Page 13 - EPR-Report-Card-2011

Basic HTML Version

British Columbia
• Clear focus on EPR as primary tool to increase diversion and implement pollution prevention
principle with pharmaceuticals, rechargeable batteries and cell phones under full EPR; beverage
containers, specified hazardous/special wastes and four phases of waste electronics under
partial EPR; and packaging/printed papers and the fifth phase of waste electronics scheduled for
• Common regulated target for each program (75%) but timeline to achieve target varies by
program and no penalties specified for failure to reach targets within timeline
• Require third party auditing of performance metrics including collection facilities, product
management in accordance with the pollution prevention hierarchy, total amount of the
producer’s product sold and collected, recovery rate
• Require third party audited financial statements only where programs recover costs through
deposits or fees charged by the producer to the consumer that show on consumer sales receipts
• Require an annual report including results of the third party audits, but an assessment of the
program’s performance and annual report is not publicly available
• Innovative policy framework steers environmental outcomes within which producers are both
required and allowed to design and operate diversion programs
• Regulated programs for beverage containers, tires, electronics, used oil materials, paint
• No progress and no commitment on remaining CAP materials
• No clear focus on EPR as priority tool
• Programs include performance measures, where practical
• No penalties for non-performance, instead “ discussion and negotiation, leading to improved
• Regulated programs must post 3-year business plans and annual reports with audited financial
statements and performance metrics
• Government staff use guidelines, which closely follow CCME’s guidance on performance, to
review business plans, annual reports and financial statements
• Management of stewardship programs by multi-stakeholder board ensures range of viewpoints
• Research on potential opportunities to affect design-for-environment through stewardship
programs, life-cycle assessment and full-cost accounting research on full impacts of regulated
C -
• Publicly supports and promotes concept of producer responsibility
• Implemented partial EPR programs for oil (1996), tires (1998), paint (2005) and electronics (2006)
with changes to the electronics program based on ministry review in 2010-11
• Consumer-paid and partly government-funded beverage container deposit program in place
• No industry funding program in place for printed paper and packaging programs despite
extensive discussions
• No clear time commitments on remaining Phase 1 and Phase 2 CCME materials
• No specific targets for EPR programs and no intention of establishing targets in the short term;
results in limited accountability for program performance
• Program accountability relies on annual reports, annual audited statements and mandatory
program reviews every 5 years
• Providing leadership in developing first comprehensive stewardship program for agricultural plastics