Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Waste Epr topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee hears SB 561 to create producer-funded disposal program for expired marine distress flares
Summary
SB 561 would create an extended producer responsibility program to collect and dispose of expired pyrotechnic marine flares. Supporters said current disposal options are scarce and costly; manufacturers and boating groups cautioned the program could raise costs and reduce access to effective safety devices.
The Senate Judiciary subcommittee heard SB 561 (author: Senator Blake Spear), a bill proposing an extended producer responsibility (EPR) program for pyrotechnic marine flares and other approved emergency distress signals.
Supporters, including environmental and local-government groups, said expired, reactive flares are hazardous waste and are difficult for local jurisdictions to accept safely. Senator Blake Spear said expired flares are classified as hazardous waste and often cannot be disposed of locally; he cited pilot events in Alameda County that achieved collection costs as low as approximately $10.55 per flare. Heidi Sanborn of the National Stewardship Action Council, a cosponsor, told the committee these devices are frequently abandoned or unlawfully discarded because residents have no practical disposal option and said a statewide program could achieve economies of scale.
Municipal and waste-management organizations supported the bill and argued program costs should be borne by manufacturers to avoid shifting high disposal costs to local governments and taxpayers. Multiple local governments, sanitation districts, waste haulers and environmental stewardship groups signed on in support.
Opponents included the industry groups representing marine manufacturers and the sole U.S. manufacturer of flares (Orion Safety Products). Clay Crabtree of the National Marine Manufacturers Association and Jim Lights of Orion expressed concern that an EPR program focused on a product made by a single supplier could raise costs and reduce the availability of the most visible daytime distress signals. They warned that alternatives such as battery-powered devices may not be Coast Guard‑approved for daytime use and that higher costs could make safety devices less accessible for lower-income boaters.
Senator Blake Spear said he would continue to work with manufacturers to structure an equitable program and noted that an EPR approach would prevent local governments and taxpayers from bearing disproportionate disposal costs. The committee took testimony but did not vote on SB 561 during the hearing.
Why this matters: Expired marine flares are hazardous and can present disposal hazards for waste workers; disposal options in California are limited. The bill would shift responsibility and costs to manufacturers through an industry-funded stewardship program, a model supporters say reduces public cost but manufacturers say must be carefully designed to preserve safety and affordability.
