September/October 1989
More and more states are legislating used-lead-acid battery regulations to keep these items out of landfills and off roadsides. Read on to learn about the states’ varied laws and proposals and the questions being posed by recyclers.
By Janice Walls
Janice Walls is director of state government programs for the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Washington, D.C.
Although the national recycling rate of lead-acid batteries has been reported at around 80 percent, state lawmakers remain concerned about the estimated 140,000 tons of lead per year that is not being recycled. When batteries are discarded in the solid waste stream, in landfills, and in incinerators, or are dumped along highways or other unauthorized locations, legislators are prompted to take action. What follows is a review of several existing battery laws and pending 1989 state battery legislation and an outline of future prospects for battery legislation.
What happens to used batteries is being discussed at statehouses nationwide as legislators focus on the environmental, health, and safety issues associated with improperly discarded batteries. During the 1989 state legislative session, 16 states introduced bills dealing with the disposal of used batteries--specifically, used motor vehicle batteries. These state proposals, aimed at facilitating the removal of old batteries from the solid waste stream, have been spurred by the overall concern about solid waste reduction and the increased emphasis on recycling.
Three States' Approaches to Used Batteries
The original Rhode Island battery law, the 1987 Rhode Island Battery Deposit and Control Act (HB 6105), stated that all batteries sold in the state would have a $5.00 refund value paid to a purchaser by the battery retailer when a battery is returned. The law also mandated that batteries would be stamped to show the name of the dealer. Under this deposit system, the battery retailer is entitled to a handling charge of at least 50 cents from the battery distributor. However, the Rhode Island Legislature subsequently amended the law to create a "deposit in lieu of" system: there is a $5.00 fee on all new batteries purchased if a used battery is not traded in. A retailer cannot refuse to accept a used battery. Currently, regulations are being drafted to implement the revised law. The indiscriminate dumping of batteries is banned, and used batteries can only be disposed of by a facility operated by the state's Solid Waste Management Corporation or by a licensed recycling business.
The other approach to used batteries often cited by policymakers addressing lead-acid battery legislation is the 1987 Minnesota law (HF 794) that establishes a "take-back" system for batteries: a retailer selling batteries must "accept, at the point of transfer, lead-acid batteries from customers" and must post written notice that, among other things, reminds people that batteries are recyclable and that it is illegal to put batteries in the garbage. Included in this law is a provision that a battery wholesaler must also accept, at the point of transfer, lead-acid batteries from retailers.
Under this Minnesota law, effective January 1, 1988, scrap processors, salvage yards, battery haulers, and retailers are considered under the "generators and collectors" category of battery handlers. Another category, "reclaimers," includes battery breaking operations and secondary lead smelters. Prompted by the battery law, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has developed a fact sheet for battery handlers that outlines the requirements for indoor and outdoor used battery storage, emphasizing that "it is generally easier to comply with the rules for indoor storage areas."
Last year, Pennsylvania passed a solid waste bill, SB 528 (Act 101, signed July 28, 1988) that included a ban on disposal of lead-acid batteries in mixed municipal waste. Under this ban, lead-acid batteries must be taken to a recycler or a lead smelter or must be exchanged at a battery retailer.
Battery Proposals in 1989
Ironically, battery handling in Minnesota came under scrutiny again in the state during a discussion of SF 95, the proposed comprehensive recycling bill that was killed in the last few minutes of the 1989 legislative session. Battery language in SF 95 included a misdemeanor charge against a person who illegally disposes of a lead-acid battery in solid waste, and a requirement that a person who transports used batteries from a retailer must deliver the batteries to a recycling facility. However, while this recent Minnesota battery language failed to pass, there have been several other states that either have passed a battery bill or have battery legislation pending as of mid-1989.
California. California Senate Bill 1594 would require a lead-acid battery purchaser to pay a $5.00 "core charge" unless the purchaser exchanges a used battery within 30 days of the purchase. The core charge funds would be made available to the California Waste Management Board to promote the collection and recycling of lead-acid batteries through a newly created Lead Acid Battery Recycling Management Fund. This core charge idea, a third approach to battery collection, has been proposed as another inducement for battery recycling in several states. As of early June, SB 1594 had passed the senate and had been sent to the assembly.
Hawaii. Hawaii House Bill 1445, signed by the governor June 14, provides for lead-acid battery recycling and prohibits placing used batteries in mixed municipal solid waste. It prohibits disposal of a lead-acid battery except by delivery to an automotive battery retailer or wholesaler, to an authorized collection or recycling facility, or to a secondary lead smelter permitted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Illinois. Like some other states that considered battery legislation this year, Illinois had several proposals introduced during the 1989 session, including two house bills. House Bill 2020, banning landfilling lead-acid batteries (among other things), remains in the Senate Committee on Energy and Environment. HB 2453 imposes a $5.00 deposit fee on lead-acid batteries that would be collected by the Revenue Department in the Solid Waste Management Fund (the money collected would go toward battery recycling). The state's House Committee on Energy, Environment and Natural Resources passed the bill in early May.
Massachusetts. Several Massachusetts battery bills, including HB 1783 and SB 67, were introduced early in the session. HB 1783 proposes a $10.00 deposit fee, with $9.00 refunded if a used battery is returned. This bill moved from the Joint Committee on Natural Resources and Agriculture in mid-May. SB 67, as originally introduced, had required a $5.00 deposit on the purchase of motor vehicle batteries (the original Rhode Island approach). However, the sponsor has since substituted the Battery Council International's proposed model battery recycling legislation, which is primarily the Minnesota take-back approach. SB 67 is currently in the Senate Ways and Means Committee. Given the serious budget discussions preoccupying Massachusetts legislators, it is unlikely that any bill with a fiscal impact, including these battery bills, will pass this year.
Michigan. Michigan SB 288, as originally proposed, had a $6.00 deposit on new batteries and a $5.00 refund if an old battery was returned. As passed by the senate, the bill has been amended and now requires that, beginning January 1992, a person purchasing a lead-acid battery from a retailer pay a $6.00 deposit; if a used battery is returned at the time of purchase or within eight calendar days, a full refund of $6.00 is made. A person can dispose of lead-acid batteries through a retailer or through a collection, recycling, or smelting facility approved by the appropriate state agency. As in Minnesota, retailers must post signs regarding the recyclability of used batteries and must warn against the illegal disposal of used batteries. As of mid-June, this bill was in the House Conservation, Recreation and Environment Committee.
Oregon. Oregon was another state with multiple battery bills this year, with one bill, HB 3305, signed into law June 6. HB 3305 prohibits used batteries in mixed municipal solid waste and requires that used batteries be delivered to a lead-acid battery retailer or wholesaler, to an authorized collection or recycling facility, or to a secondary lead smelter permitted by a state or by U.S. EPA. After December 31, 1993, retailers and-wholesalers must accept used batteries of the same type purchased from a customer at the point of transfer, in a quantity at least equal to the number of new batteries purchased. Violators of this portion of the law can incur a civil penalty of up to $500 for each violation.
Washington. The new Washington state solid waste law (HB 1671), signed May 15, prohibits disposing of batteries in landfills or in incinerators and institutes a core charge to be included in the price of a battery, which is deleted from the sales price if a used battery of equivalent size is traded in.
Among the states with battery legislation that either did not pass before the session ended or did not progress much beyond original introduction were Florida, Maryland, Mississippi, New Jersey, and New York. It must be noted, though, that of these states, New Jersey is still in session, and governor's actions had not been completed in Maine and Rhode Island at press deadline.
Future State Battery Laws: Will They Address Recyclers' Concerns?
As the above bills illustrate, several state battery bills have received considerable legislative action as policymakers determined how to regulate or control used-battery disposal. Assuming legislators continue their belief that government must intervene for proper disposal of these items, what direction will future laws take?
Legislators have several options: a straight-deposit type of bill (the original Rhode Island approach); a take-back bill (similar to what Minnesota has); or a combination of these two approaches through the core charge or surcharge idea where, for example, the price for a battery is reduced by a given amount if a used battery is returned at the time of sale or within a given period of time.
Malcolm Nordstrom, manager of smelter sales for RSR--the largest independent, nonintegrated secondary lead smelter in the U.S., with plants in New York, Indiana, and California--outlined the fundamental issue that legislators should be addressing: Since it is generally accepted that 100 percent of those batteries entering the recycling chain are recycled, the question is how to get all used batteries into that chain. Nordstrom believes "the scrap collection and recycling system can handle as many used batteries as exist," and that the public must be made aware of why it is critical to get old batteries into the recycling chain.
Battery Council International (BCI) has drafted proposed battery recycling legislation. BCI's model legislation, based on the Minnesota battery law that it helped draft and pass, prohibits placing used lead-acid batteries in mixed municipal waste and any other disposal, "except by delivery to a battery retailer or wholesaler, or to a secondary lead smelter, or to a collection or recycling facility authorized" under state law or by U.S. EPA. This model proposes that a retailer accept a used battery when a new battery is purchased, advocating that retailers post adequate notice reminding customers that it is illegal to improperly dispose of used batteries and that batteries are recyclable.
Ed Puckett, general manager of the resource and recycling division of GNB, Inc., the largest integrated battery manufacturer in the U.S., headquartered in St. Paul, Minnesota, indicates that there exists a "good structure in the U.S. for battery recycling, but new regulations are causing smelters increasing difficulty in achieving compliance." His point is worth remembering for legislators: If any part of the battery recycling chain cannot function and goes out of business, will there be a worse problem with used batteries than the one that currently exists? Both Puckett and Nordstrom indicate that used batteries will continue to be a critical issue for states as long as used batteries are improperly or illegally discarded. Adds Nordstrom, "A [battery] deposit system only creates another level of administration for a state to handle."
From a recycler's point of view, several questions must be addressed before a decision is made to support any type of battery legislation.
What type of regulations will be effective if batteries are handled?
What will happen with batteries that are not stamped with the state identification (which may thus be ineligible for a handling fee under a state law)?
Will a recycler be held liable under a joint-and-several standard of liability versus a negligence-based standard of liability for handling this material?
Are scrap processors potential participants under proposed battery legislation? If a proposal does not include scrap processors as part of that "recycling chain," what is to happen to those currently handling batteries?
The Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries' (ISRI) Environment and Legislative Committees are currently considering what position, if any, to take on proposed battery legislation. Regardless, it is clear that proposals will continue to develop in states not currently legislating the disposal of used batteries.
The best solution to the multitude of state proposals seen year after year lies in a sensible and easy-to-comply-with battery law that allows maximum public participation, environmental safety, and, for those scrap processors who choose to handle batteries, a set of guidelines that are operationally and environmentally workable.
Battery Scrap Supplies: Better Check the Weather Forecast
By Robert J. Garino
Far and away the largest end-use market for lead is batteries for starting, lighting, and ignition purposes and for industrial applications such as forklift trucks and standby power sources. According to preliminary estimates by the U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1.2 million metric tons of lead were consumed last year, of which more than 75 percent were directed to this one industry.
Because lead is so dependent on a single market, it is a seasonal commodity: the colder the winter, the better the replacement-battery sector performs? But what about summer? While battery manufacturers concede that march through May are slow months, some also see a summer uptick in demand that may be attributed to battery failures caused, this time, by heat. In fact, last summer's heat wave and drought were credited with sustaining a lead market that, at the time, many believed was due for a fall.
Is there a two-season battery market? While there may be some doubt, some feel that hot summers tend to weaken batteries, with any cold snap that follow delivering the knockout punch. Others say the newer cars place greater demands on their batteries, especially over the summer months, causing evaporation of the electrolyte and killing the batteries.
However, scrap processors cannot confirm a hypothetical increase in supplies of spent batteries caused by premature summer failure. In fact, by early July, battery scrap was said to be a little on the tight side--a situation considered typical for that time of year. Will scrap supplies increase later this summer? Perhaps a clue may be found by listening to the weather forecast.
Robert J. Garino is director of commodities for the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Washington, D.C. •
More and more states are legislating used-lead-acid battery regulations to keep these items out of landfills and off roadsides. Read on to learn about the states' varied laws and proposals and the questions being posed by recyclers.