Texas Senate Bill SB329

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Out of Senate Committee: 3/17/11
• Introduced: 1/11/11
• Voted on by Senate: 3/23/11
• Refer: 2/2/11
• Out of House Committee: 5/6/11
• Report Pass: 3/17/11
• Voted on by House: 5/19/11
• Engrossed: 3/23/11
• Governor Action: 6/17/11
• Enrolled: 5/24/11
• Passed: 6/17/11

Caption

Relating to the sale, recovery, and recycling of certain television equipment; providing administrative penalties.

Impact

This bill introduces administrative penalties for non-compliance, requiring television manufacturers to submit recovery plans for their sold products. By creating a structured program focused on accountability, the bill is expected to enhance the recycling rate of electronic waste in the state. Compliance is enforced by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), which will oversee the program and establish relevant rules and standards. This is significant at a time when electronic waste is on the rise, and proper management practices are essential.

Summary

SB329 establishes a comprehensive program for the sale, recovery, and recycling of certain television equipment. The bill aims to mitigate the environmental impact of outdated or discarded televisions by mandating that manufacturers, retailers, and consumers participate in the recycling process. The legislation outlines specific definitions related to television equipment, including categories that cover both direct view and peripheral display devices to ensure a broad scope of coverage for recycling efforts.

Conclusion

Overall, SB329 reflects a proactive approach to handling electronic waste through a structured recycling initiative. By assigning responsibility to manufacturers, it aims to not only reduce waste but also encourage innovation in recycling technologies and practices. The effectiveness of the program will depend on robust enforcement mechanisms and the willingness of all stakeholders to engage collaboratively in the recycling process.

Contention

While supporters argue that the bill promotes environmental stewardship and responsible consumer practices, there may be contention regarding the burden placed on manufacturers. They are responsible for a recycling leadership program and must meet specific collection quotas based on market-share allocations. Additionally, concerns might arise around costs associated with compliance and the impact on pricing for consumers. Critics may argue that the penalties could disproportionately affect smaller manufacturers who struggle to meet rigorous recycling standards.