California Resource Recovery Association

Part III: CRRA EXTERNAL POLICY

The following adopted policies are included for historical context on external policy actions taken by the Board and CRRA membership. The format of past policy is retained as adopted. However, policy proposed from this date forward will follow the policy formation procedures defined in Part II: CRRA Internal Policy of this document; and, therefore, will be in formal resolution format.

A. CRRA ADOPTED EXTERNAL POLICY

RESOLUTION ON INCINERATION

WHEREAS, all solid wastes ultimately end up either in the air, the sea, or the land, and;

WHEREAS, the available processing technologies are limited to 1) recycling, 2) burial in sanitary landfills, or 3) incineration, and;

WHEREAS, recent California law (AB 939, 1989) declares that integrated waste management is the state's public policy, and the incineration of waste materials is an integral element of that policy, even though incineration destroys materials rather than preparing them for reuse, and;

WHEREAS, numerous research studies have found that the conversion of municipal solid waste by incineration into energy, air pollution and new concentrated toxic solid materials creates extensive environmental problems greater than landfilling of those same materials, and;

WHEREAS, 95% of all incinerators are proposed for areas that do not meet federal air quality standards, and;

WHEREAS, even with the best pollution control devices all incinerators emit hundreds of tons of air pollution per year thereby further soiling clean air, and;

WHEREAS, incinerating all of the municipal solid waste in California would meet less than 2% of the state's energy needs, and;

WHEREAS, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1981 determined that MSW incinerators were nine times (900%) more environmentally harmful than recycling projects, and;

WHEREAS, the economics of incinerators put citizens and municipalities at financial risk, and;

WHEREAS, the extensive construction costs of MSW incinerators require large quantities of wastes to be dedicated by contract to the incinerator, thus precluding those materials being recycled, and;

WHEREAS, intensive recycling as a program option has too often been erroneously deemed "difficult" or "unprofitable" and thus rejected without fair consideration, and;

WHEREAS, the American Public Health Association and Californians Against Waste have both endorsed resolutions opposing the construction of MSW incinerators;

THEREFORE, WE the members of the California Resource Recovery Association, do agree as follows:

In most situations the incineration of municipal solid wastes is a fruitless and counterproductive strategy.
Local solid waste decision makers should be discouraged from considering incinerators as a viable solid waste disposal option.
Citizens should be encouraged to ban MSW incinerators.
To call upon the California Department of Health Services and the California Integrated Waste Management Board to reject all waste incinerator operating permits unless they can meet the federal air quality standards.
To encourage legislation to prohibit landfilling of MSW incinerator ash in landfills that do not meet the standards of Class 1 hazardous waste landfill.
To call upon the California Pollution Control Finance Agency not to provide tax-exempt bond funding for MSW incinerators.
The Board of Directors shall take all reasonable steps to implement this policy in a) our Agenda For the 90's document, b) all other new and revised policy statements of the Association, and c) in any position papers of the Association in response to requests from legislators.
These policies have no bearing on the burning of appropriately dried biomass material in such facilities that meet ambient air, water and solid waste disposal quality control regulations

RESOLUTION ON MINIMUM CONTENT

WHEREAS, the supply of recycled materials is increasing dramatically in response to federal, state and local goals and mandates for waste reduction; and

WHEREAS, demand for these recycled materials must be increased equally dramatically for adopted waste reduction goals to be realized; and

WHEREAS, minimum content requirements have proven to be one of the most effective recycling market development tools adopted by states around the nation; and

WHEREAS, proposals are pending in the United States Congress to mandate minimum content requirements for a variety of packaging and materials; and

WHEREAS, the National Recycling Coalition has adopted many policies and programs to provide national leadership in the purchase of recycled materials and products and recognizes that there is an urgent need to implement minimum content requirements for as many materials, products and projects as possible.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the National Recycling Coalition supports requirements to be included in the reauthorization of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) which would require manufacturers to use products with the maximum technically feasible levels of post-consumer recycled content by 1995, with higher goals thereafter, for products and projects such as, but not limited to:

newsprint, printing and writing papers, and other office papers;
glass, metals and plastics collected in curbside recycling programs;
packaging, and other consumer products, especially those which become household hazardous wastes; and
highway, transportation, housing, community development and redevelopment projects, and other publicly funded infrastructure projects.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that minimum content legislation should be structured as the first priority for public and private investments in expanding recycling markets. Efforts to reduce waste and increase recycling collection programs should be viewed as supplementary to minimum content legislation, not alternatives.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the NRC should ask the Recycling Advisory Council to have its Market Development Committee obtain information on the success of already adopted state minimum content programs and to develop recommendations on specific materials, products and projects to be included in RCRA minimum content requirements.

RESOLUTION ON REFORM OF THE
EXISTING PLASTIC RESIN CODE IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM

January 22, 1993

WHEREAS, the CRRA currently has a policy addressing product labelling for recyclability/recycled content; and

WHEREAS, the rationale for this policy is that consumers and product manufacturers need reliable information regarding the recycled content, reusability, and recyclability of products and packaging and...misuse of recycling symbols and terms is increasing, and it is difficult to interpret the claims of environmental labels created by manufacturers; and

WHEREAS, this policy states that the CRRA supports, at the state and federal level, the use of the three arrow recycling logo for the labelling of products and packaging to indicate technical feasibility of recycling a product; and

WHEREAS, the three arrow recycling logo is incorporated into the existing plastics resin identification code; and

WHEREAS, regardless of the intent of the resin identification code as created by industry, the consumer commonly makes the assumption that the recycling arrows logo in the resin code indicates that the product is recyclable in their community recycling programs; and

WHEREAS, existing CRRA policy states that the public's cooperation and participation is critical to the success of recycling and promotions of recycling should be more coordinated, comprehensive and consistent in approach...; and

WHEREAS, the use of the three arrow recycling logo in the resin identification code is creating consumer frustration and confusion which is leading to less cooperation and participation in recycling programs across the country; and

WHEREAS, this frustration is eroding the validity of the three arrows recycling logo in the consumer's mind; and

WHEREAS, the resin code is misleading a growing population of consumers who make purchasing decisions based on a product's apparent recyclability and recycled content;

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the California Resource Recovery Association Board of Directors supports the removal of the three arrows recycling logo from the plastics resin identification code; and that the CRRA policy committee will work with recyclers, National Recycling Congress, the Recycling Advisory Council, Federal Trade Commission, Association of Plastics Recyclers, the Society of the Plastics Industry, and the Council of State Governments Northeast Recycling Council towards this objective.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that CRRA will work with recyclers and the above organizations toward the development of a new plastics resin identification code while also taking proactive measures to induce industry to expand and develop markets for post-consumer plastics on a national basis.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that until a new plastics resin identification coding system is implemented, CRRA will continue the TAKE THE WRAP campaign.

1993 Policy Statements
Adopted by Board - February 1993

CRRA Policy Statement 1.

As communities implement AB 939 plans, CRRA encourages cities to maximize competition and diversity in implementing new services, and to build on the existing investment of the local recycling industry.

CRRA Policy Statement 2.

CRRA supports the streamlining of governmental administrative and regulatory processes, and coordination of state agencies' policies and programs to encourage reuse, recycling, composting and the conservation of resources.

1993 CRRA LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES

1993 Priorities use a two-level process. Level one are issues that CRRA will actively pursue, whereas level two priorities will be tracked, with membership participation as needed.

First Level Priority

Clearly, establish State role and responsibilities for market development and mechanisms to assist local market development by the public and private sectors.
Action: Referred to REMARC, B-REAL.

Establish manufacturers responsibility for designing reusable, and recyclable and compostable materials and products that contain the maximum amount of technically feasible secondary, postconsumer content.
Action: Referred to REMARC, B-REAL.

Support legislation to create financing mechanisms to expand existing and develop new reuse, recycling and composting industries.
Action: Referred to REMARC, B-REAL.

Support legislation to establish a consistent system of labelling products to recognize source reduction, recyclability, locally recovered organic materials, and recycled content.
Action: Referred to REMARC, B-REAL, CORC.

Support granting generic authority to CIWMB to promulgate under minimum content regulations the addition of more materials/products and projects consistent with legislatively enacted programs.
Action: Referred to REMARC.

Support strengthening local government and state agencies secondary, post consumer procurement requirements, and educational programs for businesses and consumers procurement.
Action: Referred to local chapters for action in their region. Support State use of CAW recycled products guides.

Support clarification of AB 939 to clearly authorize businesses to donate or sell materials.
Action: Referred to B-REAL.

Support revision of the definition of solid waste to clarify recyclables as commodities.
Action: Referred to B-REAL, CORC, and discussions with other recycling organizations.

Clarify legislative authority to distinguish between the environmental impacts of various composting feedstocks and size of facility, and develop permitting requirements accordingly.
Action: Referred to CORC.

For existing State-wide and local programs and in proposed legislation, adopt provisions which support expansion of reuse and composting as well as recycling wherever possible.
Action: Referred to Reuse Industries Alliance.

Second Level Priority

Integrate AB 2020 and AB 939 goals and programs, emphasizing the AB 939 public/private partnership approach, rather than the regulatory approach of AB 2020.
Action: Referred to Beverage Container Subcommittee for pursuit of funds for CRRA to study issue.

Support addition of all glass, plastic, and aluminum beverage containers to the AB 2020 system.
Action: Encourage members to support CAW initiatives on this issue.

Develop recycling incentive fees for different types of materials, learning from experience of existing programs in California and nationwide (e.g., DOC processing fees and CIWMB tire fund).
Action: Establish a subcommittee to develop CRRA policy covering combined front- and back-end pricing systems (providing price signals for reuse, recycling and composting to entire system of manufacturers, consumers, haulers, recyclers and landfill operators)

CRRA Position Statements on Diversion Monitoring under AB939

Position Statement 1

California Resource Recovery Association (CRRA) supports the following changes to AB2092:

Change the methodology for "counting" in the future to a "disposal" basis, counting total tons landfilled per capita in 1995 and 2000 as the basis for measuring AB939 success;
For the baseline year of 1990, count all public, private, and non-profit diversion programs in place prior to 1990 as identified in SRRE Waste Generation Studies (or in subsequent detailed studies); and
Extend SRRE, HHWE and initial coIWMP deadlines to July 1, 1992. SRREs/HHWE already completed should not be required to be revised immediately. They should be revised when County Integrated Waste Management Plans (CoIWMPs) are submitted to the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB).

Alternatively, in the baseline year of 1990, only count tons landfilled, without credit for prior diversion programs and broaden the authority of the CIWMB to adjust goals. Goals could be adjusted depending on local condition, prior waste reduction programs and/or demonstrated commitment to expanding waste reduction programs since the adoption of AB939.

Position Statement 2

CRRA opposes the relaxing of standards in AB939 by averaging of disposal amount with regions. These standards hold each local government accountable for their integrated waste management system and are a critical element of AB939.

Although it is appealing to consider alternatives such as "waste sheds" (based on landfills serving multiple jurisdictions), integrated waste management requires much more than just data from landfills to succeed. Integrated waste management requires fundamental changes in both solid waste and recycling collection, transfer and processing systems in order to succeed. Only individual local governments can accomplish many of those fundamental changes, as they pertain to the structure and implementation of procedures and policies which only individual local governments control, such as franchise agreements, contracts, rate structures, facility siting, permits, and ordinances.

CRRA strongly supports the direction of AB2494 that would focus on a disposal-based accounting system instead of the current requirements of AB939 which require detailed waste generation assessments. However, under the guise of further "simplification" of AB939, proponents of regional accounting will diminish one of the most successful aspects of AB939 to date - the clear focus it has provided for each local government in the state to account for their own wastes.

However, there is a need to:

Allow for waste characterization studies to be done on a "waste shed" basis;
Clarify how estimates are done for multiple jurisdictions collected in the same vehicle and for self-hauled vehicles while solid waste collection companies and solid waste facility operators develop necessary procedures and data bases that will enable them to accurately report the sources of such wastes in the future.

Position Statement 3

CRRA supports regulations that create a separate permitting process for source separated yard, food and agricultural materials with the following parameters:

A tiered permitting system should be developed in which the level of permitting requirements increase by type and volume of source separated feedstock. This includes such concepts as;

Backyard composting of yard, wood, and food waste by right;
Defines the level of permitting intensity by the environmental issues raised by the volume processed and type of source separate feedstock; and
Develops a separate pathway for commercial institutions that compost source separated materials on-site due to mitigating factors of decreasing pollution from materials transportation, and support of the IWM hierarchy

Threshold volume levels will require a significant amount of research beyond the time limits presented by the legislative process.

Therefore, actual definition of permit level designation by type of operation will need to be developed by the CIWMB.

Facilities processing MSW or sludge should be required to obtain a solid waste facilities permit to ensure health and safety issues are observed.

1991 CRRA LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES

The following priorities were adopted by the CRRA Board on October 19, 1990. Additional details were added on January 1, 1991.

Additional Glass Crisis Response - CRRA's Glass Recycling Crisis Task Force is meeting shortly to evaluate legislation adopted in 1990, and to identify if anything else needs to be done legislatively or administratively to respond to problems experienced recycling glass from curbside and commercial programs.
Purchase Tax Credits - CRRA has sponsored AB1109 in 1987-88 session and SB432 in 1989-90 session to provide tax credits for the purchase of recycled materials. AB1109 was adopted by the Legislature but vetoed by the Governor in 1988. SB432 was revised to be equipment tax credits and was adopted into law in 1989. Purchase tax credits have yet to be adopted.
Minimum Content for Recycled Oil - In 1989 the first minimum content bill was adopted requiring newspaper publishers to purchase 25% recycled newsprint. This bill has been reported to be responsible for literally billions of dollars of investment by the private sector to respond to this market demand, becoming the single most important market development initiative ever devised in the country on behalf of recycling. In 1990, a similar bill was adopted to require glass containers to contain a minimum content of recycled glass. For 1991, CRRA would like to explore the potential of developing similar legislation for recycled oil.
Advance Disposal Fees/Product Charges - AB939 required the CA Integrated Waste Management Board to design a system of charging for the disposal of wastes at the point of manufacture or distribution, technically referred to as "advance disposal fees" or "product charges." A major study is in progress by the Tellus Institute for the Board that has developed preliminary recommendation on a program design that would raise as much as $3 billion per year. The Senate Task Force on Waste Management recommended in 1989 that State funding required to implement the recommended integrated waste management system be obtained from such advance disposal fees, with local governments being given the authority to raise fees on waste hauling and landfill as their primary source of revenues to implement desired programs. Both the design of this program, and the use of the revenues obtained will be of great significance.
AB939 Clean-up - Although major clean-up of AB939 occurred in 1990, there are still some outstanding issues of concern. Of particular concern to CRRA were: the need to clarify the authority for raising fees by local government to fund integrated waste management programs; clarifying wood waste definitions to allow wood waste recycled into biomass fuel to be counted towards AB939 25% recycling goals; and extending due dates for Source Reduction and Recycling Elements an additional 6 months.
Integration of AB2020 and AB 939 Systems - with the establishment of the new California Integrated Waste Management Board, there is a question as to whether the AB2020 system needs to remain in the Department of Conservation, and how best that system should be coordinated with recycling initiatives being pursued by local governments to meet AB939 requirements. Legislation may be needed to clarify these issues in 1991.

The California Resource Recovery Association (CRRA) would like to recommend the changes that should be included in AB2092, as follows:

Change the methodology for "counting" in the future to a "disposal" basis, counting total tons in landfilled per capita in 1995 and 2000 as the basis for measuring AB939 success;
For the baseline year of 1990, count all public, private and non-profit diversion in SRRE Waste Generation Studies (or in subsequent detailed studies); and
Extend SRRE, HHWE, and initial CoIWMP deadlines to July 1, 1992. SRREs/HHWEs already completed should not be required to be revised immediately. They should be revised when County Integrated Waste Management Plans (CoIWMPs) are submitted to the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB).

Alternatively, in the baseline year of 1990, only count tons landfilled, without credit for prior diversion programs and broaden the authority of the CIWMB to adjust goals. Goals could be adjusted depending on local conditions, prior waste reduction programs and/or demonstrated commitment to expanding waste reduction programs since the adoption of AB939.

We believe that the key to "counting" is to design the simplest system possible, to allow jurisdictions to focus on implementing programs rather than counting them. If you have any questions about these recommendations, please do not hesitate to contact me at 408-277-5533. Thank you for your consideration.

CALIFORNIA GLASS RECYCLING CRISIS

CRRA POSITION STATEMENT - REVISED JULY 1, 1991

PROBLEMS

Imbalance in supply and demand in terms of color (i.e., commingled glass vs. flint, green, and amber); the largest problem is for color mixed glass. There will probably be differential in demand for production of different colors of products in the future. A viable market still remains for color sorted material in general. Increased sorting leads to increased amount of residues which need their own market/use.
Higher quality of cullet needed when using higher percentages of cullet in batches (i.e., one color, no contaminants, etc.). This is a factor of scale: small operations do not see and there are color control standards which are more strictly applied now than in the past.
Container market cannot absorb all of the mixed color recycled glass and supply will increase with AB939 and subsequent increase of both curbside and commercial recycling programs, as well as increase in glass recycling beyond beverage containers.
The current system of establishing and funding convenience zones is inefficient. State has either mandated too much convenience or not enough funding. Processing fees do not correctly reflect the full costs of collecting glass and processing it to manufacturer specifications. The original processing fees methodology implemented, and the redemption containers themselves, are not paying their own way by type of material. The original intent of AB2020 was that the gaps in operating costs were to be paid by beverage dealers, and Convenience Zone Incentive Payments would be limited to ten percent of funds collected paid to rural centers only.
Beverage dealers have not been held accountable under AB2020. They need to promote recycling centers, provide better signage, establish better hours of operation, and provide information regarding alternate redemption centers (if not located on-site, or when on-site facilities are closed). State needs to enforce the requirements detailed in AB2020.
Paperwork required to meet regulatory requirements is time consuming and administratively expensive.
Out-of-state glass cullet is cheaper than in-state cullet.
Glass industry has lost market share since processing fees started on January 1, 1991.

SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS

A key goal should be that the minimum floor price of cullet is paid at a level that covers the cost of recycling for collection (recognizing different value resulting from distances to market) through processing to the point of manufacturing, evenly applied to all manufactured waste stream contributors, with the avoided costs of waste collection and disposal paying for any incremental cost above manufacturers' virgin material costs.
Implement processing fees on all manufactured waste stream contributors in a manner that provides purchasing credits or incentives for use of recycled material. Expand source of market development payments to other manufactured waste stream contributors. Allow reusable products to obtain market development payments available through the State.
Streamline paperwork or increase administrative fee to cover administrative costs to recyclers and processors. Standardize reporting systems for haulers,
recyclers, processors, and landfill operators (service providers).
State and industry should fund major residential and commercial education campaign to encourage "clean" recycled materials to meet market specifications, including reduced glass contaminants. The economic benefits to haulers and recyclers of such an investment should be documented to foster continued investment. Evaluate collection procedures to decrease contamination and better accommodate market requirements for color sorted cullet.
Retailers should be contributing to the promotion and operations of recycling collection and buy-recycled education of consumers and bearing fiscal responsibilities for the success of centers. Require enforcement by DOC for all beverage retailers to comply with promotions, signage, hours of operation, and to provide information regarding all alternate redemption centers in their convenience zone or vicinity. Retailers should take back containers when the centers are not open or when redemption equipment is not operating.
Support additional products from all manufactured waste stream contributors to include minimum recycled content and increase levels of minimum content for California glass containers.
Develop alternative markets and alternative technologies. Encourage phased development of alternative of alternative uses to emphasize value-added products. Encourage development of technology that does not require colored glass to meet customer specifications of technology which would accept mixed colors.
Work towards formalizing definitions and performance standards to facilitate communication among generators, recyclers and manufacturers to meet industry needs.
Develop government funding for research and development in alternative markets and technologies for all types of waste generated. Provide tax credits for private research and development.
State and Federal Commerce Departments need to work with major consuming industries (e.g., goods/beverage suppliers) and the advertising industry to change packaging specifications to keep non-recycled/non-recyclable packaging from being designed/manufactured (Design for Recyclability).
Work to formally integrate AB2020 Program into overall IWM planning as part of the implementation of AB939.
Support equal investment in market by those establishing collection systems to assure markets are there for products.

B. A RECYCLING AGENDA FOR THE 1990'S

Introduction: The Broader Social Implications of Recycling

Since the Islip garbage barge captured national headlines just a few years ago, a recycling revolution has begun to sweep the country.
By the time of Earth Day 1900, recycling had emerged as the most tangible way that individuals could help their environment. As such, recycling became more than just a way of saving resources: it helped popularize environmentalism itself, and involved millions of people in the process of saving the earth.
This document considers recycling from a professional standpoint,; having institutionalized practices like curbside recycling, how do we now move beyond them to the new frontiers: sources reduction, composting, market development and the rest.
Before delving into those subjects, however, it is important to step back and see recycling from the vantage point of the public.
As professionals in the field, we see recycling as just one part of the reduce-reuse-recycling imperative. To the public, however, recycling is a metaphor for the full array of activities needed to build a sustainable society.
Because of this, recycling professionals need to be aware of the symbolic impact of their field - its potential to literally change the way people think about and deal with their environment.
For most people, recycling is a new way of looking at natural resources. For years, we undervalued resources, by pretending that their true cost was merely the cost of getting them out of the ground. But valuing resources according to the cost of putting a pipe in the ground is like valuing your life savings according to the cost of driving to the bank to withdraw them.
Natural resources are the earth's bank account, to withdraw for our use, then replenished for the use of future generations. Recycling recognizes this is so. This concept can extend beyond bottles and cans, to all the energy and material resources on which we depend.
Recycling's greatest impact, therefore may be as a metaphor, a lesson to be applied much more broadly. As recycling professionals, we can play an important role not just in the technical aspects of recycling, but more broadly in the environmental movement which recycling is helping to define.
For example, a broad array of economic policies undervalue natural resources. Even the Gross National Product ignores the costs of resource depletion; as a result, GNP increases as waste increases, and declines as waste is reduced. What does this say about the meaning of GNP growth? Does higher GNP imply a higher standard of living, a stronger national economy? To the person in business, the question might be restated this way; would you buy stock in Planet Earth, In.c, if you knew it was liquidating all its assets at a fraction of their value?
Recycling can also be a guide for changing our definition of the free market. For example, for decades recycled commodities have completed against subsidized primary resources. This is true even though the costs of recycled resources reflect their full costs of production, while the costs of primary resources only reflect their cost of extraction. The reason: the "free market" as defined in the past externalized depletion and pollution costs. In the future, the free market must internalize these costs, to provide a level playing field for recycling, and to minimize environmental impacts.
Specific policies which would internalize these impacts, and provide a major boost to recycling, include the following:
· Eliminate standards, subsidies and rate structures that give primary resources an advantage in taxes, transportation, garbage rates, product pricing and product procurement.
· Invest in domestic recycling industries, to promote value-added in the U.S. rather than serving as a cheap raw materials supplier to the advancing economies of the world.
· Transfer costs of waste disposal to producers through deposits, advance disposal fees, processing fees and/or "retrofit" fees.
· Establish a comprehensive national materials policy that recognized secondary materials as valuable raw materials for the reindustrialzation of America.
Adoption of these policies would not only benefit recycling, but also protect the environment more broadly. Most importantly, they would provide a framework for determining how an economy can operate in a manner than benefits the environments as well.
All social advances occur in three stages. First comes a concept, and idea that contain within it solutions to challenging social problems. Second comes innovation and experimentation, as society seeks ways to give the idea practical applications. finally comes institutionalization, as experience yields prove applications, which then are broadly implemented.
On the first Earth Day in 1970, municipal waste recycling aside from the traditional activities of scrap metal dealers and paper brokers was an idea; and imperative for the future certainly, but one in need of clear applications to move it beyond the private scrap industries from which it emerged.
The 1970s was a decade of experimentation for recycling, as environmental activists, progressive communities, and a handful of businesses developed various models for recycling; including: curbside recycling; buy-back and drop-off recycling centers; container deposits, composting and commercial/industrial recycling (source separation and material recovery facilities).
The 1980s drew from the lessons of the innovative `70s to begin the process of bringing recycling to all communities. The combination of major siting difficulties for landfills and waste-to-energy facilities, dramatically escalating costs of disposal, and the ill-fated story of the now famous garbage barge Mobro, culminated in public and professional waste managers alike turning to source reduction, recycling and composting to handle ever increasing percentages of the municipal waste stream. This was the decade that recycling moved beyond being the preoccupation of a forward-thinking minority, and came to b embraced enthusiastically by many major cities, counties, and businesses.
The 1990s now hold three epic opportunities for recycling:
· First, practical form must be given to the concept waiting to be applied in 1970: Market Development. Today Market Development remains largely an idea, its specific applications are the frontier of recycling as we enter the 1990s. Without clear planning for inevitable market fluctuations and dramatic increases in supplies of recycled materials, the promise of recycling will not be attained. Expanding collection programs in many countries threaten to flood markets with some commodities, while lack of secondary processing capacity contributes significantly to our nation's balance of trade deficit. An alternate course for this nation to pursue would be to develop a sustainable system of resource utilization, where today's used products become the feedstock locally for tomorrow's new ones.
To do this will require careful collaboration between the public and private sectors, as well as between public agencies and departments. Local governments must look beyond "solving the solid waste problem" as a public works activity. They should involved their economic development, redevelopment, community development, planning and purchasing departments to innovatively expand recycling businesses, attract new recycling product manufacturers and to buy their products. Similar state and federal resources should be applied to this aspect of recycling development. These efforts need to be expanded dramatically and quickly, until our nation is investing at least as much (by either the public or private sector) in buying recycled products as are being invested in collecting recycled material.
Similarly, local governments should ally themselves with other potential users of recycled products, or those who will benefit from their use, such as agriculture and horticultural interests.
· Second, consensus must be developed on how to design products for durability and recyclability and to factor disposal costs into the design of products to maximize source reduction.
Unilateral actions by governments to ban products or packaging, or levy significant deposits or advance disposal fees will increasingly be the response to industries who consider it their prerogative to introduce non-recyclable or non-essential products in the marketplace. Governments may also work to make it profitable for industries to do that which is beneficial to society, where there are cooperative commitments to manufacturing products which are more environmentally sound.
· Third, the challenge is to reach beyond the initial excitement in curbside, drop-ff and buyback recycling programs, to institutionalize programs that can recycled the largest fractions of the wastestream: commercial/industrial recycling and composting.
Much excitement has been generated by the fact that governments and industry have found ways to work together to implement recycling programs. local governments in particular have realized that they have tremendous ability to adjust the economic framework in which solid waste and recycling activities occur in their communities. By revising their contracts, ordinances, permits and rate structures, local governments are able to make it profitable for industry to switch from a one-way disposal orientation for waste collection and disposal, to a new era of source reduction, recycling and composting.
At the same time, it must be understood that underlying the broad public appeal for recycling is the recognition by the public that recycling contributes significantly to improving environmental quality. The public is no longer willing to accept that there has to be a choice between environmental quality and the economy. Catastrophes such as the Mobro, the Valdez, ozone depletion and the greenhouse effect have galvanized a worldwide commitment to renewed efforts of responsible environmental stewardship of the earth. Such a commitment will continue to enhance the public's interest in recycling, so long as recyclers are careful to remain true to the environmental ethics and idealism embodied in Earth Day.
The public is responding and contributing many hours of voluntary labor in all facets of recycling because they believe it is the right thing to do and makes common sense to businesses to decrease waste to avoid costly disposal options. that spirit of cooperation must be embraced and encouraged. Careful steps must be take to recognize that cooperation and to quantify how recycling has made a difference in decreasing environmental problems. The industry must also cultivate the highest quality of public/private partnerships and active public participation to maintain this unique public trust.
Trade associations, professional associations, environmental groups, public interest groups, the media and coalitions of all these interest must strive to speak forcefully and be ever vigilant in assuring that this unique public trust is not undermined by parochial interest. All those involved must view their participation.

AN E.P.I.C. OPPORTUNITY

Many of these policies were addressed in the National Policy on Recycling adopted by the National Recycling Coalition in 1986. That Policy was drafted in Fresno, California, adopted in Seattle, Washington, and reported on in Portland, Oregon after years of consensus-building throughout the country. It was originally initiated by an ad hoc Committee for a National Recycling Policy formed in the late 1970s. The National Policy on Recycling has since been circulated widely and endorsed by many local, state and national trade associations, local and state governments, environmental groups and businesses. This Recycling Agenda for the 1990s builds on that firm foundation and assumes that all the actions identified in the National Policy on Recycling will also be pursued as aggressively as the additional recommendations in this document.
The Agenda for the 1990s is intended to provide more detailed analysis and recommendations regarding issues addressed in the National Policy on Recycling, as well as introducing some new issues for policy discussion and leadership.
After this document is adopted by CRRA members, the Board of Directors intends to send it to the National Recycling Coalition, the National Recycling Advisory Council the U.S. E.P.A., all state recycling organizations, trade journals, California's Congressional delegation in Washington, D.C. and other interested parties. Subsequent revisions of the Agenda for the 1990s after it is adopted may be made by the CRRA Board of Directors, or by CRRA members through mail ballot or at the annual members' meetings.
Through this vehicle, it is hoped that CRRA can contribute to the development of a national consensus on the issues addressed in the Agenda for the 1990s, to help guide the recycling industry into the 21st century.
This is an E.P.I.C. opportunity to help channel the energy and imagination of this nation's policy makers to deal with the following issues confronting recycling.
The activities which are needed to respond to the opportunities of the 1990s may be represented by the acronym "E.P.I.C." for the four basic areas of focus which will be required.
· Equity - Policies to insure the fair economic treatment of secondary materials as compared to virgin materials, including determining the long-term costs of environmental impacts and resource depletion. Actions to expand the use of recycled materials and products would include ensuring equity in taxes, transportation, garbage rates, product pricing and product standards.
· Procurement and Market Development - To drive demand for recycled materials and products through the purchasing power of governments, industry and consumers. To expand existing recycling manufacturers and attract the development of new industries.
· Information, Public Education and Curriculum - To share ideas, disseminate new knowledge and change public habits and attitudes. To foster long-term behavioral change in society through the educational systems curriculum and provide expertise needed to implement recycling in government and industry.
· Cash - To provide funding for needed investment in recycling collection, processing and manufacturing activities.

GOAL ONE: EQUITY

National Policy on Recycling sections that apply include:

Transportation Policy
Tax Policy
Product Design for Recyclability
Public-Private Partnership

Additional Action Step: Restructure Garbage Collection Rates

Many cities offer unlimited garbage collection service for a flat fee. Once recycling services are offered so that residents can choose to waste or to recycle, a limit to the amount of waste accepted at a base price should have a significant impact on consumer behavior. This base price for garbage service in analogous to the "lifeline" services provided by utilities to provide basic service while promoting conservation. Changes in rate structure may need to be phased in gradually to diminish illegal dumping and enable generators to efficiently reduce waste. Variable can rates could also influence consumer behavior, by charging ratepayers fees which are directly proportional to the number of cans or bags they are authorized to set out. Limited or variable can rates are a critical first step toward a rate structure that discourages waste. Variable can rate structures should ideally rise steeply so that the rate for pickup of second and third cans is more than 2-3 times the rate for the first can.

Additional Action Step: Restructure Garbage Disposal Rates

Local prices set at landfills should be set at replacement costs or higher to encourage source reduction, recycling and composting, to encourage waste generators and haulers to keep recyclable materials separate from other wastes. Incentives or lower fees for "clean" loads (those that can be easily separate for post-source recycling, as in a load of wastepaper from business offices only) will enable landfill operators to produce higher quality recycled materials, and provide benefits to waste generators to encourage their participation in such programs.
Expenses for public education, research and development, and regulatory costs should be factored into the basic rates of disposal. Local solid waste plants should foster such rate restructuring.

Additional Action Step: Incorporate Disposal Costs into Product Prices

In the past, consumers have purchased products or materials without regard to the costs of disposal which are paid after the product's intended use is completed. Now that disposal capacity is recognized as a scarce resource, product disposal costs should be borne, at least in part, at the production level, where design decision are made. In this way, industries will be able to fully account for the effects of their products on the environment, and design their products to minimize such effects including the reduction of packaging. This has already begun to happen within the hazardous waste arena, where source reduction and waste minimization are recognized as the most cost effective response to the concerns raised by the proper disposal and liabilities associated with the clean-up of hazardous wastes. Consumers will then be able to choose to purchase products with a full understanding of the costs of proper disposal. In addition to the direct costs of disposal, costs for public education, product redesign incentives and disposal alternatives should be borne through product charges. In the long run, all environmental costs of a product, including its true resource costs, should be included in its prices.
Mechanisms that could be used to achieve this goal could include:
· Advance Disposal Fees, such as those to be instituted on packaging in Florida in 1992, as well as those on newsprint and other materials enacted in New jersey, and those proposed for the funding of the reauthorization of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) in Congress.
· Processing Fees, such as those established on beverage containers in California in 1987.
· Deposits, such as those established on beverage containers in many states, and those on chemical drums, batteries, automobiles, and m,any other products in various locations.

Additional Action Step: Integrated Waste Management

Policies should be adopted at local, state, and federal levels of government to pursue an integrated waste management hierarchy of priorities for solving solid waste problems. Such a hierarchy should be established consisting of source reduction, recycling/composting, transformation (including all types of capital intensive processing techniques to convert wastes from one form to another, such as gasification) and disposal (landfill). The hierarchy should place primary emphasis on implementing all feasible source reduction, recycling and composting while not precluding communities from considering transformation facilities and landfills to address waste which cannot be reduced at the source, recycled or composted. such hierarchy should govern all solid waste policies, particularly the planning for and regulations of all waste facilities.

Additional Action Steps: Maximizing Competition

Government policy should be careful in assessing how they may contribute to maximizing the vertical integration of virgin material industries (e.g., timber use and paper mills, mills and waste paper dealers, and domestic versus export firms). the horizontal integration of recycling and virgin material industries, and the horizontal integration of recycling and solid waste industries. Vertical integration should be banned where it co-opts secondary/recycled materials development. Vertically integrated companies should be encouraged to maintain assets for the long-term (like land-banking) without exploiting resources, in part by making recycling company components to be profitable. Governments should be careful in adopting policies, designing systems and awarding contracts so that they help maintain the maximum competition and foster the maximum recycling in the most effective way in the future.

Additional Action Step: Recycling Infrastructure

As recycling activities are expanded, efforts should be pursued in such a way to build upon the existing recycling infrastructure of markets, processors, collectors, sorters, (both private and non-profit) and the throughput they generate. As the existing infrastructure grows, steps should be taken to ensure cost effective design of systems, and for collection, processing and end-users to grow in size together. Incentives to increase the recycling rates should be structured so as to provide maximum benefit to those who increase the amount of recycling in an area, rather than support existing activities. Community based recyclers and non-profit recyclers should be funded and encouraged to expand into other recycling activities (such as commercial recycling pickups and public education) once public and private recycling activities are provided. Alternatively, they could be incorporated into the design of services to be provided on a more comprehensive basis.

GOAL TWO: PROCUREMENT

National Policy on Recycling sections that apply include:

Maximum Enforcement of Procurement Laws
Buy Recycled Program
Labeling
Standard-Setting Organizations

Additional Action Step: Federal Procurement Standards

Federal, state, and local governments should immediately institute recycled products procurement standards that specify minimum post-consumer recycled content and appropriate price preferences for a broad range of products. EPA has not implemented the procurement requirements in the original 1976 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), nor subsequent amendments. although some guidelines have been issued in the last year, they have been deficient in their requirements so that they will have minimal effect on stimulating greater levels of recycling. The National Recycling Coalition has sued EPA for non-compliance with the spirit and intent of RCRA, as well as specific details which would make a significant difference in the effect of EPA guidelines. State recycling associations, local and state governments and interested businesses should join with the NRC in legal actions to ensure that the Congressional intent of increasing the demand for recylcables is met.
Local and state governments should review federal and state procurement requirements (e.g., those in RCRA) to determine what additional efforts, if any, are required of them to comply with laws requiring the use of recycled materials and products when using federal and state funding for projects within that government.

Additional Action Step: Local and State Government Procurement

Ensure that specifications issued by local and state governments for materials (e.g., printing paper, janitorial supplies, motor oil, paint and landscape materials) and products (e.g., copying and printing equipment, park furniture, parking lot bumpers, and fencing materials) which are available in the marketplace containing or using recycled materials, require the highest percentage recycled content determined to be technically feasible. Local and state governments should formalize policies to enable them to pay more for materials and products with the highest percentage of recycled content (in the short-term, price preference is needed for recycled products to compete with virgin materials for many products); to purchase reusable and recycled products in all operations, and identify other products purchased by the government which could use reusable and recycled materials. Workshops should be conducted with trade associations for purchasing agents to educate them as to the options and opportunities for recycled materials and products.
Local and state governments should also:
· Reduce and reuse products to he maximum extent technically feasible. This includes using duplex copiers, plain paper faxes, durable products, and minimal packaging.
· Identify reusable or recyclable products (or less harmful, more environmentally sound products) that could replace single-use and non-recyclable products.
· Quantitatively summarize current purchasing patterns for reusable and recycled materials and products. identify potential suppliers to the Purchasing Department's buyers.
· Prepare a guide to purchasing and use of reusable and recycled products for operating departments, including a list of available materials, how to obtain them, how to minimize cost, and how departments can adapt their operations and equipment to use recycled paper and other recycled materia.s
· Prepare standard specifications that require, in government construction projects (including those done directly under contract or with the financial assistance of the government), that a minimum percentage of recycled materials (including asphalt, concrete, wood chips, hums and compost) be utilized.
Require in City grants, contracts, consultant agreements and other agreements tat printed materials be on recycled paper and that other recycled products will be used to the degree available and practical. Also require all proposed vendors to certify that they have adopted, or will adopt within 12 months, a recycled products procurement policy applying throughout their firm or organization.

Additional Action Step: Expanded Procurement by Industry and the Public

Greater attention must be given to developing demand for recycled products by industry and general consumers. Unless the cycle is altered to shift directions from past reliance on virgin materials, even the expansion of recycling manufactures in this country will only displace demand from current recycling manufacturing activities in other countries. The advertising and printing industry must be challenged to rethink the standards that are set for many products, to allow for greater use of recycled materials and products. Transportation and construction companies must be challenged to adjust their specifications for materials used in construction and landscaping to specify the highest use of recycled materials, rather than discouraging them. labeling of products as recycled will also enable the public to identify these products to prefer for their purchasing. Local governments should develop and advocate state legislation that would require that manufacturers use products with the maximum technically feasible levels of post-consumer recycled content (for example, in newspapers, office papers, printing and copy papers, glass and other products).

Additional Action Steps: Product Standards

Local, state and national laws should be adopted that ensure the highest level of recycled content available in the marketplace for newspapers, packaging and other consumer products. Wherever possible, standards should be revised to allow greater use of recycled and recyclable materials. Impediments to use of recycled products should be scrutinized carefully, including review of FDA health-related constraints on recycled materials used in a variety of food packaging and paper brightness standards. The impact of hazardous wastes regulation on recycling programs should be evaluated carefully to assure the maximum benefit to society is achieved in reducing both solid and hazardous wastes (e.g. non-bleachable inks have been introduced to decrease amount of hazardous waste from inks, but make paper non-recyclable in today's technology).

Additional Action Step: Marketing Cooperatives

Establish marketing cooperatives among interested cities and companies. Cooperatives would establish formal or informal trigger prices at which materials would be voluntarily withheld from or released for sale to markets. Such cooperatives would all respond to the need for the United States to more aggressively compete as a unified whole in international markets, where other countries have already established major public/private partnerships that dramatically affect the prices of recycled materials sold from the United States.

Additional Action Step: Contingency Planning

Local governments should be encouraged to develop contingency plans to anticipate what actions should be taken if different economic conditions develop. Contingency planning activities should include identifying materials where market demand is exceptionally weak, particularly where the loss of one market might compete the landfilling of the materials. Contingency plans should identify alternative uses for materials with weak markets, and identify any procurement policies, legislation, or economic development efforts needed to diversify markets for such materials. Priority attention should be given to markets for yard waste and all commodities of paper collected in curbside a nd commercial recycling programs. Trigger levels and mechanisms should be established to direct recycled materials to other uses once the value of materials falls below established standards. Possibilities for short-term stockpiling of materials should also be fully explored on a regional basis, although limited shelf-life and market-flooding supply stockpiles might weaken a community's negotiating position. Over the long term, the focus of contingency planning should evolve from short-term protection of recycling programs and minimization of a cit's financial risk to development of new markets and new products for recyclables.

Additional Action Steps: Recycled Materials Manufacturing Base

Recycled paper and scrap metals are the two largest export commodities on the West Coast. Although such export markets have helped to ensure the economic viability of recycling programs on the West Coast when others in the nation have struggled to find markets, it is also a sign of weakness. Like many Third World economies, we are not value-adding. The United States is becoming a supplier of basic raw materials (from recycling) which other economies are processing into much higher value materials and products, often for consumption back in the United States. To build a recycling manufacturing base will not only strengthen the demand for recycled materials, but it will also assist in resolving our nation's balance of trade deficits, and will reinvest local waste resources that contribute jobs and taxes to local economies.
Expansion of existing recycling mills and attraction of new environmentally sound manufacturing plants should be a high priority for local, state and federal governments. A concerted effort is needed to coalesce both public and private interest in recycling into an national commitment to enable the United States to be more competitive in the world economy. Financing tools such as state and local bond issues should be structure creatively to foster such market development activities, to provide the seed money or economic margin to warrant significant investment by the private sector in recycled materials manufacturing in the U.S. Small businesses should also be encouraged to start-up to provide the innovation needed to develop solutions to major problems in this field. Such an entrepreneurial emphasis will also enable the U.S. to offer new recycling services to other countries once they are developed here.

GOAL THREE: INFORMATION, PUBLIC EDUCATION AND CURRICULUM

National Policy on Recycling sections that apply include:

National Leadership for Research and Development and Technology Transfer
National Recycling Database
Recycle Week
Postage Stamp
Commercial Section Education
Curriculum Development

Additional Action Step: national Clearinghouse and Extension Service

A National Clearinghouse should be established along with a recycling extension service for recycling information, sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with the following functions:
· Maintain an up-to-date file on all significant state legislative proposals and local ordinances which seek to reduce waste or promote recycling.
· Report rapidly on the development of new collection and processing technologies, and marketing techniques as they are implemented around the nation.
· Report recycling rates for all commodities commonly collected through buy-back, drop-off, curbside recycling, commercial/industrial recycling or composting activities in a format that can be disaggregated to the level of source of data by city.
· Report on the costs of recycling (including energy and resources saved), and the costs of collecting and disposing of garbage, including avoided collection, landfill and depletion costs resulting from recycling.
· Provide information to the public through a variety of means, including 800#, publications, a computer network, PSAs and/or movies), and a recycling extension service in conjunction with state recycling associations and universities throughout the nation.
· Identify universal measures and methods of calculating toe establish level of performance and success of programs.
Similar statewide and local clearinghouses should be established.

Additional Action Step: Product Identification

"Green labelling" programs should be adopted for application to a broad array of products and packages. The Green Seal and Green Cross campaigns presently being developed by environmental and business groups should indicate products and packages that minimize waste, are reusable or have post-consumer recycled content.
Products which may only be disposed of as hazardous wastes should be labelled with that information, and required to provide a means of disposal that does not exceed the purchase price of the product. all products certified to required disposal as hazardous waste should be identified on store shelves with a particular symbol, to caution consumers of the difficulties of proper disposal.

Additional Action Step: Public Education

The public's cooperation and participation is critical to the success of recycling. Promotions of recycling should be more coordinated, comprehensive and consistent in approach, with an emphasis on "Buy Recycled" at the state level. The public should also be sought more to participate in long-term solid waste management planning.

Additional Action Step: College and University Curriculum

A national education policy is needed that emphasizes environmental quality, resource conservation, source reduction, recycling and sustainable growth, so that society can enjoy the best of science and technology and live in harmony with nature.
Solid waste management suffers from a lack of qualified personnel to carry out the broad mandates of waste reduction and recycling. In business and industry, professions are needed to maximize product durability, to ensure accommodations for recycling in building design, and to promote procurement of recycled and low -waste materials. In government, professionals are needed to implement needed programs in source reduction, recycling, procurement and market development and in shifting the solid waste system to an integrated waste management system.
Colleges and universities should develop fully-accredited degree programs for integrated waste management and recycling to train future graduates to become waste management professionals with expertise in these particular fields. Degree programs may include single-disciplinary degrees with a solid waste/ recycling emphasis (e.g. engineering and packaging design or architecture and building design for recycling) as well as interdisciplinary programs involving business, political, economic, legal, environmental and engineering perspectives.
To raise environmental consciousness and as part of general education in community colleges, colleges and universities, courses should be required in Biology of Human Survival, including emphasis on cycles in nature and essential of environmental ethics, resource management, source reduction and recycling. That course should be acceptable to replace another general education requirement.
Colleges and universities should aggressively work to develop graduate programs to research and develop innovative products from recycled materials, and to provide data and information to professional in the field as part of a nationwide recycling extension service. Colleges and universities should be encouraged to provide the maximum number of recycling opportunities for all materials on campus, to act as a model and to provide experience for volunteer and paid students to learn about recycling from an operation perspective.

Additional Action Step: K-12 Curriculum

Source reduction and recycling are not currently represented in the formal framework of environmental education in K-12 schools. The source reduction and recycling of waste must be reflected in such school curriculum in order for society to make this a daily practice. A clearinghouse to provide technical support may be useful. Consistent, coordinated statewide programs are needed to provide information on and involvement in source reduction and recycling programs at all stages of K-12 curriculum. Current science curriculums would be the first place to include a significant emphasis on these topics. Initial efforts should be made of incorporating these topics into at least four specific grade levels in the K-12 public school system. The goal should be to constantly and consistently strive to instill reduce-recycle habits and values over time.
High schools should be encouraged to provide the maximum number of recycling opportunities for all materials on campus, to act as a model and to provide experience for volunteer and paid students to learn about recycling from an operation perspective.

GOAL FOUR: CASH FOR EXPANDING RECYCLING

The National Policy on Recycling did not include any recommendation on how to fund the expansion of recycling collection/processing systems and market development activities. That is the focus of this section.

Additional Action Step: Local Funding Authority

Local governments should be authorized by state governments to enact a broad range of local fees and taxes to support all aspects of an integrated waste management program (including market development activities), and to set rates for waste collection and disposal. Integrated Waste Management fees and taxes should be authorized to be levied on waste generators, waste collectors, waste and recycling processors, transfer stations, waste-to-energy facilities and landfills. State enabling authority should require such fees and taxes to be dedicated to the specific purposes of program implementation on a cost recovery basis, and should encourage the establishment of "enterprise funds" by local governments to accurately account for these funds (and to decrease the burden on City and County General Funds). in cities or counties which have charter restrictions that require garbage collection costs to be paid out of the General Fund through general taxes, integrated waste management fees and/or taxes should be authorized in addition to supplement basic garbage collection services.
Eligible activities to be funded by such fees and taxes should include staffing, consultants, analyses and all direct and indirect costs including the actual capital costs and operating expenses for integrated waste management programs. Market development activities should include any incremental costs for purchase of recycled products previously not budgeted, and economic incentives for the expansion of existing and the attraction of new recycling product manufacturers (including assistance in permitting, financing, site acquisition and pollution control costs).
Fees and taxes should be authorized to be raised both by individual cities or counties, or jointly by several cities and/or counties working together. In the event that a regional framework is developed, revenues should be authorized to be shared for any authorized integrated waste management purposes pursued individually or jointly.

Additional Action Step: Local Rate-Setting

The costs of local source reduction, recycling and composting programs should be included as part of the costs of the overall solid waste system. Recycling programs should not be required to be shown separately on bills unless all other components of the solid waste system are itemized (e.g. collection costs, transfer costs, landfill costs, regulatory costs, fees and taxes). Costs to provide source reduction, recycling and composting services to both residential and commercial customers should be identifies to decision-makers at the same time rates are set for each sector. Incentives should be included in the rate structure to encourage source reduction, recycling and composting in both residential and commercial rate structures.
Franchise fees for the privilege of doing business in an area should be able to be adjusted during the life of collection contracts to provide an additional source of revenue for local governments to implement programs. These could be evaluated annually as part of the rate-setting and budget development processes.
Separately addressing contractor payments, franchise fees, and additional integrated waste management fees or taxes should provide local governments with significant funding authority to maximize their options to fund source reduction, recycling and composting activities. This could be facilitated by clear contractual authority for local governments to direct their contractors to bill residents and businesses at a total service rate that local governments specify (adjusted annually).

Additional Action Step: Avoided Collection/Disposal Costs

As source reduction, recycling and composting programs are instituted, costs of garbage collection and disposal are avoided by the municipality and/or its contract(s). One of the most challenging aspects of changing local systems to foster recycling will be establishing methods to accrue the avoided collection and disposal costs to the benefit of funding recycling programs. This should be done in a way that provides incentives for waste generators, collects and landfill operators to expand recycling and encourage the reduction of amounts of wastes generated and that takes into account future increasing waste disposal costs. In most instances it will require a multi-faceted program over several years time to change contract and ordinance language and the design of the solid waste system to a point where the price signals are provided to all involved to foster source reduction, recycling and composting.

Additional Action Step: Funding of State and Federal Activities

State and federal government activities in integrated waste management should be funded primarily by advanced disposal fees on manufactured wastes according to their percent contributions to landfilled wastes. Advanced disposal fees systems should be implemented in such a way as to minimize the amount of bureaucracy required to oversee the systems. Until such systems are implemented, disposal fee surcharges should be assessed at a level sufficient to fund state and federal activities. When considered together with expanded use of collection and disposal surcharges by local governments to fund their initiative, this spreads the burden of additional costs to the system on manufacturers, waste generators, waste haulers, and landfill operators in as comprehensive a way as possible.

Additional Action Step: Capital Investments in Recycling

A substantial combination of public and private investments will be required over the next decade to expand the necessary recycling infrastructure to meet goals already established and those being proposed nationally. Federal, state and local programs for economic development, community development redevelopment, research and development, and pollution control assistance should clearly authorize expenditures for source reduction, recycling and composting collection, processing and market development activities to be eligible for participation in public investment tools. Private investors, venture capitalists and alternative investment houses should all be educated as to the demand for these investments, and the prospects for r their participation in the future. Federal and state programs should be developed to encourage the maximum investment by the private sector, particularly in commercially available technologies. Federal and state programs should also be developed to encourage the maximum innovation and research and development into new technologies by both the public and private sectors, including through universities and colleges throughout the country. Primary emphasis should be on policies and investments that expand the demand for recycled products, to provide the most efficient sources of supplies for the nation's manufacturing industries.

A STRATEGY FOR CHANGE

Support RCRA Reauthorization to include as much of the National Policy on Recycling and Recycling Agenda for the 1990s recommendations as possible.
Actively enlist public in direct action implementing recycling in their communities, including petitions of support for the National Policy on Recycling ,and the Recycling Agenda for the 1990s.
Enlist assistance of media to include recycling in TV shows and news coverage, and to develop movies with emphasis on the battle to save the environment and recycling's contributions.
Seek Congressional and presidential candidate positions on recycling and solid waste issues and publicize to recycling organizations.
The National Recycling Coalition should amend the National Policy on Recycling to include items in Recycling Agenda for the 1990s.
Encourage local governments and industry to adopt CRRA's State Recycling Policy (in California), the National Policy on Recycling and the Recycling Agenda for the 1990s as legislative policy guidelines for them to use in evaluating proposed legislation