the Ox Mountain Landfill in San Mateo County were charged with grand theft of nearly $1.4 million (M). The employees misclassified construction waste as green waste and illegally collected fees on the material from landfill customers. The defendants are also accused of misrepresenting the weight of materials disposed of by certain customers and stealing the difference between the amount they charged consumers and the amount paid to the landfill.

• In 2014, a jury ordered Recology (a waste management company) to repay $1.3M to San Francisco ratepayers for bonuses it received in 2008 from the city for meeting recycling goals. The jury found that the bonus was paid based on false information provided by Recology to the city.
  
  

• Also in 2014, the Kern County District Attorney filed suit against Benz Sanitation for illegal disposal of solid waste on property east of the company’s Tehachapi recycling facility. This case is pending. In 2012, Benz Sanitation was fined $2.375M for falsifying records. The company collected residential and commercial solid waste from Los Angeles County, created fraudulent documents showing that the trash was generated in Kern County and disposed of the material in Tehachapi Landfill in Kern County, thereby avoiding disposal fees for either county.
  
  

• In 2008, a number of employees of the Kirby Canyon Landfill in San Jose were involved in a bribery scheme in which a waste hauler, Resource Development Services, bribed the workers to allow its trucks to pay reduced landfill fees. Six employees were arrested, and five were fired but not charged. An internal investigation found that Waste Management, the owner of the landfill, lost more than $13M in revenue.
  
  

CalRecycle is tasked with ensuring the safe management of tires in California, including the upkeep of a waste tire manifest system. The tire manifest system has similar enforcement provisions to those in this bill. CalRecycle is authorized to assess administrative penalties of up to $10,000/day for violations of hauling and manifest requirements. According to CalRecycle, increased administrative penalty authority has resulted in a consistent decrease in violations since 2009. Similar to the success in enforcing waste tire hauling and manifest requirements, this bill proposes to provide CalRecycle with similar tools to enforce DRS requirements in this bill.

4. Author’s amendment. The author wishes to delete the provisions in AB 901 related to the Public Records Act; and instead cross reference provisions in the Integrated Waste Management Act concerning the availability of documents and protection of trade secrets (PRC §40062).
   
   

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 1826 (Chesbro), Chapter 727, Statutes of 2014, required generators of specified amounts of organic waste to arrange for recycling services and requires local governments to implement organic waste recycling programs.

AB 341 (Chesbro), Chapter 476, Statutes of 2011, established a statewide 75% recycling goal and required commercial waste generators to arrange for recycling services and required local governments to implement commercial solid waste recycling programs.

SOURCE:

Author

SUPPORT:

California Resource Recovery Association

California State Association of Counties

Californians Against Waste

City of San Francisco, Mayor Edwin Lee

County of San Mateo

Inland Empire Disposal Association

Los Angeles County Waste Management Association

Recology

Rural County Representatives of California

Solid Waste Association of Orange County

StopWaste

Waste Management

OPPOSITION:

Los Angeles County Solid Waste Management Committee/Integrated Waste Management Task Force

Waste Connections, Inc.

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 901

Author:(Gordon)

As Amended Ver:April 20, 2015

Majority vote

SUMMARY: Updates, revises, and expands the information recycling and composting operations and facilities are required to submit to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Specifically, this bill:

1. Clarifies that recycling and composting operations and facilities are required to submit periodic information and requires that information be submitted to CalRecycle, rather than counties. Authorizes CalRecycle to provide this information to local jurisdictions upon request.

2. Establishes penalties for any person who refuses or fails to submit waste tracking information required by law or regulation of $500 to $5,000 per violation.

3. Establishes penalties for any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, or any person who refuses to permit CalRecycle to perform an inspection or examination of records of $500 to $10,000 per violation.

4. Requires that all reporting required by the bill or related regulations be submitted electronically.

5. Authorizes CalRecycle or its designee to conduct audits, perform site inspections, observe facility operations, and otherwise investigate recordkeeping and reporting.

6. Authorizes CalRecycle to issue an administrative complaint to any person on whom civil liability may be imposed, as specified, and specifies that existing formal adjudicative procedures apply for the imposition of administrative penalties.

7. Requires that any penalties collected be deposited into the Integrated Waste Management Account or retained by the city or county that brought the action.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:

1. Estimated increased costs of over $330,000 (IWMA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2015-16 and FY 2016-17 (second and third years of implementation) for CalRecycle to conduct an enforcement program. Costs may be offset by streamlined data collection workloads and unknown revenue increases resulting from the penalty authority established in the bill (IWMA).

2. Minor, absorbable costs for first year implementation (IWMA).

COMMENTS: In 2011, the Legislature established a statewide recycling goal of 75% by 2020. According to CalRecycle, achieving the 75% recycling goal will require CalRecycle to successfully collect reliable waste flow data.

The existing lack of enforcement authority for waste flow reporting contributes to a widespread lack of compliance. According to CalRecycle, 65% of 2013 Disposal Reporting System (DRS) reports were late, incomplete, or inaccurate. Inadequate waste flow data comprises California's ability to make informed decisions about how and where to allocate resources to achieve the 75% recycling goal.

Additionally, inaccurate reporting can defraud local jurisdictions and the state out of millions of dollars in revenue and hinder the ability of local jurisdictions to comply with their recycling requirements. Several recent cases in which disposal tonnages were misallocated resulted in criminal action and involved millions of dollars in fraud.

Existing law relating to disposal reporting, established in 1992, is outdated. In 2007, CalRecycle implemented an electronic DRS (eDRS), which simplified the process for disposal facility operators, local governments, and CalRecycle. Under the updated system, disposal facility operators can update DRS directly on an ongoing basis. Currently 22 counties report using eDRS, 30 continue to submit paper reports, and 6 are not subject to reporting requirements. This bill requires that all reports be submitted using eDRS.

Moreover, existing law as it relates to reporting requirements for recycling and composting facilities has been in effect since 1992; however, CalRecycle has never implemented the provision that requires recycling facilities to report on the types and quantities of materials that they accept. CalRecycle has indicated that in order to achieve California's 75% recycling goal and ensure compliance with organic waste recycling requirements, it intends to begin implementing these provisions. This bill updates and streamlines the existing requirements to facilitate that process.

While all counties in which solid waste facilities are located are required to submit DRS reports, compliance is a significant issue. Currently 65% of DRS reports received by CalRecycle are not properly filed. Just under 30% (126 facilities) submitted their annual reports to counties late in 2013, and 29 facilities never submitted their 2013 annual report and remain out of compliance.

There have been a number of high profile violations over the last several years. Earlier this year, four former employees of the Ox Mountain Landfill in San Mateo County were charged with grand theft of nearly $1.4 million. The employees are accused of misclassifying construction waste as green waste and illegally collecting fees on the material from landfill customers. The defendants are also accused of misrepresenting the weight of materials disposed of by certain customers and stealing the difference between the amount they charged consumers and the amount paid to the landfill.

In 2014, a jury ordered Recology (a waste management company) to repay $1.3 million to San Francisco ratepayers for bonuses it received in 2008 from the city for meeting recycling goals. The jury found that the bonus was paid based on false information provided by Recology to the city. This case is currently pending appeal.

Also in 2014, the Kern County District Attorney filed suit against Benz Sanitation for illegally disposing of solid waste on property east of the company's Tehachapi recycling facility. This case is pending. In 2012, Benz Sanitation was fined $2.375 million for falsifying records. The company has been accused of collecting residential and commercial solid waste from Los Angeles County, creating fraudulent documents showing that the trash was generated in Kern County and disposed of the material in Tehachapi Landfill in Kern County, thereby avoiding disposal fees for either county.

In 2008, a number of employees of the Kirby Canyon Landfill in San Jose were involved in a bribery scheme in which a waste hauler, Resource Development Services, bribed the workers to allow his trucks to pay reduced landfill fees. Six employees were arrested, and five were fired but not charged. An internal investigation found that Waste Management, the owner of the landfill, lost more than $13 million in revenue.

Analysis Prepared by: Elizabeth MacMillan / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092 FN: 0000672

Date of Hearing: April 29, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Jimmy Gomez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 901

Author:(Gordon) – As Amended Ver:April 20, 2015

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable:

SUMMARY:

This bill modifies and expands the information recycling and composting operations and facilities are required to submit to CalRecycle. This bill establishes penalties for failing to submit information or filing false reports. Specifically, this bill:

1. Specifies recycling and composting operations, in addition to facilities, are required to submit information to CalRecycle, rather than counties. CalRecycle may provide this information to local jurisdictions upon request.

2. Establishes penalties for any person who refuses or fails to submit waste tracking information required by law or regulation of not less than $500 and not more than $5,000 per violation.

3. Establishes penalties for any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, or any person who refuses to permit CalRecycle to perform an inspection or examination of records of not less than $500 and not more than $10,000 per violation.

4. Authorizes cities and counties to be designated by CalRecycle to enforce these provisions.

5. Requires all required reporting to be submitted electronically.

6. Authorizes CalRecycle or its designee to conduct audits, perform site inspections, observe facility operations, and otherwise investigate the recordkeeping and reporting.

7. Authorizes CalRecycle to issue an administrative complaint to any person on whom civil liability may be imposed, as specified, and specifies that existing formal adjudicative procedures apply for the imposition of administrative penalties.

8. Requires any collected penalties to be deposited into the Integrated Waste Management Account (IWMA) or retained by the city or county that brought the action.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. Estimated increased costs of over $330,000 (IWMA) for FY15-16 and FY16-17 (second and third years of implementation) for CalRecyle to conduct an enforcement program. Costs may be offset by streamlined data collection workloads and unknown revenue increases resulting from the penalty authority established in the bill (IWMA).

2. Minor, absorbable costs for first year implementation (IWMA).

COMMENTS:

1. Rationale. AB 341 (Chesbro), [Chapter 476, Statutes of 2011], directed CalRecycle to achieve a statewide recycling goal of 75% by 2020. According to the author, moving toward the more progressive 75% recycling goal will require CalRecycle to successfully collect reliable waste flow data.

The current absence of enforcement authority contributes to a widespread lack of compliance. According to CalRecycle, 65% of 2013 DRS reports were late, incomplete, or inaccurate. Inadequate waste flow data comprises California's ability to make informed decisions about how and where to allocate resources to achieve the 75% recycling goal.

The author further states, inaccurate reporting can defraud local jurisdictions and the state out of millions of dollars in revenue and hinder the ability of local jurisdictions to comply with requirements. Several recent cases where disposal tonnages were misallocated resulted in criminal action and involved millions of dollars in fraud.

This bill provides improved reporting accuracy and enforcement authority.

2. Background. Existing law relating to disposal reporting, established in 1992, is outdated. In 2007, CalRecycle implemented an electronic Disposal Reporting System (eDRS), to simplify the process for disposal facility operators, local governments, and CalRecycle.

Under the updated system, disposal facility operators can update DRS directly on an ongoing basis. Currently, 22 counties report using eDRS, 30 continue to submit paper reports, and 6 are not subject to reporting requirements. This bill requires that all reports be submitted using eDRS.

Existing law as it relates to reporting requirements for recycling and composting facilities has been in effect since 1992; however, CalRecycle has never implemented the provision that requires recycling facilities to report on the types and quantities of materials that they accept.

CalRecycle has indicated that in order to achieve California's 75% recycling goal and ensure compliance with organic waste recycling requirements, it intends to begin implementing these provisions. This bill updates and streamlines the existing requirements to ease that process.

3. Major Violations. While all counties in which solid waste facilities are located are required to submit DRS reports, compliance is a significant issue. Currently, 65% of DRS reports received by CalRecycle are not properly filed. Just under 30% (126 facilities) submitted their annual reports to counties late in 2013, and 29 facilities never submitted their 2013 annual report and remain out of compliance.
   
   There have been a number of high profile violations over the few years. Earlier this year, four former employees of the Ox Mountain Landfill in San Mateo County were charged with grand theft of nearly $1.4 million. The employees misclassified construction waste as green waste and illegally collected fees on the material from landfill customers. The defendants are also accused of misrepresenting the weight of materials disposed of by certain customers and stealing the difference between the amount they charged consumers and the amount paid to the landfill.
   
   In 2014, a jury ordered Recology (a waste management company) to repay $1.3 million to San Francisco ratepayers for bonuses it received in 2008 from the city for meeting recycling goals. The jury found that the bonus was paid based on false information provided by Recology to the city. This case is currently pending appeal.
   
   Also in 2014, the Kern County District Attorney filed suit against Benz Sanitation for illegally disposing of solid waste on property east of the company's Tehachapi recycling facility. This case is pending.

4. In 2012, Benz Sanitation was fined $2.375 million for falsifying records. The company collected residential and commercial solid waste from Los Angeles County, created fraudulent documents showing that the trash was generated in Kern County and disposed of the material in Tehachapi Landfill in Kern County, thereby avoiding disposal fees for either county.
   
   
   

Analysis Prepared by: Jennifer Galehouse / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 13, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES

Das Williams, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 901

Author:(Gordon) – As Introduced Ver:February 26, 2015

SUBJECT: Solid waste: reporting requirements: enforcement

SUMMARY: Updates, revises, and expands the information recycling and composting operations and facilities are required to submit to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle).

EXISTING LAW, pursuant to the California Integrated Waste Management Act (Act):

1. Establishes a state recycling goal of 75% by 2020 and requires each local jurisdiction to divert 50% of solid waste from landfill disposal.
   
   

2. Requires a commercial waste generator, including multi-family dwellings, to arrange for recycling services and requires local governments to implement commercial solid waste recycling programs designed to divert solid waste from businesses.

3. Requires generators of specified amounts of organic waste (i.e., food waste and yard waste) to arrange for recycling services for that material.

4. Requires cities and counties to report specified information to CalRecycle using the Disposal Reporting System (DRS), which tracks the amount and origin of waste disposed in California and sent from California to out-of-state landfills.

5. DRS information must be submitted by cities and counties at least quarterly to CalRecycle.

6. Requires disposal facilities to report the origins and tonnages of all material accepted at the facility to the county in which it is located.

7. Requires recycling and composting facilities to submit periodic information to counties on the origin, types, and quantities of materials that are disposed of, sold to end users, or that are sold out of state.

8. Requires each county to submit period reports to the relevant cities, regional agencies, and CalRecycle on the origin and amounts of waste disposed in the jurisdiction.

9. Grants CalRecycle regulatory authority to adopt practices and procedures related to waste tracking in the state, as long as the regulations do not impose an "unreasonable burden" on waste handling, processing, or disposal operations.

THIS BILL:

1. Clarifies that recycling and composting operations, in addition to facilities, are required to submit periodic information and requires that information be submitted to CalRecycle, rather than counties. Authorizes CalRecycle to provide this information to local jurisdictions upon request.

2. Repeals the requirement that counties provide recycling and composting facility information to CalRecycle.

3. Establishes penalties for any person who refuses or fails to submit waste tracking information required by law or regulation of not less than $500 and not more than $5,000 per violation.

4. Establishes penalties for any person who knowingly or willfully files a false report, or any person who refuses to permit CalRecycle to perform an inspection or examination of records of not less than $500 and not more than $10,000 per violation.

5. Authorizes cities and counties to be designated by CalRecycle to enforce these provisions.

6. Requires that all reporting required by the bill or related regulations be submitted electronically.

7. Authorizes CalRecycle or its designee to conduct audits, perform site inspections, observe facility operations, and otherwise investigate the recordkeeping and reporting.

8. Authorizes CalRecycle to issue an administrative complaint to any person on whom civil liability may be imposed, as specified, and specifies that existing formal adjudicative procedures apply for the imposition of administrative penalties.

9. Requires that any penalties collected be deposited into the Integrated Waste Management Account or retained by the city or county that brought the action.

10. Makes related technical and clarifying changes.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown

COMMENTS:

1. This bill. According to the author:

With the passage of AB 341 (Chesbro), [Chapter 476, Statutes of 2011], the Legislature directed CalRecycle to achieve a statewide recycling goal of 75% by 2020. Moving toward the more progressive 75% recycling goal will require CalRecycle to successfully collect reliable waste flow data.

The current absence of waste flow data enforcement authority contributes to a widespread lack of compliance. According to CalRecycle, 65% of 2013 DRS reports were late, incomplete, or inaccurate. Inadequate waste flow data comprises California's ability to make informed decisions about how and where to allocate resources to achieve the 75% recycling goal.

Additionally, inaccurate reporting can defraud local jurisdictions and the state out of millions of dollars in revenue and hinder the ability of local jurisdictions to comply with their AB 939 (Act) requirements. Several recent cases where disposal tonnages were misallocated resulted in criminal action and involved millions of dollars in fraud.

2. DRS. Existing law relating to disposal reporting, established in 1992, is outdated. In 2007, CalRecycle implemented an electronic DRS (eDRS), which simplified the process for disposal facility operators, local governments, and CalRecycle. Under the updated system, disposal facility operators can update DRS directly on an ongoing basis. Currently 22 counties report using eDRS, 30 continue to submit paper reports, and 6 are not subject to reporting requirements. This bill requires that all reports be submitted using eDRS.
   
   Existing law as it relates to reporting requirements for recycling and composting facilities has been in effect since 1992; however, CalRecycle has never implemented the provision that requires recycling facilities to report on the types and quantities of materials that they accept. CalRecycle has indicated that in order to achieve California's 75% recycling goal and ensure compliance with organic waste recycling requirements, it intends to begin implementing these provisions. This bill updates and streamlines the existing requirements to ease that process.

3. DRS enforcement. While all counties in which solid waste facilities are located are required to submit DRS reports, compliance is a significant issue. Currently 65% of DRS reports received by CalRecycle are not properly filed. Just under 30% (126 facilities) submitted their annual reports to counties late in 2013, and 29 facilities never submitted their 2013 annual report and remain out of compliance.
   
   There have been a number of high profile violations over the last several years. Earlier this year, four former employees of the Ox Mountain Landfill in San Mateo County were charged with grand theft of nearly $1.4 million. The employees misclassified construction waste as green waste and illegally collected fees on the material from landfill customers. The defendants are also accused of misrepresenting the weight of materials disposed of by certain customers and stealing the difference between the amount they charged consumers and the amount paid to the landfill.
   
   In 2014, a jury ordered Recology (a waste management company) to repay $1.3 million to San Francisco ratepayers for bonuses it received in 2008 from the city for meeting recycling goals. The jury found that the bonus was paid based on false information provided by Recology to the city. This case is currently pending appeal.
   
   Also in 2014, the Kern County District Attorney filed suit against Benz Sanitation for illegally disposing of solid waste on property east of the company's Tehachapi recycling facility. This case is pending. In 2012, Benz Sanitation was fined $2.375 million for falsifying records. The company collected residential and commercial solid waste from Los Angeles County, created fraudulent documents showing that the trash was generated in Kern County and disposed of the material in Tehachapi Landfill in Kern County, thereby avoiding disposal fees for either county.
   
   In 2008, a number of employees of the Kirby Canyon Landfill in San Jose were involved in a bribery scheme in which a waste hauler, Resource Development Services, bribed the workers to allow his trucks to pay reduced landfill fees. Six employees were arrested, and five were fired but not charged. An internal investigation found that Waste Management, the owner of the landfill, lost more than $13 million in revenue.
   
   CalRecycle administers similar enforcement provisions in its tire management program. CalRecycle is tasked with ensuring the safe management of tires in California, including the upkeep of a waste tire manifest system. The tire manifest system has similar enforcement provisions to those in this bill. CalRecycle is authorized to assess administrative penalties of up to $10,000 a day for violations of hauling and manifest requirements. According to CalRecycle, increased administrative penalty authority has resulted in a consistent decrease in violations since 2009.

4. Suggested amendment. The bill includes a drafting error that references the former California Integrated Waste Management Board, which was eliminated in 2006 and replaced by CalRecycle. In order to maintain consistency in the bill and avoid confusion, the committee may wish to amend the bill to correct this reference.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Californians Against Waste

Rural County Representatives of California

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Elizabeth MacMillan / NAT. RES. / (916) 319-2092