The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0404.000r I I I ~. " .. ' , , .... . .' July S, H90 THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL PALO ALTO. CALIFORNIA PROPOSAl< 'l'Q RESTRICT pIS_ABLE PMS'!'IC FOOD PACkAGING Members of the Council: The intent status of requested. CIt this report Is to inform council coIK:erning the this assignmf'..nt to staff. No Council action is On April 24, 1989,. the Council directed staff -to prepare an ordinance, effective July I,. 1990, banning non-recyclable, disposable polystyre.ne and rigid plastic food service items used by restaurants, delicatessens, fast tood establishments, business cafeterias, street vendors. and grocery store meat and produce departments .. - The impetus for such an ordinar.ce ..... as that polystyrene food packaging is seen as a one-time use of a non-renewable resource. This Council direction vas one of several actions taken by Council in response to recommendations of the City's War on Waste committee. Staff has reported periodically to council on progress toward the implementation of each of the Council directives. ~yel9Pment of the ordinanc~ In early 19'90, the City Attorney prepared the initial draft of the proposed ordinance. The War on Waste COmn'littee pr()vided assistance to staff in researching any siDilar efforts by other communities and gatherill9 infor:mation helpful to formulating: the ordinance. 'the. <::o-mmittee met with representatives of plastics manufacturers, food packaging ve.ndors., local businesses, and environmental groups. S~sequent drafts of tbe ~rdinance reflected the. information ootained, and recommendations developed, by tha War on Waste committee. As 1II'ork proceeded on the ordinance, it became apparent that encouraging recycling would better serve. the needs of the city and the environment than banning the use of disposable polystyrene. staff was presented with substantial information on the characteristics of paper versus plastic food packaqinq. Staff learned that technology existed for recyclinq post-consumer waste • \ , , . '.-. \ " " \ , , \ \ ... \ • ~-;> , /~ ,,' c-, .--1.' i ~I i 1 1 I I I I , ! . :;- o Page 2 polystyrene whereas the paper alternatives, once oontaDinated with food ... could not be recycled. Furthermore, during this period, .everal representatIves of the polystyrene industry indicated to the city an interest in providinq assistance in establishing a polystyrene foa1l recycling program. If th'9 City·s qoal is to reduce the burden placed on the landfill... it yould be prudent to per-it the use of polystyrene toam. it it is recycled. Another issue which arose durinq the drafting of the ordinance involved the assessment of its environmental impacts. Comments received durIng industry review of the preliminary draft of the ordinance indicated the importance of evaluating the l1erits of paper versus plastic food packaging from several perspectives: the nature of the natural resource from vhich it is originally produced; the environmental impact of the original manufacturing process; the product's characteristIcs once it is into the waste stream: and, finally. impacts relate~ to the recycling and remanufacturing processes. At least one ordinance enacted elsewhere waa au-cc.essfully challenged on the ba.sis. of an inadequate environmental assessment (Suffolk County, New York.) . Before a final draft ordinance Is presented for consideration, the City Attorney will verify that the appropriate environmental document has been prepared and noticed. Polystyrene Recycling Technology Kanufact.urars have recycled the scrap from the production of polystyrene products for quite some time, but it Is only recently tbat. the capability has been developed to recycle post-consumer polystyrene, i.e., products such as styrofoam cups that have been use~ and discarded. Plastics .anufacturers and ~ajor users have been instrumental in setting up pilot recycling facilities across the United States. The technology is continuing to evoive as more waste is collected and made available to the recycling facilities. At this time, the recyclers prefer to hand1e only a single type of plastic resin and discourage mlxe~ plastics collection. At least one facility is now operating in the vicinity of the south Bay which can handle post-consumer polystyrend foam a Recycling of post-consumer pol}'styrene does not mean that it will be reused in the same form. The foam cup or tray will not co~e back as another food service iteD, but instead as another type of polystyrene product, e.q., plastic -lumber-, i.nsulation board, office products, house~ares, or video tape cassettes. Tbe recycling process involves oonvertinq the waste polystyrene foam into flakes, qranules, and pellets 'Which can then be sold to companies Which zanufacture the new end products. 0IR:&04:0 C'",··,' -, • I r j I I I f ! • " _.-.. ,', ·1 I .. , i '. -v . , . , \ . . . _-:: __ --~._-~_:. ~_'-n_:_~ .--....,... ....... ____ ._~p*__&w_ :"1 - Paqe ) The long term viability of the recycling process will depend on a continuing market for the rec:l'cled polystyrene~ It the City advocates the recycllnq of polystyrene foall, it may wish to consider including a preference tor products manuf~ctured from recyclea: polystyrene in the city's proc1Jrement policy .. Recycl~J)g Polystyrene Foam in Palo~ltQ The Peninsula Conservation Center (PCC) has taken a leadsrship role locally to encourage representatives of the polystyrene industry to consider assisting in the organization of a pilot program for recyclinq polystyrene foam in Palo Alto. If an effective program can ce developed in Palo Alto, it can serve as a model tor other communities. Critical elements in t~e establishment of a successful program for recycling polystyrene foam include the following: identifying the Ilajor polystyrene generators in the City: acquiring and placing recycling bins in the approprIate locations; detenaininq a means to collect and transport the material to a recycling facility; developing a publicity program related to the recycling effort. Because of the current constraints of recycling technology. the pilot prograa would involve only polystyrene foam and not the rigid plastiC which the Council had also directed be addressed in the ordinance. However. the program would be able to collect polystyrene foam used in applications other than food packaging, sucb as tile toaa packaging used in shipping various items. Inclusion in the cityrs residential c~rbsid~ recycling program is not contemplated at this time. Strong educational and publicity efforts will be essential for the success 'Of the recycling program~ The common public perception has been that polystyrene is harmful to the enviror~ent and the choice of paper is always preferable. Hovever, if the recycling of the polystyrene foam allows the reuse of this non-renewable resource and lessens the quantity of food packaging in the waste stream, it can be shown to be preferable to the paper alternative if it is actually recycled. Chlorofluorocarbons (Cres) are no longer used as a blowing agent in the manufacture of polystyrene. (The Palo Alto city Council previously prOhibited the use of food packaging Ilanufactured with CFCs with the acloptlon of ordinance '3869 in 1989.) . Legislation which became-effective January 1, 1990 requires all cities and counties to achieve a 25' reduction in solid waste CMR:&04: ° . .,.. , -,..,.- :~~~~: .t{ <;"C' ~:~~~\. . ~ .-----,-;:, -. ~::--. ---_.- o " , , currently landfilled by 1995 and a SO, reduction by the year 200'0. Implementation of a polystyrene foam recycling pr09rall in the community, with a system for documenting the quantity of material collected, would assist the City 1n complyinq with the AB 939 mandate. Source reduction .. however .. Ilust continue to be the city's top priority. ~JtlsiQ.n Unless Council directs o-therwise, staff will delay brlnqill9 the proposed ordinance to council for consld:eration at this time. There is an apparent enthusiasm in the community to set up a pilot recycling proqraJI and a willingness on the part of the polystyrene Industry.to participate. It 15 desirable, in staft's opinion, to encourage a voluntary cooperative approach involving the Pee, the polystyrene Ind,ustry, and local businesses. Start "ill report back to Council in six months concerninq the l.plementation of the voluntary pilot polystyrene recycling program. This time period is premised on the expectatIon that 90 days vill be required to put the program In place and another 90 days will peralt preliminarf evaluation of its etfectlveness~ If the polystyrene industry and the community should prove unsuccessful in their efforts to establish the pilot program, staff will schedule the draft ordinance for Council consideration. Copies of this informational staft report are heing sent to the various organizations" t!rIlS" and individuals who have inquired about the status of the proposed ordinance. Respectfully sUbmitted. kt:tfi~~- VICCI ~D~ Assistant to the city Manager Cfu.ru-~y JUNE FLEXING Assistant City Manager .. '#kL~~ 0~'<o0~f0--<-- XICHAEL H. MILLER Deputy Director, Public works Operations CKR:404:0 L DAVID G. ADAXS Director of Public Works I ~ r ' f I 1 ~ • -. \-. '-, , \ \. ! I -.; 1 ~ '._'. -I I'~f(.'~_~;, ~ ~ -- o Page 5 ce: War on waste committee Debbie xytels, Executive center Director, PenInsula conservation susan Murphy, Dart Industries Dennis J. Nemura, James River Corporation Walter E. Roberts, Richard F. Gamble , Ass?Ciates Louis Gonzalez, Sateway Stores, Inc. sandie 3. Preiss, Sweetheart CUp Company John LewM,e:nk:o, SCott Worldwide Food Service James Burden, Mobil Chemical company Tom L. J:ornegay. Jr .. , Amoco Foall Products. Company Brigitte Seifert, Dow chemical U.S.A. steve SCarpulla, 11 Fornalo Corporate Offices Cynthia Dettner, Local Government services Yvonne Hunter, League of California cities Natalie west, Meyers, Nave, Riback , West Einar Berqstedt, Xentucky Fried Chicken conrad Freem.an .. HcDonC'l,la' s George Kakrauer, Amko Plastics, Inc. Frank Moffett, Northern CalifornIa Grocers Association Becky cox, Epoch Foods Dale E. Arthur. styrotek, Inc~ Melissa Kunde, oregonians for Recycling' Responsible Packaging Paul J. Mitchell, Carl Karcher Enterprises Leo Prather, Lucky Stores. Inc. Bruce D. Perl son, Quantum Chemical Corporation Barbara Price, project AdVocates Sandra Jerabek, Californians AgaInst Waste Foundation Jim Benfield, Committee for Environmentally Effective Packaging Arthur Graham, Free Flow Packaging Corp. QIR,404:0 •