Editor – Page 23 – Northern California Recycling Association

Loving Reusables in the Time of COVID

By David Krueger, NCRA President, 6/9/20
Editors note: Most, but not all of these links are downloadable pdfs.
There has been a lot of confusion lately about whether or not stores and restaurants are allowed to let customers bring their own shopping bags, mugs, or other reusable items. While the State does not prohibit reusables, local jurisdictions are allowed to have COVID-19 regulations that are stricter than the State’s. (Packaging Law, 4/22/20)

On March 16, 2020 Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and San Mateo Counties, plus the City and County of San Francisco and the City of Berkeley issued identical Shelter-in-Place Orders. (APNews, 3/16/20) These Orders all contained the same language on reusables, found in Appendix A: Social Distancing Protocol, Measures to Prevent Unnecessary Contact, which is a checklist for businesses to follow. The specific language was: __ Not permitting customers to bring their own bags, mugs, or other reusable items from home.

Relaxed Restrictions
The Shelter-In-Place Orders have been changing rapidly since March, and the Bay Area jurisdictions listed above no longer have identical Orders.

Alameda County, (Page 6) and the City of Berkeley, (Page 7) now state: “Customers are permitted to bring their own bags, mugs, or other reusable items from home, but they must not place them on any surfaces.” Stopwaste is seeking clarification from Alameda County and the City of Berkeley regarding the definition of “surfaces” before educating the public about this new Order.

Santa Clara County (Page 4) still says “Do not allow customers to use their own cups or other reusable food containers from home for takeaway”, but allows customers to use their own shopping bags as long as businesses “Require customers using reusable bags from home to bag their own groceries”.

Still Prohibiting Reusables
Contra Costa County, (Page 2)
Marin County, (Page 6)
Napa County, (Page 2)
San Francisco, (Page 2)
San Mateo County, (Page 2)
Santa Cruz County, (Page 2)
Solano County – TBD
Sonoma County, (Page 3)

NCRA Recommendations and Suggested Actions
NCRA and Californians Against Waste recommend using Mendocino County’s (Attachment A, Page 24) language regarding reusables: “Not permitting customers to bring their own bags, mugs, or other reusable items from home that must be handled by employees. Customers bringing their own reusable items that do not require handling by employees is permissible.”

We also recommend that customers be allowed to bring their own reusable shopping bags as long as the customers and the store follow the Cal-OSHA guidelines for the safe use of reusable bags (pdf):

- Bags are not placed on conveyor belts or any other area outside of shopping carts.
- Bags make no contact with employees.
- Customers bag their own groceries.
- Customers do not bag groceries in the checkout area if they cannot maintain physical distancing. Groceries can be placed in a cart and bagged elsewhere by the customer.
- Increase the frequency of disinfection in bagging areas used by customers.

On April 21, 2020 NCRA sent letters to six of the prohibiting jurisdictions listed above encouraging them to allow reusables. On April 27, 2020, NCRA signed on to the attached letter organized by Upstream Solutions. On June 10, we sent eight letters encouraging the receiptant jurisdiction revise their order as per Mendocino County’s (Attachment A, Page 24) . (See each (NCRA LETTER) in Health Officer List below.

What Can You Do?
1. SHOP WITH REUSABLES
When reusables are “legal” again, shop at establishments that allow them and encourage others to follow. Note that some stores and restaurants may still choose to prohibit reusables even if they are not required to.

Here is bagging advice from Zero Waste Sonoma: However, you can still use reusable bags; just leave them in your vehicle, or if you don’t drive to the store, keep them in a backpack or handbag, and ask the bagger to place groceries directly into the cart at checkout. When you exit the store, transfer items from the cart into your bags. As an extra precaution, wash your bags between uses.

2. WRITE YOUR HEALTH OFFICER
Please write your local health officials to allow reusables again. Encourage them to adopt the Mendocino County Attachment A language. “Not permitting customers to bring their own bags, mugs, or other reusable items from home that must be handled by employees. Customers bringing their own reusable items that do not require handling by employees is permissible.” (See each (NCRA LETTER) in Health Officer List below.

Bay Area Health Officials and Sample Letters
Dr. Erica Pan, Interim Health Officer (NCRA LETTER)
Alameda County Public Health Department
1000 Broadway Suite 500, Oakland, CA 94607
510 267-3200, Erica.Pan@acgov.org

Lisa B. Hernandez, MD, MPH, Health Officer (NCRA LETTER)
City of Berkeley, Health Housing, and Community Services
1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor, Berkeley, CA 94704
510 981-5308, Fax: 510 981 5395, lihernandez@cityofberkeley.info

Christopher Farnitano, MD, Health Officer (NCRA LETTER)
Contra Costa County Health Services
50 Douglas Drive, Suite 310-A, Martinez, CA 94553
925 957-2679, Chris.Farnitano@hsd.cccounty.us

Matthew Willis, MD, KPH, Public Health Officer and Benita McLarin, Director (NCRA LETTER)
Marin County Health and Human Services
3240 Kerner Boulevard, San Rafael, CA 94903
415 473-4163, bmclarin@marincounty.org; mwillis@marincounty.org

Tomás J. Aragón, MD, DrPH, Health Officer (NCRA LETTER)
San Francisco City and County Department of Public Health
101 Grove Street, Room 308, San Francisco, CA 94102
415 554-2710, tomas.aragon@sfdph.org

Scott Morrow, MD, MPH, Health Officer and Cassius Lockett, Director (SAMPLE LETTER)
San Mateo County Public Health Department (NCRA LETTER)
225 37th Avenue, San Mateo, CA 94403
650 573-2519, smorrow@smcgov.org; clockett@smcgov.org

Sara H. Cody, MD, Health Officer (NCRA LETTER)
Santa Clara County Public Health Department
976 Lenzen Avenue, 2nd Floor, San Jose, CA 95126
408 792-3798, sara.cody@phd.sccgov.org

Gail Newel MD, Health Officer (NCRA LETTER)
County of Santa Cruz Health Services Agency
Post Office Box 962, 1080 Emeline Ave., Santa Cruz, CA 95061-0962
831 454-4000, Fax: 831 454-4488, gail.newel@santacruzcounty.us

Dr. Sundari Mase, Interim Health Officer (NCRA LETTER I/P)
Sonoma County Department of Health Services
1450 Neotomas Avenue, Suite 200
Santa Rosa, CA 95405

# # #

Conscious Container – 21st Century Bottle Reuse

By Caren McNamara, Founder/CEO, 06/10/20
Refillable/Reusable/Returnable glass bottle systems can deliver an economically viable and environmental impactful solution to reduce single-use bottle packaging waste, as long demonstrated by refillable bottle systems all around the world.

Conscious Container was incorporated as a California Benefit Corporation – B Corp, in early 2017 to create a refillable glass bottle system here in the United States. Over the past 3 years Conscious Container has been conducting ‘proof of concept’ glass bottle collection pilots in Northern California and Northern Nevada. Pilots included an incentive-based drop-off program in Nevada, a donation-based drop-off program and a CRV redemption-based program in Northern California. Becoming a certified ‘Processor’ in the CalRecycle CRV system allowed Conscious Container to pilot with a recycler to separate specific CRV bottle for washing and refilling. These pilots provided insights on how a refillable system could operate while creating strategic partnerships with beverage producers, recyclers, waste haulers, non-profit organizations, policymakers and industry thought leaders.

In the later part of 2019 Conscious Container was asked to present our refillable program at several large industry events, including the Resource Recycling Conference in New Orleans and the Sustainable Packaging Coalition member event in Denver. From these events large beverage producers and retailers began to approach Conscious Container to learn more about our refillable business model, several of whom operate refillable/returnable bottle systems in other countries.

One company, Anheuser Busch InBev (ABInBev), encouraged Conscious Container to apply for their 100+ Sustainability Accelerator program. In early 2020 Conscious Container was one of seventeen start-up companies from around the world select to join the Accelerator program to conduct our business solution pilot in 2020. Although the pilot is a bit delayed due to COVID19 requirements, the partners intended to launch a refillable pilot in the San Francisco North Bay hopefully in Q3. Additionally, Conscious Container was honored with an invitation to join the Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s CE100 program which allows this innovative start-up a seat at the table to create circular economy solutions with large global producer Foundation members.

Conscious Container’s vision of ‘A World of Reuse Cultures & Economies’ stands out front. And, moving the needle on reducing our single use packaging waste, as many of you know, requires collaboration across many ecosystems. As Conscious Container’s Founder Caren McNamara often states, “Here we go…”.

Here is a short video about Conscious Container’s partnership with the ABInBev 100+ Sustainability Accelerator program.

# # #

Berkeley Moves The Ball Forward For Salvage and Reuse

From left: Urban Ore staff – Elias Soto, Max Wechsler and Jose Luis Soto. Photo by now forgotten City staff person circa 2011.

By Max Wechsler, Operations Manager, Urban Ore Inc., 6/9/20
On June 2, the Berkeley City Council adopted a resolution authorizing the City Manager to extend its contract with Urban Ore for another 3 years!

Importantly, the new contract reinstates the company’s salvage service fee for every ton rescued from the transfer station to be sold for reuse or recycling. The resolution was written by Berkeley’s Department of Public Works and was passed on the consent calendar. It states that, “the new contract will allow the City to continue reduction of landfilling reusable materials and support the City’s Zero Waste Goal to reduce materials to be landfilled”.

Some history: Urban Ore has been salvaging in Berkeley since 1980. In the year 2000, for two main reasons, the City began paying the business for its salvage service. First, the enforcement of AB939 was about to take effect, and the City was incentivized to meet the state’s diversion requirements. Second, Urban Ore was in the middle of a big move to its current location. Councilwoman Linda Maio led Council to label Urban Ore a “Berkeley treasure” and support it both financially and administratively to help it through the move. Various measures were taken, including the invention of the salvage service fee, which is largely credited to Tania Levy, who was working for the Solid Waste Division – now the Zero Waste Division – of the Department of Public Works.

The invention was elegant indeed, recognizing that reuse and recycling aren’t free; these services involve significant labor and capital costs. The City of Berkeley owns and operates its own transfer station. If the City pays X dollars to send one ton of material to the landfill, doesn’t it make sense to pay X dollars to keep the same material out of the landfill? With that in mind, the City began payments in 2000, first at $30 per ton, and then $40 per ton – always slightly less than the landfill disposal fee. This continued until the Great Recession created a budget crisis for the City, and the salvage service fee was removed from the 2012 contract renewal.

Now, eight years later, the salvage service fee has been reinstated, and for the first time ever, the City is paying Urban Ore the exact amount per ton, $47.74, as it is to Waste Management, Inc. for landfill disposal. This is good news not only for Urban Ore, but conceptually, it is a game changer because it recognizes that Zero Waste services deserve at least the same amount of compensation as do Waste services because Zero Waste services create a variety of economic, environmental, and social benefits that wasting does not. Actually, one can quite reasonably make the argument that a Zero Waste service should be paid more than the alternative, but this is a good start! Here is the summary of the benefits that we create, taken from my public comment to City Council:

Economically, the City’s landfill tipping fees decrease proportionally to our salvage service payments, so the direct cost is a wash to the City. However, Urban Ore’s goods and services create interesting economic multiplier effects that landfilling does not. We provide inexpensive, quality goods to our customers, thus saving the local community money and increasing the profit margins for other small businesses. For example, contractors buy lumber and vintage door hardware from us at the lowest prices available—a shameless plug, but true! We also pay out about $100,000 to customers annually, in both cash and store credit, in exchange for dropping off high quality items for us to re-sell. This process recirculates money and goods through the local economy. Little is exported. Furthermore, as a for-profit business, in 2018 we paid $240K in sales tax, $116K in property tax, and $456K in employer’s taxes. In a “normal” non-virus situation, we employ 42 staff, which translates to 31 FTE.

Environmentally, it’s a big win that helps the City reach its Zero Waste goals. In addition to the resources that we salvage at the transfer station, we deal with thousands more tons of materials that are dropped off on our site annually. We also have a crew doing pick-ups from residences and businesses throughout the Bay Area. Our salvaging staff are trained to identify hazardous materials at the transfer station and communicate with City staff to ensure responsible handling.

Last but not least, there are intangible but very real social and community benefits which I have come to appreciate increasingly over the last four years. Urban Ore serves as a stage for a vibrant community of artists, teachers, builders, collectors, environmentalists, hipsters, do-it-yourselfers—you name it! Our customers are from every socioeconomic background and are as diverse as you will find. The 2018 New York Times article “Berkeley on a Budget” ends like this:

‘But the place that captured the Berkeley spirit as much as any place I went was Urban Ore; part salvage yard, part thrift store, it’s one of the most incredible places I’ve visited for recycled and upcycled goods. From clothing to electronics, an entire section of loose doors (yes, doors) and a yard full of toilets and sinks, you can easily spend a few hours there. It’s eclectic, a little chaotic and inimitable — just like Berkeley itself.”

In summary, the question for City Council was: with two equal cost options, how do we want to allocate the enterprise fund? Do we want to allocate it to Urban Ore, which generates all of the aforementioned benefits? Or, do we want to allocate it to the largest owner of landfills in the world, which involves a handful of people and some heavy equipment burying the same materials in a landfill at the headwaters of an upland creek that drains into the San Francisco Bay?

Urban Ore would like to thank the Berkeley City Council, the Berkeley Zero Waste Commission, and the Berkeley Department of Public Works, particularly Phil Harrington, Greg Apa and Heidi Obermeit. On the resolution, the list of WHEREAS’s really knocks the ball out of the park, including, “WHEREAS, Urban Ore’s proven safety record, environmental commitment, and quality customer service have made them a vital zero waste partner; and… WHEREAS, the Urban Ore salvage program is a Strategic Plan Priority Project that advances our goal to be a global leader in addressing climate change, advancing environmental justice, and protecting the environment”.

We look forward to continuing our pioneering and renowned private-public partnership for generations to come.

# # #

Don’t Suspend Bottle Bill – But Do Overhaul It

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
The views expressed here do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of the Northern California Recycling Association.

RESPONSE TO FORKASH LETTER – DON’T SUSPEND BOTTLE BILL – BUT DO OVERHAUL IT
By Jeff Donlevy, General Manager, Ming’s Resource East Bay Corp, Hayward, CA, 6/9/20, 1988
In response to his letter regarding the need to Suspend and Overhaul the Bottle Bill, Mr. Forkash makes several good points that need to be acted upon in the near future, however, several of his points are not supported by most recycling centers that make their living from the program.

Overhauling the Bottle Bill is long overdue and we are recommending items that can be done fairly quickly to help support local recycling centers. However, the suggestion to suspend the Bottle Bill completely is not a realistic option.

The Bottle Bill can be fixed. Consumers throughout California want to get their deposits back and there are people of all walks of life that are dependent on getting their California Redemption Value (CRV) deposits back. Many companies, including locally, have grown, created jobs and done very well financially since the Bottle Bill was created.

Since 1986, the Bottle Bill has helped prevent billions of used beverage containers from ending up in streams, rivers, along highways, in the bay, the ocean, or in landfills. It has helped most Californians think about recycling material in their daily lives and returns over $700 million in CRV to Californians every year. Like he indicates, the unredeemed amount needs to be improved by adding more convenient redemption opportunities for consumers including Recycling Centers, In-store take back programs, Reverse Vending Machines (RVM’s), and Bag Drop Programs.

At the start of the Pandemic in March, the request was made to the Governors office to suspend the CRV program to prevent possible spread of the Covid virus, flatten the curve, and help reduce grocers and their employees from potential exposure from the public trying to redeem their CRV deposits. In late March, the Department of Homeland Security in Washington D.C. issued a letter that emphasized recycling centers in the United States were essential businesses supplying resources and material for needed manufacturing activity and support of grocers. Recycling centers that could implement and follow CDC guidelines for safe operations, handling of material, and social distancing with customers could remain open.

By April, approximately 800-900 of the 1,200 certified recycling centers were able to remain open and help relieve the burden of grocers from having to redeem deposits in the store. Currently, the Bottle Bill supports approximately 8,000 jobs, with most recycling centers being small family owned, and a large percentage minority, owned businesses.

On April 22, Governor Newsom issued a 60-day Executive Order, allowing recycling centers to remain open less than the 30 hours per week required by the Bottle Bill and relive the grocery stores and dealers from having to redeem containers in stores. The Order is set to expire on June 22. As we emerge and move into Phase 2, 3, and 4, now is the time to help recycling centers, so more people can redeem their deposits and get that money back into the local economy.

CalRecycle has been supportive of local recycling centers, attending meetings with concerned recycling center operators in Hayward with Senator Wieckowski staff and Alameda County Supervisor Richard Valle. CalRecycle staff has toured several bay area recycling centers, including Aaron’s Metals facility in Hayward, to gather more information on the impact of closures. CalRecycle is supportive, but they are limited in what they can do.

As of June 3^rd, the Bay Area is one of the most underserved areas in the state of California for recycling centers. The Peninsula has only 3 recycling centers, East Bay has 7 recycling centers and San Jose/Santa Clara has only 6. Only 16 recycling centers for 5.2 million people. Several CRV recycling centers that were co-located with other metal recycling facilities like Aaron Metals or at solid waste facilities like Recology or Blue Line Transfer, may not re-open due to very low scrap prices for aluminum, plastic, and the underfunding by CalRecycle, as pointed out by Mr. Forkash.

Californians like to redeem their CRV deposits when the redemption locations are convenient. Curbside programs may be a ‘green’ option and convenient, but the quality and recovery of material is not the highest or best use, compared to taking material back to a CRV recycling center. With curbside programs, consumers do not get their deposits back . Curbside should be the last option, not the only option, as is the case in many northern California communities.

It is up to the Governor and Legislature to enact changes to the Bottle Bill that will help consumers redeem their deposits and get that money into the local economy, while supporting local recycling centers. We are recommending common sense reforms to help provide more redemption opportunities for consumers to redeem their deposits, including:

- - Provide additional financial relief for Recycling Centers due to low aluminum and plastic prices
  - Help grocers get made whole for redeeming CRV containers
  - Better use of Reverse Vending Machines’ (RVM’s)
  - Allow bag drop programs
  - Density based payments to recycling centers in underserved areas, like the Bay Area
  - Incentives for recyclers to open in unserved convenience zones
  - Hold cities accountable when recycling centers or redemption opportunities are not available in local jurisdictions
  - Allow CalRecycle authority to determine jurisdictional recycling zone requirements and
  - Convert funds approved under AB 54 and the Penalty account into a Matching Funds account that CalRecycle could use to help start up recycling centers, provide RVM’s, or equipment upgrades in rural or underserved areas.

We ask the Governor and Legislature to act swiftly this summer to approve legislation to help consumers get their deposits back, put money into the local economies, and support local recycling centers. Failure to do so could result in a continued collapse of the flawed program as Mr. Forkash points out. We agree with him, the recycling industry stands ready and willing to partner with the Governor, Legislature, and CalRecycle to re-build a robust recycling system worthy of the consumers it serves.