issue area reports | energy and environment
this organization to collect that specific type of packaging statewide .
This program would have duplicated the existing waste management infrastructure in the state by creating several redundant organizations responsible for collecting different materials and would add to consumer confusion about recycling while further increasing the cost of products . Additional fees collected would go to cities and counties to fund their solid waste programs . The bill covered all types of packaging materials and was based off programs in British Columbia and Ontario with the goal of reducing plastic use by incentivizing other material types . Based on the experience of these programs , the actual result is that consumer goods increase in price and businesses pay more without seeing any reduction in plastic use . AWB opposed the bill , which died .
Sen . Shelly Short , R-Addy , is Republican floor leader in the Senate and ranking minority member of the Environment , Energy & Technology Committee .
chemicals in cosmetics . While both bills got heavily worked during session and , there remains strong pressure for the state to move faster to regulate products with certain chemicals in them . Advocates argued that the passage of the Safer Products program in 2019 , which grants Ecology the authority to take on any chemical used in commerce , would negate the need for the Legislature to have to direct the agency . It appears that the pace of the existing program is not enough to satisfy the advocates and more chemical bills will continue to be seen in the Legislature . epr bills
SB 5697 renewing washington ’ s recycling system and reducing waste
Failed / AWB Opposed
SB 5697 was the return of last year ’ s EPR bill in all but name . This would require producers of products sold in the state to fund and join an organization ( or organizations ) to manage the collection and recycling of their packaging . Producers or NGOs would be incentivized to create an organization specific for packaging types ( dairy and yogurt containers for example ) and then producers would pay
HB 1896 expanding battery collection
Failed / AWB Opposed
This bill created a program for the collection and recycling of all used batteries or products with batteries in the state . While the issue of battery material recovery is supported by the AWB membership , this bill ’ s scope was far too big . It ignored the existing and successful battery collection programs that currently operate effectively in the state for certain battery types . Furthermore , the bill covered every product with a battery , regardless of battery type or chemistry . This included everything from EV batteries in vehicles to singing birthday cards . Retailers were required to track any of these products which they sold . While there were some good ideas in the bill about diverting useful minerals away from landfills , the bill was too large and unwieldly . AWB and our members pushed a more narrowly focused bill , however
Bill considered as part of AWB ’ s voting record
Favorable outcome for Washington businesses
Missed Opportunities
special edition 2022 25