Home
Who We Are
How We Can Help
Business Assistance
Grant Assistance
Govt. Relations
California Tire Report
Sample a Recent CTR
Subscription Rates
2003 Tire Article
2001 Tire Article
Resource Links

 www.CalTireReport.com 

"MAKING GOOD ON A TIRE BILL"

by Terry Leveille

(reprinted from the December 2000 issue of Resource Recycling)

--UPDATED APRIL 2001--

"All it took was an act of God," said one pundit after California Governor Gray Davis signed into law the most far-reaching scrap tire legislation in the state’s history. He was referring to the freak lightning storm that set ablaze over five million tires on September 22, 1999, and spurred the State Legislature into action. The process culminated this fall with the deliverance of Senate Bill 876, a law increasing the fee on new tires to $1 and dedicating $39 million over the next six years to cleaning up illegal tire piles.

How It All Began

California, long touted as a leader in environmental regulation, is a laggard when it comes to tire recycling. The state’s first scrap tire law was passed in 1989, directing the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) to promote tire recycling markets by awarding grants and loans to private and public entities. In addition, the Board was required to develop regulations for the safe storage of scrap tires. Tire programs were to be funded with a 25-cent fee on scrap tires left for disposal at tire stores.

Although California generates 30 million or more scrap tires annually, and it landfills or stockpiles over 10 million, until recently the 25-cent fee brought in barely $4 million a year. After subtracting the costs for administration and fee collection, little more than $3 million was left for tire pile remediation, enforcement, permitting, hauler and market development programs.

Previous attempts to beef up the state’s Tire Recycling Fund with a fee of $1 or more were killed by anti-tax legislators and an unreceptive Republican administration. A 1997 effort to include a 32-cent "recycling rebate" to end users who diverted tires from landfills was also summarily dismissed. Not until 1999, when Senator Martha Escutia (D-Montebello) launched her seemingly quixotic legislative initiative, armed with an unflattering report on California tire programs, did a full-fledged "omnibus" tire bill emerge—initially to be financed with a $2 fee on the sale of new tires.

The State Legislature wasn’t thrilled. When the Senator tried to move the bill out of a legislative committee in 1999, it was met with yawns and quickly placed on the "Inactive File" for the rest of the year. Then, as if commanded by a higher power, came the lightning bolt from the sky.

The resulting fire near the town of Westley at the state’s largest tire pile burned for 34 days, spewing an acrid black smoke into the air that kept residents inside their homes and providing dramatic television footage in Sacramento 70 miles to the north. Within days, special hearings were hastily arranged in the immediate area and legislators heard an outpouring of public wrath from residents. A subsequent class action lawsuit attracted over 3,000 claimants who sought medical attention because of the smoke. What looked like a bill headed for the scrap heap, SB 876 was given new life.

A Bill Revived—and Revised

The 2000 legislative year in California, starting three months after the Westley fire, was expected to be a good one for scrap tire legislation, specifically SB 876. Nevertheless, new and used car dealers about to lose their traditional exemptions from such fees vehemently opposed the proposed $2 tire fee. Tire dealers also opposed the bill, arguing that in addition to angering customers with the fee, the anticipated $60 million to $80 million annual revenue stream generated by SB 876 was far too rich for a state agency that had fewer and fewer tires to clean up.

They had a point. While supporters touted the bill as the answer to tire fires because it eliminates their fuel source, the number of illegal scrap tires—once estimated at 20 million to 30 million—actually had shrunk to just one or two million. This was due to the CIWMB’s aggressive scrap tire clean up program (11.2 million tires remediated in 5 years); the Board’s threats of legal action against tire stockpilers (5.8 million tires remediated); and, most importantly, three tire fires (13.5 million tires consumed).

Despite tire dealers’ opposition, the bill’s major potential roadblock remained California’s Governor, Gray Davis, who has in the past been reluctant to sign bills that increase fees or taxes. After months of negotiating with the Governor’s staff, however, Senator Escutia agreed to lower the tire fee to $1, and the bill wriggled its way out of the Democratic-controlled State Legislature on the final day of the session. A few weeks later, the Governor signed SB 876, publicly extolling the need for increased funding for cleaning up the tire fire residue from the Westley tire fire and a previous fire in nearby Tracy.

The law, which went into effect on January 1, includes the following:

bullet

A $1 fee on new tires sold individually and those sold with new or used vehicles (including spares). The $1 fee automatically drops to 75 cents in 2007. There is no fee "sunset."

bullet

$6.5 million annually to be spent on tire pile clean ups over the next six years

bullet

A new scrap tire manifest system that will have generators, haulers and end users submit forms to the state (electronically if possible)

bullet

Tougher penalties against violators of scrap tire handling and storage laws

bullet

Provisions to make it easier for the state to prosecute violators

bullet

A requirement for the CIWMB to adopt a five-year plan of goals and priorities for the scrap tire program and each program element, and update the plan every two years

bullet

A requirement for the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to submit annually a report on the use of scrap tires in transportation and civil engineering projects

bullet

a requirement for the state Air Resources Board to submit annually a report on air emissions from tire burning facilities

bullet

A requirement for the CIWMB to spend up to $150,000 for a report on the toxicity of tire fires

bullet

An extension in the provision allowing baled tires to be landfilled

bullet

A definition of "crumb rubber" as "granules less than or equal to * inch," and exempting processed crumb from scrap tire storage limits

bullet

An exemption from storage regulations of "tire-derived product" that has been "sold and removed from the processing facility," and "used tires" that are "stacked or racked"

bullet

An allowance for local governments to give written authorization to haul an unspecified number of tires to an "amnesty day" event without a permit

bullet

An increase from four to nine the number of scrap tires that can be hauled anytime without a permit.

The Impact of Legislation

In practical terms, the CIWMB will receive $30 million to $40 million a year in revenue from the new tire fee. Traditionally, the state has allocated 50 percent for tire pile clean ups, enforcement and permits, and the other half for market development programs. Over the past 10 years, the state has spent the following on tire eradication or market development programs:

bullet

Amnesty day/public education event grants for local governments: $2.5 million

bullet

Playground cover and running track surfacing grants for school districts and local governments: $2 million

bullet

New technologies and commercialization grants for the private sector: $2.8 million

bullet

Rubberized asphalt concrete grants and contracts: $3.6 million

bullet

Civil engineering demonstration projects (road base, levy construction, septic tanks, landfill gas and leachate collection applications, etc.): $1.9 million

Additionally, because of a parks bond initiative passed by the voters in March 2000, the state is currently offering park districts $2.5 million worth of grants to upgrade playgrounds with equipment made from recycled material (plastic, metal, wood, tires, etc.). Five million more may be available in the next year.

With the state’s Tire Recycling Fund bolstered with new found revenue, the CIWMB will be on the hot seat unless it can devise a budget to handle the windfall. In its recently approved "Five Year Plan for Tire Programs, the Board has recommended funding for the following programs:

bullet

An average of $10 million per year for tire pile remediation or tire fire site clean ups, including local government assistance for tire amnesty day programs;

bullet

Up to $3 million per year for research into such things as energy recovery from tires, civil engineering uses for tires, use of fiber and steel from crumb rubber processing, etc.

bullet

Approximately $9 million annually for market development programs such as playground cover grants (using crumb rubber from California tires), private sector grants, loans for tire recyclers, etc.

bullet

A new scrap tire hauler manifest system to track scrap tires from their generation points to their ultimate destinations.

bullet

Grants to local governments to monitor and enforce tire storage regulations.

Two tire recycling industries submitted requests for subsidies. California crumb rubber processors are worried that subsidized product is making its way into the state from British Columbia, and a tire-to-energy plant says that it will help California in its energy crisis—if only the state will help it get re-started.

While the tire-to-energy plant will receive a hearing in April, the crumb rubber processors have yet to receive support for their subsidy request.

In addition to out-of-state subsidized crumb rubber and high energy costs, California tire recyclers cannot command high tipping fees because the state allows the unfettered landfilling of tires (as long as they are "permanently reduced in volume," says state policy). For example, in Southern California, tipping fees for the best customers at the huge Azusa landfill are less than $20 per ton for shreds and under $40 per ton for whole tires. Compare this to the $70 to $90 per ton that recyclers receive in the Midwest or East Coast, coupled at times with recycling reimbursements some states and Canadian provinces offer. This results in the "uneven playing field" that California crumb rubber producers cite.

With no legislative support for making it more difficult to landfill tires, or for providing a "recycling" rebate to recyclers, the onus for developing a thriving tire recycling industry in California must be on the CIWMB. With their newfound largesse, how successful the CIWMB is with its expanded grant programs, contracts and loans may mean the difference between the status quo—where, today, 35% of the scrap tires are landfilled—and a healthy, vibrant tire recycling industry.

Back to Top

 

 

Updated:  03/21/2008

Copyright © 2000 TL & Associates. All rights reserved.                    

 Questions or comments contact:  webmaster@CalTireReport.com