Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Waste Tire Recycling topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House passes waste-tire recycling fee to fund cleanup, reimburse recyclers
Summary
The Utah House approved House Bill 34 on Jan. 19, 1990, creating a recycling fee to fund tire recycling, reimburse certified recyclers and pay local health departments; sponsors said the $21-per-ton fee and five-year sunset would stimulate markets and reduce hazardous stockpiles.
Get email alerts on the Waste Tire Recycling topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative David S. Ochsler and co-sponsor Cindy Jo Milner introduced House Bill 34, a plan to assess a recycling fee on new tires to create an expendable trust fund to subsidize recycling and cleanup of waste-tire stockpiles. Sponsors told the House the program would make it economically feasible to collect and recycle abandoned tires, reduce fire and health hazards, and promote development of markets for recycled products.
Under the bill as amended on the floor, the state tax commission would collect the fee under procedures similar to sales-tax collection. Reimbursements from the trust fund would be paid to recyclers that the local county or municipal health departments certify; local health departments would receive $1 of every $21 per ton fee to reimburse their administration. The bill establishes a five-year sunset for the program and sets a threshold for reimbursable recyclers (the bill’s floor discussion referenced a 100,000‑tires-per‑year minimum for full reimbursement eligibility). Sponsors said the fee would allow the state to recycle roughly four to five tons of used tires for every ton of new tires entering the market.
Floor questions centered on whether the state had enough recycling capacity, whether the fee constituted a tax, how the bill would interact with local zoning and licensing, and whether out‑of‑state tires could be improperly claimed for reimbursement. Representative Milner and Representative Ochsler said the intent was to create a targeted recycling fee (not general revenue) that would go into a dedicated fund; they said local health departments would screen applicants and deny reimbursements for tires coming from out of state. Several members warned the program might initially benefit urban areas more than rural ones and urged follow-up reviews.
The House adopted several technical amendments on the pink sheet and by voice vote to clarify that recapped or resold used tires are exempt because the fee is imposed when a tire first enters commerce as new. After extended debate and multiple amendments, the House voted to pass House Bill 34 as amended by a recorded vote of 51 affirmative and 15 negative votes. The bill will be transmitted to the Senate for further action.
Supporters framed the bill as a practical, market‑oriented approach to a growing environmental and public‑health problem; opponents raised concerns about rural access to recyclers and possible double costs to consumers through dealer fees. Sponsors said the program will be monitored and revisited after initial implementation.
