MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

HEARING TESTIMONY OF SECRETARY KENDL P. PHILBRICK

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ENERGY AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE

JULY 20, 2005 2:00 P.M.

RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING, WASHINGTON D.C.

“Electronic Waste: An Examination of Current Activity, Implications for Environmental Stewardship, and the Proper Federal Role.”

On behalf of Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr. and the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE), I would like to thank you for the invitation to testify before your Subcommittee today on electronic waste. It is an honor for me to provide you with the status of electronic waste management in Maryland, a summary of our new Statewide Computer Recycling Pilot Program, our views on the federal role in electronics recycling, and answers to any questions you may have.

Background and Current Status of eCycling in Maryland

Electronics recycling or “eCycling” began in Maryland in October 2001 with the EPA Region 3 eCycling Pilot Project. The goal of the project was to develop an economically and environmentally sustainable collection, reuse, and recycling system for electronics based on the principle of shared responsibility among business (electronics manufacturers and retailers), government, and consumers. The kick-off for the EPA Region 3 pilot was held at Scarboro Landfill in Harford County, Maryland and generated 150 participants and 7.99 tons of electronics, including televisions, computers, printers, fax machines, and other electronics for recycling. During the pilot project, there were a total of 5,722 participants in 21 one-day collection events and two (2) two-day collection events throughout all regions of Maryland. One permanent electronics collection facility (Wicomico County) was also established with project funding. Over 250 tons of electronics were collected through these activities until the end of the project on December 31, 2002.

The EPA Region 3 project gave Maryland and the other Region 3 states the shot in the arm needed to begin collection and recycling of these valuable materials. Without funding and other shared resources from this important partnership, such as idea brainstorming, advertising, and lessons learned, Maryland would not have gotten the start needed to become a leader in eCycling. EPA Region 3 is no longer providing funding for these activities but periodically holds conference calls with Region 3 states to information on electronics recycling activities.

Since the end of the EPA Region 3 project, MDE has continued to provide funding support to local governments through cost sharing for 31 additional one-day, two (2) additional two-day, and one (1) curbside electronics recycling events with approximately $79,000 in unspent capital projects monies from the Solid Waste Facilities Loan Fund. MDE has managed these events through the Maryland Environmental Service, another State agency, and its contractor. There is enough money left from this funding to support perhaps one additional electronics collection event in a small population county. After that event, the Department will have no other source of funding to continue assisting local jurisdictions with electronics collection and recycling until the registration fees from new legislation are received by January 1, 2006.

In spite of the limited State funding and lack of private and federal funding support that has been available to local governments for electronics collection and recycling, many local governments have been able to establish their own systems for addressing the increase in citizen demand for these activities. Maryland electronics recyclers have often responded to demand for electronics waste reuse, refurbishment, and recycling by negotiating mutually beneficial contracts with local governments for collection and recycling activities. At this time, six (6) jurisdictions (Harford, Howard, Montgomery, Prince George’s, Wicomico, and Worcester Counties) have established permanent electronics collection facilities and several other jurisdictions (MidShore Region, Anne Arundel, and Baltimore Counties and the City of Greenbelt) hold regular collection events. At least two (2) additional jurisdictions have committed to establishing permanent collection facilities in the near future. In addition, the City of Salisbury has been collecting electronics curbside on several weekends in January for the past three (3) years.

As a result of State and local government efforts and participation by all Maryland counties and the City of Baltimore, over 3,900 tons of electronics, including televisions, computers, and other electronics, have been collected through a total of 63 one and two-day events, three (3) curbside events, and 7 permanent or on-going programs in Maryland since eCycling began in October 2001. The largest electronics collection event in Maryland was held during a four (4)-hour period in Baltimore County on April 30, 2005 in which 1,600 participants brought over 89.5 tons of electronics for recycling.

Legislative History

Legislation regarding electronics waste and recycling was proposed during several General Assembly sessions, beginning in 2001, before the first electronics waste legislation was passed in Maryland during the 2004 Legislative Session. House Bill 109 “Environment – Cathode Ray Tubes and Computer Products – Collection Systems” was carefully negotiated with the bill sponsors and interested parties to include elements from two other bills also proposed that session. The bill required MDE to study, in collaboration with stakeholders, including elected officials, local governments, environmental groups, and electronics manufacturers, recyclers, and retailers, the funding, collection, and implementation of an electronic waste system in Maryland by January 2006.

The Electronics Recycling Workgroup established by House Bill 109 met over several months in Fall 2004 to study issues related to electronic waste management, and found that there were diverse views, particularly amongst electronic industry representatives on mechanisms for handling electronic wastes. The two primary means for addressing this problem surfaced during the discussions: 1) the application of an advanced recycling fee to fund the collection and recycling of electronics, similar to that legislated in California; and 2) a system of shared responsibility with all stakeholders, including manufacturers, retailers, local governments, and citizens, having a role in eCycling, similar to the system legislated in Maine.

Because many Workgroup members voiced differing opinions on key components of an eCycling system (a definition for electronic waste, a funding mechanism, or whether to ban disposal of electronic waste in landfills and incinerators), they felt that decisions regarding funding and a system for electronics collection and recycling in Maryland should be delayed to allow for the development of a national electronics waste management system. Although wide consensus was not reached during these Workgroup meetings, valuable information and views were shared and relationships developed with stakeholders, including manufacturers and recyclers, which continued communications and partnering throughout the 2005 Legislative Session and to date.

Several of the elected officials that participated in the Electronics Recycling Workgroup in Fall 2004 proposed legislation during the 2005 General Assembly Session. House Bill 575 “Environment – Statewide Computer Recycling Pilot Program,” as originally proposed, would have imposed a State Computer Recycling fee, to be collected by retailers, on computers sold by a computer manufacturer which did not have a certified environmental compliance plan. Through a series of drafting sessions, stakeholders, including several national electronics manufacturers, local and State government representatives, retailers, and elected officials, negotiated the provisions of the bill which was passed by the legislature and signed into law by Governor Ehrlich in April 2005.

House Bill 575 defines “computer,” “manufacturer,” and “computer takeback program” and requires a manufacturer of an average of more than 1,000 computers over the previous three years to register with MDE and pay a registration fee, if it intends to sell its computers in Maryland on or after January 1, 2006. The initial registration fee is $5,000 and a manufacturer’s renewal registration fee will be reduced to $500 in subsequent years if the manufacturer has implemented a computer takeback program acceptable to MDE. These fees will be used primarily to provide grants to counties and municipalities for implementing computer recycling programs and to carry out the purposes of the State’s Recycling Program. The bill requires MDE to study and compare the environmental and public health impacts of disposing and recycling cathode ray tubes and review the effectiveness of the pilot program in diverting computers and computer monitors from disposal in landfills in the State through a report of its findings to the Maryland General Assembly by December 1, 2008. The law is scheduled to sunset on December 31, 2010.

In collaboration with electronics manufacturers, retailers, and recyclers, local governments, and State representatives, MDE is currently identifying computer manufacturers affected by the bill and drafting regulations to clarify certain language in the new Statewide Computer Recycling Pilot Program law. Regulations should be finalized by December 2005. In addition, MDE is conducting outreach and education activities and developing criteria for awarding grants to counties and municipalities for computer recycling programs. Challenges with implementation of this bill include: 1) uncertainty regarding the actual number of computer manufacturers worldwide affected by the bill; 2) inability to determine if the registration fees available initially and in subsequent years will be sufficient to fund the pilot program; 3) acceptability of regulations for implementing the bill; 4) whether the level of the registration fee will encourage more computer manufacturers to implement computer takeback programs; 5) impacts of other states’ and federal legislative initiatives on the implementation of Maryland’s law; and 6) the influence that the bill’s narrow focus on computers may have on collection of other electronics historically acceptable through local government recycling programs.

Federal Role

The establishment of electronics recycling in Maryland in 2001 could not have taken place without the financial support and collaborative efforts of EPA Region 3, the Region 3 states, electronics manufacturers and retailers, and local governments through the eCycling Pilot Project. Through the project, the definition of electronics waste was determined to be broad, encompassing those items frequently defined as consumer electronics, such as unwanted computers, monitors, keyboards, televisions, audio equipment, printers, cellular phones, and other home electronic devices. Although this is the definition used by MDE, in 2005 House Bill 575 the legislature only defined computer recycling. The original, broader definition continues to be narrowed by various state legislatures that are struggling with which electronics are most hazardous and/or most valuable to recycle.

It is well known that electronic equipment contains metals, including cadmium, lead, and mercury, and other materials that can become hazardous to human health and the environment if they are not properly managed. It is reported that the largest source of lead in municipal solid waste (MSW) is computer monitors and televisions that contain cathode ray tubes made with leaded glass. In addition, the largest source of cadmium in MSW is rechargeable nickel-cadmium batteries, commonly found in laptop computers, and a leading source of mercury in MSW comes from batteries, switches, and printed wiring boards in electronic wastes. In addition to these hazardous components, however, electronic equipment also contains valuable resources, such as precious metals, engineered plastics, glass, and other materials.

The presence of hazardous components in electronic equipment is frequently cited by environmentalists, elected officials, and some scientists, as the reason for restricting disposal of these materials and collecting them for recycling. However, there is no conclusive evidence that modern, highly engineered solid waste acceptance facilities are insufficient to protect the public and the environment from these hazards. Clearly any materials that can be eliminated from the solid waste stream through recycling will increase landfill life and solid waste capacity, but the economics of electronics recycling vs. disposal has not been completely evaluated. Useful data on the number and types of stored electronics would help to establish the true extent of this waste stream and assist the states in identifying the costs of recycling these historic materials and estimating future costs. Outreach and education programs established on a national level would continue to increase awareness of the need to recycle electronics. In addition, electronics recyclers throughout Maryland are concerned that they are not all on a level playing field, as there are no standards (state or federal) to ensure that collection and recycling of electronics are conducted in an environmentally safe manner so as to protect workers and the public from physical and chemical hazards. Guidance from EPA and other science based federal agencies on these subjects would be welcome. Although the states do not historically receive federal funding for solid waste and recycling programs, support in these areas could certainly enhance state programs, even on a limited term basis.

Although the efforts of the National Electronics Product Stewardship Initiative (NEPSI) to develop a national financing system to help maximize the reuse and recycling of old computers and televisions have been deemed noble, that collaboration did not result in a consistent and effective national solution to the problem of electronics waste management and recycling. The passage of significant electronics waste legislation in California, Maine, and now Maryland shows that states are prepared to design and implement their own systems to address electronic waste. Many states do not require recycling of certain materials. In Maryland, counties are required to recycle a certain percentage of their wastes, based on their population, but they are free to determine the most efficient way to reach their required rate and the materials that they choose to collect for recycling. Maryland does not currently mandate electronics recycling.

With no national solution, the challenge for manufacturers and retailers is how to comply with a patchwork of differing state programs. As more citizens demand electronics recycling, and in some areas assume some financial responsibility for this activity, additional states will be forced to pass legislation, continuing the hodgepodge of state laws. As evidenced by the level of involvement and influence by the larger electronics industry representatives in the development of state legislation, industry is partnering more and more with state governments to find individual legislative solutions to the demands and challenges of electronic wastes. Industry is also evaluating and responding to the European Union’s requirements related to electronic wastes, with less hazardous processes and materials.

Maryland’s law is new and it will take the State several years to develop enough information to determine its impact. It is important for states to stay involved on the national level and share successes and challenges. As Governor Ehrlich is a strong proponent of recycling, Maryland offers support to Congress in its efforts to sort out electronics waste and recycling issues.