meeting funded by: thank you to our sponsors!. psi fluorescent lighting national dialogue meeting ©...

Meeting funded by:

Thank you to our sponsors!

http://www.govlink.org/hazwaste/

PSI Fluorescent Lighting National Dialogue Meeting

© Product Stewardship Institute, Inc.July 2008

Fluorescent Lighting Product Stewardship Initiative (Day 1)

National Dialogue Meeting #2July 15-16, 2008

Seattle, WA

2



What is the What is the Product Stewardship Institute?Product Stewardship Institute?

Non-profit environmental institute located in Boston, founded in 2000

Membership 44 State members 54 Local agency members Over 20 Adjunct Council members

Board of Directors: 7 states, 4 local agencies Multi-stakeholder product stewardship network Adjunct Council: Business & Env’l/Organizational

3



PSI Full and Affiliate State Members

4



PSI Members – Washington & Oregon Washington Department of Ecology City of Seattle King County Hazardous Waste Management

Program King County Solid Waste Management Program Kitsap County Snohomish County Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Metro Regional Government

5



PSI Projects Fluorescent lamps

Mercury thermostats

Paint

Medical sharps

Pharmaceuticals

Electronics

Radioactive devices

Telephone books

Gas cylinders

Tires

Beverage containers

Packaging

Batteries

Motor oil6



What is Product Stewardship?

“Product Stewardship" is a principle that directs all those involved in the life cycle of a product to take shared responsibility for reducing the health and environmental impacts that result from the production, use, and end-of-life management of the product.

7



PSI Role in National Dialogue

Research

Facilitate/mediate dialogue meetings

Implement projects & initiatives

Evaluate projects

8



PSI’s “Agenda”

• Promote product stewardship solutions• Reduce product impacts• Forge partnerships that share responsibility– Product management– Sustainable financing

• Get results – not just discussion

9



Stakeholder Roles• Authorized to represent company, agency, or organiz.• Attend 4 meetings (or via phone).• Actively participate between meetings.• Jointly develop agreements.• Ensure your interests/others’ interests are met.• Participation in dialogue does not preclude legislative

activity.• Negotiate in good faith.

10



Consensus

• All participants can live with decision and no one will actively block or undermine decision.

• The greater the stakeholder agreement, the greater the likelihood that the agreement will be sustainable.

11



Consensus• Consensus is preferable for broad initiatives: – Technical standards– Policies– Legislation

• Consensus is NOT needed for pilot projects or individual initiatives.

12



Possible Dialogue Outcomes

• Pilot projects with measurable results• Demonstration project to test comprehensive

program• Model state policies (e.g., procurement)• National standards

13



Possible Dialogue Outcomes

• Business innovations/profitability studies (e.g., reverse logistics potential)

• Model state or federal legislation• Model state or national education campaign• National sustainable financing system for the

management of spent lamps

14



Possible Mechanisms for Agreements

• Letter of agreement between those involved in pilot project

• Memorandum of agreement between stakeholders stating intent to perform certain activities

15



What do we want to avoid?

• Avoid multiple state solutions

• Avoid unilateral state or federal regulation

16



Overall Dialogue Goal

• Promote use of energy efficient lighting while eliminating or reducing the amount of mercury and other toxins entering the environment during the lifecycle of fluorescent lamps.

17



Specific Dialogue Goals• Reduce environmental impact of manufacture

of fluorescent lighting.• Increase manufacture and procurement of

environmentally preferable lighting.• Maximize safe collection and recycling of

spent lamps from households and businesses.• Develop nationally-coordinated system that is

financially sustainable.18



Discuss priority issues/strategies

MEETING 2

•Present Workgroup findings/plans

• Full financing discussion•Discuss additional strategies

Road Map

MEETING 3

MEETING 1

AGREEMENTS

START

April 2008 July 2008 October 2008 January/February 2009

•3 Workgroups• Develop findings

•Refine draft agreements

•Refine Workgroups •Develop findings•Draft work plans

• Present Workgroup findings/plans• Discuss additional strategies

• Start to develop draft agreements

MEETING 4

• Finalize agreements

• Develop Implementation Plan

Dialogue Meeting

Workgroup Activity

19



Meeting #1: Salt Lake City, UT• April 23-24, 2008• 24 in the room, 25 calling in at various times• Created 3 workgroups– Infrastructure (for “small”/consumer sector)– Bans & enforcement– Financing

20



Infrastructure Workgroup• Gather information relevant to the development of a

convenient collection infrastructure for residential consumers• Retailers perceived as “backbone” of a collection system

– Identified “Top 10” list of retail collection obstacles/challenges– Survey retailers that have overcome obstacles – instructive for other

retailers that may collect• Breakage

– Workgroup will continue to provide input to U.S. EPA study • What does a collection system need to look like?

– Paint Infrastructure Study • Performance goals

– Some initial discussion21



Bans & Enforcement Workgroup• Discuss strategies to increase the number of states

with bans on commercial disposal and to ensure effective enforcement of bans

• Determine whether a ban should be enacted for consumer sector lamps

• Evaluate effectiveness of existing bans• Develop model state ban and strategy for passage of

legislation• Develop compliance education/enforcement plan

22



Financing Workgroup• Research existing financing systems to develop a

common language for lamp financing discussion• Identified priority financing systems (different places,

different products)– Presentations today– Discuss generally the pros and cons of the various systems

in the context of fluorescent lamps – Discuss elements of a financing system that the dialogue

group would like to see for lamps

23



“Parking Lot” Issues• Impacts from manufacturing

– Manufacturing practices, locations– Verification of lighting qualities

• Procurement policies– Model procurement policy (MPP)– Otherwise promote “preferred” lighting options

• Public education

– Labeling– Public awareness

24



Goals and Strategies Table: Status

• Represents where PSI thinks things stand based on what we have heard

• Intended to guide discussion and track areas of agreement and need for further discussion

25



Objectives for Meeting #2• Share information on key state and local initiatives• Learn how some retailers are overcoming collection obstacles

and outline next steps for encouraging additional retailers to collect lamps

• Determine whether an infrastructure study is necessary • Determine need for comprehensive (commercial/consumer)

disposal ban and other next steps• Learn more about financing system options and identify

elements of a sustainable financing system• Discuss challenges and options for developing baseline and

target metrics 26



Objectives for Meeting #2• Evaluate priority of parking lot issues relative to other issues

discussed during this meeting• Set workgroup priorities• Identify missing stakeholders for Meeting #3 (Oct. 29-30,

Seattle)• Identify agenda items for Meeting #3

27

Meeting funded by:





Overcoming Obstacles to Retail Collection

• Consumers require a convenient collection and recycling system that:– Minimizes travel– Does not put burden on local government– Is safe for consumer and those involved in collection,

transport, recycling– Is cost effective

29



Overcoming Obstacles to Retail Collection

• Several different options exist with examples around the country– Retailers– Mail-back (with package purchased at retail or

ordered on-line)– HHW– Libraries and other public locations

30



Overcoming Obstacles to Retail Collection• Growing interest and momentum– Primarily independent/small retailers or limited

regional participation (e.g., Ace)– Range of retailers now trying out collection;

primarily hardware & home goods at this time– The Home Depot’s recent announcement

• Interest in dialogue participation• Frequently Asked Questions sheet • Posing additional questions on their program• Dialogue participation and potential store visit

31



Overcoming Obstacles to Retail Collection• Very real challenges (potential PSI retailer survey)– Space– Safety (breakage)– Employee training– Costs– Regulatory context– Liability– Consumer confusion about what to drop off (wrong

products brought in)32

Meeting funded by:





Bans & Enforcement• Commercial sector disposal ban (NY)• Comprehensive disposal bans (CA, ME, MA,

MN, NH, VT)• Disposal ban for small and large commercial

sectors• Disposal ban for consumer sector?– Adequate recycling opportunities– Widespread education– Sustainable financing system

34



Bans & EnforcementNext steps:• Evaluate effectiveness of existing bans• Develop model state ban and strategy for passage of

legislation• Develop compliance education/enforcement plan

35

meeting funded by: thank you to our sponsors!. psi fluorescent lighting national dialogue meeting ©...

Documents