AB 1239 — Tire recycling: California tire regulatory fee and waste tire program.
Last action — Assembly refused to concur in Senate amendments. (Ayes 34. Noes 34. Page 6599.)
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
3Passed Assembly
-
4Passed Senate
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2015-2016 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there are no live odds of enactment. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
(1) The California Tire Recycling Act requires, until January 1, 2024, a person who purchases a new tire to pay a California tire fee of $1.75 per tire, for deposit in the California Tire Recycling Management Fund, for expenditure by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery upon appropriation by the Legislature, to fund the waste tire program and for other purposes, including to pay for the costs associated with a waste tire and used tire hauler program and manifest system, as provided. After January 1, 2024, existing law reduces the tire fee to $0.75 per tire. Existing law requires any person generating waste tires or used tires that are transported or submitted for transportation, for offsite handling, altering, storage, disposal, or for any combination thereof, to complete a California Uniform Waste and Used Tire Manifest, as required by the department. Existing law requires a generator to provide the manifest to the waste and used tire hauler at the time of transfer of the tires, and to submit to the department, on a quarterly schedule, a legible copy of each manifest. This bill would require, until January 1, 2024, upon a specified finding by the department, a waste tire generator that is a retail seller of new tires to end user purchasers to pay a California tire regulatory fee and to remit that fee to the state on a quarterly schedule for deposit in the California Tire Recycling Management Fund. The bill would require the department to track revenue from the California tire regulatory fee separately and would prohibit those funds from being used for activities other than those specified. The bill would require the department to identify the specific programs that the California tire regulatory fee would fund. The bill would require the department to establish the California tire regulatory fee in an amount that does not exceed $1 per new tire sold, and would require the department to base the amount of the fee on specified criteria, as provided. The bill would authorize the department to differentiate in setting the fees between the waste tire generators who are retail sellers depending upon the nature of the activity generating waste tires, the number of waste tires generated, and other appropriate bases. The bill would require the department, prior to establishing the California tire regulatory fee or making any adjustment to the fee, to hold a public hearing, as specified. The bill would provide that an adjustment to the fee becomes effective on January 1 of the year following its adoption. The bill would require the department to adopt regulations to implement the initial California tire regulatory fee, and would authorize the department to adopt regulations to adjust the California tire regulatory fee, as specified. (2) Existing law prohibits the California tire fee from being imposed on a tire sold with, or sold separately for use on, a self-propelled wheelchair, a motorized tricycle or motorized quadricycle, or a vehicle that is similar to a motorized tricycle or motorized quadricycle, as specified. This bill would prohibit the California tire regulatory fee from being imposed on those same vehicles. (3) Existing law establishes, as a part of the waste tire program, the tire recycling program, which promotes and develops alternatives to the landfill disposal of used whole tires. The program provides for grants to certain entities involved in activities that result in reduced landfill disposal of whole used tires, and development and implementation of a waste tire incentive payment program to promote increased demand for waste tires recycled in this state. Under the act, until June 30, 2019, the Rubberized Pavement Market Development Act provides for the award of grants to certain public agency projects that use rubberized asphalt concrete. This bill would repeal the Rubberized Pavement Market Development Act and instead enact the Tire Recycling Incentive Program Act. The bill would require the department, in accordance with specified law, to establish this incentive program to make payments to entities that purchase waste tire material for incorporation in a product for sale to end users, as specified. The bill would require the department, on or before July 1, 2018, to hold a public workshop to develop a plan for the tire recycling incentive payment program, as specified, and would require the department to evaluate the program in a public forum and propose changes accordingly. The bill would make an entity eligible to receive an incentive payment upon demonstrating to the department that the entity purchased California-generated waste tire material processed in California and sold an incentive-eligible tire product incorporating that material to an end user. (4) Existing law declares the intent of the Legislature to reduce the landfill disposal and stockpiling of used whole tires by 25% within four years of full implementation of a statewide tire recycling program and to recycle and reclaim used tires and used tire components to the greatest extent possible in order to recover valuable natural resources. This bill would declare that it is the policy goal of the state that not less than 75% of solid waste tires generated be source reduced or recycled in the state by the year 2020. The bill would require the department, if that policy goal is met for 3 consecutive years, to review existing tire recycling programs and make recommendations, as specified. (5) Existing law requires a person generating waste or used tires that are transported or submitted for transportation to submit a California Uniform Waste and Used Tire Manifest, as defined, to the waste and used tire hauler and to submit copies of the manifest to the department. A waste and used tire hauler is required to possess that manifest while transporting waste or used tires, and the operator of a waste or used tire facility is required to submit a copy of the manifest to the department and the generator. Existing law requires the department to develop and implement a system for auditing manifests, including continuously conducting random sampling and matching of manifests. This bill would revise those provisions to, among other things, require a waste and used tire hauler, on and after January 1, 2018, to submit an electronic manifest, instead of a paper manifest, to the department within 7 days of the date of the pickup or delivery for each load of waste or used tires transported.
Bill Text
- Amended 08/16/16 - Amended Senate Current pdf August 16, 2016
- Amended 08/01/16 - Amended Senate pdf August 01, 2016
- Amended 06/23/16 - Amended Senate pdf June 23, 2016
- Amended 06/15/16 - Amended Senate pdf June 15, 2016
- Amended 06/02/16 - Amended Senate pdf June 02, 2016
- Amended 05/05/15 - Amended Assembly pdf May 05, 2015
- Amended 04/21/15 - Amended Assembly pdf April 21, 2015
- Introduced 02/27/15 - Introduced pdf February 27, 2015
- AB1239 View text html
Action History
-
Assembly refused to concur in Senate amendments. (Ayes 34. Noes 34. Page 6599.)
-
Assembly Rule 63 suspended. (Page 6544.)
-
From committee: That the Senate amendments be concurred in. (Ayes 6. Noes 2.) (August 30).
-
Joint Rule 62(a), file notice suspended. (Page 6401.)
-
Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES. pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.2.
-
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 25 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
-
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 25. Noes 13. Page 5247.).
-
Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (August 11).
-
Referred to APPR. suspense file.
-
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 1.) (June 29).
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on E.Q.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on E.Q.
-
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on E.Q.
-
Referred to Com. on E.Q.
-
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
-
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 50. Noes 29. Page 1787.)
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 5.) (May 28).
-
Joint Rule 62(a), file notice suspended. (Page 1613.)
-
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
-
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Read second time and amended.
-
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 3.) (April 27).
-
Re-referred to Com. on NAT. RES.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on NAT. RES. Read second time and amended.
-
Referred to Com. on NAT. RES.
-
Read first time.
-
From printer. May be heard in committee March 31.
-
Introduced. To print.
Sponsors
- Atkins · Cosponsor
- Gordon · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 120 not signed on · 14 voted No
Sponsors (1)
- Gordon
Co-sponsors (1)
- Atkins
Not signed on (120)
120 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 120 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 32 | 27 | 0 | 11 |
| Democratic | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| Republican | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 34 | 34 | 0 | 12 |
| % of votes cast | 43% | 43% | 0% | 15% |
How each member voted (80)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Achadjian | — | Nay |
| Baker | — | Nay |
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Brough | — | Nay |
| Brown | — | Not Voting |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Linder | — | Nay |
| Maienschein | — | Nay |
| Mathis | — | Nay |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Olsen | — | Nay |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Thurmond | — | Yea |
| Waldron | — | Nay |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Chávez | — | Nay |
| Cooper | — | Not Voting |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Nay |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Lopez | — | Yea |
| Harper | — | Nay |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Low | — | Yea |
| Mayes | — | Nay |
| Salas | — | Nay |
| Burke | — | Yea |
| McCarty | — | Yea |
| Melendez | — | Nay |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Nay |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Chang | — | Nay |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Chiu | — | Yea |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Dababneh | — | Nay |
| Dodd | — | Yea |
| O'Donnell | — | Yea |
| Obernolte | — | Nay |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Ridley-Thomas | — | Yea |
| Ting | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Nay |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Nay |
| Bonilla | — | Not Voting |
| Gray | — | Not Voting |
| Frazier | — | Nay |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Not Voting |
| Kim | — | Nay |
| Alejo | — | Not Voting |
| Chu | — | Not Voting |
| Medina | — | Not Voting |
| Rodriguez | — | Not Voting |
| Santiago | — | Not Voting |
| Steinorth | — | Nay |
| Hadley | — | Nay |
| Beth Gaines | — | Nay |
| Cristina Garcia | — | Not Voting |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Jim Patterson | — | Nay |
| Lorena Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Roger Hernández | — | Yea |
| Travis Allen | — | Nay |
| Arambula, Joaquin | Democratic | Nay |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Gipson, Mike A. | Democratic | Not Voting |
| Irwin, Jacqui | Democratic | Nay |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Nay |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Nay |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Nay |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Nay |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 6 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 67% | 22% | 0% | 11% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Harper | — | Nay |
| McCarty | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Hadley | — | Nay |
| Cristina Garcia | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Not Voting |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 23 | 12 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 25 | 13 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 64% | 33% | 0% | 3% |
How each member voted (39)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Anderson | — | Nay |
| Bates | — | Nay |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Nay |
| Vidak | — | Nay |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Cannella | — | Nay |
| Allen | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Not Voting |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Hertzberg | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Nay |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Moorlach | — | Nay |
| Morrell | — | Nay |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Nay |
| Glazer | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Nay |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Nay |
| Mark Stone | — | Nay |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Nguyen, Stephanie | Democratic | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 71% | 29% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Nay |
| Nielsen | — | Nay |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 71% | 14% | 0% | 14% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bates | — | Not Voting |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Nay |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 47 | 22 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 50 | 29 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 63% | 36% | 0% | 1% |
How each member voted (80)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Achadjian | — | Nay |
| Alejo | — | Yea |
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Brough | — | Nay |
| Brown | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Nay |
| Mathis | — | Nay |
| Medina | — | Yea |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Perea | — | Yea |
| Ridley-Thomas | — | Yea |
| Steinorth | — | Nay |
| Wagner | — | Nay |
| Wilk | — | Nay |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Cooper | — | Yea |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Low | — | Yea |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| O'Donnell | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Frazier | — | Yea |
| Gray | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Lopez | — | Yea |
| Hadley | — | Nay |
| Harper | — | Nay |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Kim | — | Nay |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Nay |
| Burke | — | Yea |
| Linder | — | Nay |
| Mayes | — | Nay |
| Chang | — | Nay |
| McCarty | — | Yea |
| Melendez | — | Nay |
| Obernolte | — | Nay |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Baker | — | Nay |
| Bigelow | — | Nay |
| Chiu | — | Yea |
| Chu | — | Yea |
| Chávez | — | Not Voting |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Dababneh | — | Yea |
| Dodd | — | Yea |
| Olsen | — | Nay |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Rodriguez | — | Yea |
| Santiago | — | Yea |
| Thurmond | — | Yea |
| Ting | — | Yea |
| Waldron | — | Nay |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Nay |
| Cristina Garcia | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Roger Hernández | — | Yea |
| Travis Allen | — | Nay |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Gipson, Mike A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Irwin, Jacqui | Democratic | Nay |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Nay |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Nay |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Nay |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Nay |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Nay |
| Patterson, Joe | Republican | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 10 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 12 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 71% | 29% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (17)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Chang | — | Nay |
| Bigelow | — | Nay |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Nay |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Nay |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 67% | 33% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Harper | — | Nay |
| McCarty | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Hadley | — | Nay |
| Cristina Garcia | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Nay |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does AB 1239 do?
- (1) The California Tire Recycling Act requires, until January 1, 2024, a person who purchases a new tire to pay a California tire fee of $1.75 per tire, for deposit in the California Tire Recycling Management Fund, for expenditure by the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery upon appropriation by the Legislature, to fund the waste tire program and for other purposes, including to pay for the costs associated with a waste tire and used tire hauler program and manifest system, as provided. After January 1, 2024, existing law reduces the tire fee to $0.75 per tire. Existing law requires any person generating waste tires or used tires that are transported or submitted for transportation, for offsite handling, altering, storage, disposal, or for any combination thereof, to complete a California Uniform Waste and Used Tire Manifest, as required by the department. Existing law requires a generator to provide the manifest to the waste and used tire hauler at the time of transfer of the tires, and to submit to the department, on a quarterly schedule, a legible copy of each manifest. This bill would require, until January 1, 2024, upon a specified finding by the department, a waste tire generator that is a retail seller of new tires to end user purchasers to pay a California tire regulatory fee and to remit that fee to the state on a quarterly schedule for deposit in the California Tire Recycling Management Fund. The bill would require the department to track revenue from the California tire regulatory fee separately and would prohibit those funds from being used for activities other than those specified. The bill would require the department to identify the specific programs that the California tire regulatory fee would fund. The bill would require the department to establish the California tire regulatory fee in an amount that does not exceed $1 per new tire sold, and would require the department to base the amount of the fee on specified criteria, as provided. The bill would authorize the department to differentiate in setting the fees between the waste tire generators who are retail sellers depending upon the nature of the activity generating waste tires, the number of waste tires generated, and other appropriate bases. The bill would require the department, prior to establishing the California tire regulatory fee or making any adjustment to the fee, to hold a public hearing, as specified. The bill would provide that an adjustment to the fee becomes effective on January 1 of the year following its adoption. The bill would require the department to adopt regulations to implement the initial California tire regulatory fee, and would authorize the department to adopt regulations to adjust the California tire regulatory fee, as specified. (2) Existing law prohibits the California tire fee from being imposed on a tire sold with, or sold separately for use on, a self-propelled wheelchair, a motorized tricycle or motorized quadricycle, or a vehicle that is similar to a motorized tricycle or motorized quadricycle, as specified. This bill would prohibit the California tire regulatory fee from being imposed on those same vehicles. (3) Existing law establishes, as a part of the waste tire program, the tire recycling program, which promotes and develops alternatives to the landfill disposal of used whole tires. The program provides for grants to certain entities involved in activities that result in reduced landfill disposal of whole used tires, and development and implementation of a waste tire incentive payment program to promote increased demand for waste tires recycled in this state. Under the act, until June 30, 2019, the Rubberized Pavement Market Development Act provides for the award of grants to certain public agency projects that use rubberized asphalt concrete. This bill would repeal the Rubberized Pavement Market Development Act and instead enact the Tire Recycling Incentive Program Act. The bill would require the department, in accordance with specified law, to establish this incentive program to make payments to entities that purchase waste tire material for incorporation in a product for sale to end users, as specified. The bill would require the department, on or before July 1, 2018, to hold a public workshop to develop a plan for the tire recycling incentive payment program, as specified, and would require the department to evaluate the program in a public forum and propose changes accordingly. The bill would make an entity eligible to receive an incentive payment upon demonstrating to the department that the entity purchased California-generated waste tire material processed in California and sold an incentive-eligible tire product incorporating that material to an end user. (4) Existing law declares the intent of the Legislature to reduce the landfill disposal and stockpiling of used whole tires by 25% within four years of full implementation of a statewide tire recycling program and to recycle and reclaim used tires and used tire components to the greatest extent possible in order to recover valuable natural resources. This bill would declare that it is the policy goal of the state that not less than 75% of solid waste tires generated be source reduced or recycled in the state by the year 2020. The bill would require the department, if that policy goal is met for 3 consecutive years, to review existing tire recycling programs and make recommendations, as specified. (5) Existing law requires a person generating waste or used tires that are transported or submitted for transportation to submit a California Uniform Waste and Used Tire Manifest, as defined, to the waste and used tire hauler and to submit copies of the manifest to the department. A waste and used tire hauler is required to possess that manifest while transporting waste or used tires, and the operator of a waste or used tire facility is required to submit a copy of the manifest to the department and the generator. Existing law requires the department to develop and implement a system for auditing manifests, including continuously conducting random sampling and matching of manifests. This bill would revise those provisions to, among other things, require a waste and used tire hauler, on and after January 1, 2018, to submit an electronic manifest, instead of a paper manifest, to the department within 7 days of the date of the pickup or delivery for each load of waste or used tires transported.
- Who sponsors AB 1239?
- AB 1239 is sponsored by Atkins and Gordon.
- What is the current status of AB 1239?
- This bill died with 2015-2016 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track AB 1239?
- Track AB 1239 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on AB 1239
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of AB 1239
Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →