Skip to Content

[X] CLOSEMENU

Back to 2024 News Archive

NERC in the News

Coordinating Collection: Checking in with the ERCC

E-Scrap News, March 2011

As the Electronics Recycling Coordination Clearinghouse turns one, its organizers offer a summary of its many accomplishments and a hint at things to come for the new organization.

By Jason Linell

E-Scrap News

When you think of the word “harmonization” many things may come to mind – music, standards, or even tariffs.  Electronics recycling programs would likely be far down on that list. However, for the last year, members and administrators of the Electronics Recycling Coordination Clearinghouse (ERCC) have been attempting to give new meaning to the idea of harmonization by working across state lines to create a forum for information exchange and to work together to accomplish meaningful goals and projects. Through this new group, agencies and impacted stakeholders have been able to reduce the burden on their individual resources and make the implementation of electronics recycling laws more of a collaborative effort.

How We Got Here
Before summarizing the successes and activities of the first year of the ERCC, it is helpful to take a step back and review why the organization was created.  As everyone involved in the electronics recycling industry knows, there are now 24 different state laws on electronics recycling.  State legislatures have enacted these laws with varying product scopes, financing methods, and collection requirements over the last seven years with little or no data on the results of similar programs that came before them.  As a result, many of the state agencies were taking on new tasks without precedent in other states, and many manufacturers and other stakeholders were dealing with unique requirements. 

In 2007, the National Center for Electronics Recycling (NCER) began convening the state agencies tasked with implementing these laws for periodic calls to share information.  As the number of agencies and differing models grew, it became apparent that there were opportunities to do more than information exchange through a formalized structure. An organizational structure could offer the benefits of allowing for joint responses on key implementation issues, engagement with impacted stakeholders, as well as coordinated data gathering and a home for key information resources.

As it turned out, the model for such a structure already existed with the Toxics in Packaging Clearinghouse (TPCH), managed by the Northeast Recycling Council, Inc. (NERC). TPCH has demonstrated over the years that providing coordination efforts can provide benefits to and reduce costs for state governments and the regulated community in addition to providing consistency to the impacted industry.  Using this model, NCER and NERC collaborated to launch the Electronics Coordination Clearinghouse. 

Like the TPCH, the ERCC has two types of membership.  The first are the Voting Members, who are states and local governments that are implementing electronics recycling laws.  The second type is an affiliate, non-voting membership consisting of industry and other organizations. The ERCC also adopted the type of membership rate structure used by TPCH, where annual membership dues for a state is based on population and any state that has passed electronics recycling legislation is eligible for membership. Affiliate membership is open to states without legislation, industry, trade associations, NGOs, or others and is based on size or type of organization.

With the structure in place, NCER and NERC signed up 21 Founding Members in late 2009 and launched at the 2010 International Consumer Electronics Show.  One of the main purposes of the ERCC is to put member states together so that ideas and work can be shared.  For example, instead of three states individually trying to identify the contact for the same bankrupt manufacturer so that a recycling obligation can be paid, now one state can do the legwork and share the information with the rest of the member states. Many of the members have been able to avoid reinventing the wheel by sharing this type of information with one another. The ERCC provides them with the perfect platform to do this. 

It is also important to stress what the ERCC is not. First, it is not an organization that is advocating for one type of legislative approach to electronics recycling over another.  The ERCC does not take positions or become involved in legislative battle on electronics recycling. Secondly, the ERCC takes the current state of electronics recycling laws as a given and works with state agencies and stakeholders to address technical implementation issues.  That means that ERCC is also not working to harmonize laws by making changes to existing laws, although members can and have taken information gathered in ERCC discussions to recommend improvements to legislators.

Major Highlights of the First Year
One year after its launch, the ERCC is 29 members strong, and growing, with several new members expected to be added in 2011. The group has taken on several significant projects over the last year, including those that provide benefits to the public in the form of new data and analyses of the state laws, and others that address key implementation overlap challenges for state agencies. 

The first major project was the development of a comprehensive public resource on state electronics recycling laws through a new ERCC website at www.ecycleclearinghouse.org.  A working group of members helped develop the list of key resources that would be available on the new site.  Anyone can access detailed breakdowns, descriptions, and other data comparing state electronics recycling laws, including interactive maps.  In addition to these public resources, members have access to specialized ERCC content and databases, such as the Brand and Manufacturer Tracking Database (BMTD).  The BMTD is a comprehensive listing of all brands and manufacturers registered in each state, sortable and searchable based on user input.  The manufacturer and brand registration data were previously housed on a separate NCER website, but were not searchable. The BMTD saves ERCC members valuable research time by allowing online, anytime access to reports on manufacturers out of compliance, bankruptcy information, and listings of orphan brands by state.

Secondly, the ERCC created two working groups to coordinate data needs on market share and return share requirements.  These data needs are perfect case studies for the benefits of coordinated action through the ERCC.  In both cases, state agencies need data on market share of manufacturers or the percentage of a brand in the return stream in order to allocate costs of the administration or running of the mandated recycling system.  And the data on which these calculations are based can come from national, rather than state-based sources.  Rather than duplicate efforts to obtain these data separately, members can work together to obtain consistent market or return share data sets through ERCC.

The use of a consolidated registration tool is another great example of the benefits of coordinated activity.  Currently, 20 of the states with electronics recycling laws require manufacturers, and in some cases collectors and recyclers, to annually register and submit required information.  The ERCC has designed an online state registration application which will enable manufacturers and possibly recyclers covered by the state electronics recycling laws to register their common and state-specific information in one place. 

Another major activity in 2010 for ERCC was the hosting of a successful workshop on “Harmonizing State Electronics Recycling Laws” at the E-Scrap 2010 conference. Over 60 attendees from government, industry, and non-profit organizations helped determine some of the priority areas ERCC would be focusing on in the coming year. Attendees discussed and prioritized topic areas that present challenges for all stakeholder types in implementing and complying with state electronic recycling laws.

Table 1: Priority Topics from ERCC Workshop at E-Scrap 2010

1. Program Goals & Performance Measures – creating a level playing field, judging states without laws, convenience, etc.
2. Product Scope – variations among state laws, categorizing new or “gray area” products, developing a methodology for deciding if new products should be “covered”
3. Recycler Standards – which ones are used, variations across state programs
4. Cross border regulation of recyclers – state managers have no authority to regulate out of state recyclers
5. Data Reporting/Standards
6. Collector Best Practices

In addition to all of the above, the ERCC has also been tracking the pounds collected across all of the state electronics recycling programs—not just member states (Chart 1). Covered entities and product scope differ widely across the state programs, which makes it difficult to compare program results. The ERCC will continue to be the most comprehensive resource for unbiased data on the performance of state recycling programs, by, for example, including context about product scope and covered entities in reports about per capita collection totals and working towards better “apples to apples” comparisons. 

One major topic of discussion among state agencies is the status of certain brand and manufacturers.  All but one of the ERCC members operated under a producer responsibility framework where manufacturers must register their brands and comply with recycling operation requirements.  Apart from the large national brands, there is a discrepancy in which manufacturers register under the various state programs.  ERCC members share information about new manufacturers and brand ownership changes, and the ERCC has sent information to retailers and manufacturers on behalf of the state programs letting them know of the requirementsIn most of these states, it is illegal for manufacturers or retailers to sell unregistered brands, and the ERCC has consolidated registration lists as well as out of compliance brands on its website. 

Table 2: Non-Compliant Brands and Manufacturers in Multiple States
Manufacturer Brand Product Type States

Apex Digital Inc.

Apex Digital

TV

OR, WI, WA

Broksonic c/o Hatzlachh Supply Inc

BROKSONIC

TV

ME, OR, WA

Skyworth Electronics

Skyworth

TV

IL, ME, WI

DoubleSight Displays

DoubleSight Display

Monitor

OR, WI, WA

General Dynamics Itronix Corporation

Itronix

Computer

WI, WV

TriGem USA

Averatec

Computer, Monitor

OR, WI, WA

Velocity Micro

Velocity Micro

Computer, Monitor

IL, OR, WI

Finally, ongoing ERCC conference calls allow state program administrators to hear how their colleagues are addressing challenges such as product definitions, new product categories, recycler certification programs, collector standards, and public education through regular calls with all members. Affiliate members also participate in the calls and play a valuable role in providing feedback on how the varying requirements impact their daily operations and resource planning. 

Looking Ahead

In 2011, the ERCC will release documents with recommendations on topics such as performance measures, collector best practices, and product definitions, which have been or will be developed through member working groups.  The ERCC is also planning to activate the online registration system and expand the Brand & Manufacturer Database to include registered recycler information.

The scope of the challenge that 24 separate mandated electronics recycling programs present is vast, but the ERCC is attempting to solve manageable pieces.  We are already seeing that lessons learned through the ERCC have been valuable for state agencies in the planning stages of implementation of newer laws.  The intention is that ERCC will be a long term resource for addressing the challenge of implementing effective electronics recycling programs through coordination rather than duplication.

Jason Linnell is the co-founder and executive director of the National Center for electronics Recycling and leas the Electronics Recycling Coordination Clearinghouse. He can be contacted at jlinnell@electronicsrecycling.org.