WHEREAS,
- manufactured goods and packaging constitute approximately 75% of the materials managed by solid waste facilities in the United States, based on figures by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; and
- residents and businesses in [City/County] are required to spend large sums of money to manage discarded manufactured goods and packaging; and
- hazardous and hard-to-recycle product management costs are expected to increase substantially in the short term unless policy changes are made; and
- there are significant environmental and human health impacts associated with improper management of these products; and
- New York State policy currently makes local governments responsible for achieving waste diversion goals, which is an unfunded mandate; and
- the municipal waste management system in the United States was established a century ago to manage far simpler and more homogeneous wastes like ashes, food scraps and horse manure, rather than the manufactured goods and packaging which dominate today's municipal waste stream; and
- local governments such as [City/County] have no input into the design or marketing of products, may not profit from the products and do not have the resources to adequately address the rising volume of discarded products; and
- costs paid by citizens and local governments to manage products are, in effect, subsidies to producers that enable and encourage producers to design products for disposal and without regard to end of life management; and
- some corporate producers have implemented take-back efforts which have been helpful, but there is a need for consistent industry-wide practices and this can only be accomplished by EPR legislation on a State or Federal level, and
- Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is an environmental policy approach in which producers (brand owners and importers) accept responsibility for the management of post-consumer products, so those who produce products bear the costs of recycling and responsible disposal; and
- when producers are responsible for ensuring their products are reused or recycled responsibly, and when health and environmental costs are included in the product price, there is an incentive to design products that are more durable, easier to repair and recycle, and less toxic; and
- the State of New York can advance EPR through a variety of mechanisms including requiring the manufacturers of many products sold to New York State departments to take financial responsibility for collecting and recycling those products at the end of their useful life; by incorporating EPR policies into New York State's product procurement practices; by favoring vendors and manufacturers that take back their product and associated packaging at the end of life; and
- [City/County] supports statewide efforts to hold producers responsible for hazardous product discard management and other product waste management costs;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that [City/County] intends to encourage the State of [State] to transfer responsibility for the costs of managing certain products at end-of-life to producers (brand owners and first importers); and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that [City/County] urges the New York State Legislature to enact framework EPR legislation which will give producers the incentive to design products to make them less toxic and easier to repair, reuse and recycle; and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Deputy Commissioner of the [City/County] Division of Solid Waste Management is requested to send letters to the State Legislature and State associations and to use other advocacy methods to urge support for EPR legislation; and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, the State of New York and its member agencies are urged to include EPR language, such as specifying product and packaging collection and recycling requirements, in contracts for commodities.