1 / 12

Basis for An Exemption

Review of requests from 4 manufacturers for exemption from the Plastic Trash Bag Law for the 2002 period, examining factors impacting quality standards and efforts to comply.

laken
Download Presentation

Basis for An Exemption

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Consideration of Plastic Trash Bag Manufacturer Requests for an Exemption from the Plastic Trash Bag Law for the 2002 Reporting Period

  2. Basis for An Exemption • Demonstrate lack of quality APCM • Meet Board quality standards? • Demonstrate reasonable efforts were made • Document efforts to work with suppliers

  3. Four Manufacturers Requested An Exemption for 2002 • Manufacturers requesting exemptions • Clorox • Trans Western Polymers • Poly-America • Pactiv Corporation • Board directed staff to confirm that manufacturers made “reasonable efforts”

  4. Reasons Cited For Lack of Availability of Quality APCM • Manufacturers reported the following: • Fewer suppliers in business in 2002 • Out of date Board supplier list • Insufficient collection of LLDPE feedstock • Available LLDPE going to other markets • Suppliers lacked capacity to meet orders • Customer specifications (color & strength) make use of APCM more difficult

  5. Factors Limiting Purchases As Reported By APCM Suppliers • APCM price must be lower than virgin • No follow up on: • Phone calls offering APCM, or samples submitted • What quality standards samples failed on • Potential purchase orders not completed • No feedback about steps to improve quality

  6. Issues Raised At Committee • New standard of review • Not given adequate notice • Suppliers not contacting manufacturers • There is no APCM available • Outdated Board suppliers list

  7. Poly-America, 2002 Summary: • Exempted in ‘99, ‘00, ‘01 • Used 842 tons of APCM in ‘02 • 4.1 % Recycled Content • Purchased & processed APCM into pellets • Supplied receipts documenting purchases

  8. Pactiv Corp., 2002 Summary • First exemption request • Used 357 tons of APCM • 7.5% Recycled content • Purchased and processed APCM into pellets • Supplied receipts documenting purchases

  9. Clorox Co., 2002 Summary • Exempted in ’99, ’00, and ’01 • Used no APCM in 2002 • 0% Recycled Content • Tested five samples, from 3 suppliers • None met quality standards • Could not document that they established effective communication with suppliers to resolve quality problems

  10. Trans Western Polymers Inc., 2002 Summary • Exempted in ’01 • Used 32.5 tons of APCM • 1% Recycled content • Did not purchase new APCM in 2002 • Tried to run APCM purchased in 2001 • Did not attempt to contact new suppliers to obtain better quality APCM

  11. Staff Recommendations: • Based on review of submitted documentation, follow up discussion with manufacturers, and industry surveys, staff recommends: • Select Option 1 and approve the exemptions for: • PolyAmerica • Pactiv Corp • Select Option 2 & disapprove the exemptions for: • Clorox • Trans Western

More Related