====================================================================================================================================================

MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION

A.2517 by Assemblyman DiNapoli

AN ACT to amend the environmental conservation law, the economic development law and the state

finance law, in relation to returnable beverage containers; and to repeal sections 27-1005, 27-1007

and subdivision 2 of section 27-1011of the environmental conservation law relating thereto

    The New York Association of Convenience Stores represents the interests of 6,000 neighborhood mini-marts and convenience stores, many of them independent, family-run enterprises, from Glens Falls to Great Neck.

    Along with selling gas, coffee, newspapers, cigarettes, lottery tickets, and other items, our stores carry beer and soft drinks, which are subject to the nickel deposit, and iced tea, sports drinks, bottled water, and other non-carbonated beverages, which are currently exempt but would require a deposit under this bill.

    As business owners, parents and citizens, we share the commitment of New York State and its communities to recycling. But as the folks who get stuck with the labor costs, space requirements, and mess of physically handling and storing returnable, often unrinsed carbonated beverage containers, we have a different perspective on this issue than the sponsors of A.2517.

Unfunded Mandate

    First, with limited space and limited volume, smaller stores are not able to offer the reverse vending machines for accepting returnable bottles and cans that you may see in supermarkets. In our stores, real, live employees handle returnables, and it costs money.

    Let's assume a clerk's wages, employer taxes and benefits cost the store $9 per hour. You come in to redeem an empty six-pack of soda. The transaction takes the clerk three minutes; she spends another three minutes making sure the empties are clean and placing them in a holding bin in the back room. That's six minutes, or a labor cost of 90¢ for 6 cans, or 15¢ per can.

    Under the current bottle bill, the store receives a handling fee of 2¢ per redeemed can, a fraction of the actual handling cost. So it's a losing proposition. Even increasing the handling fee to 3½¢, as proposed by A.2517, would be woefully insufficient to cover the actual handling cost. And increasing by one-third the quantity of used bottles and cans stores would have to handle and store would make it even more of a losing proposition.

Heightened Sanitation Risk

    The second issue is the potential sanitation hazard. Many smaller stores today rely on food service as a major product category, under license from the state Department of Agriculture and Markets. When you leave empty soda or juice cans sitting around your house in mid-August, what do they attract? Now imagine if you left three or four 32-gallon bags full of empty soda and juice cans sitting around in a hallway.     Expand the bottle bill, and that's what you're likely to find in the tiny back room of smaller stores, just steps away from the food counter. The last thing we need in a store that sells sandwiches, pizza or salads is an extra attraction for rodents, insects, and germs, especially during the summer. Or, do the sponsors expect the retailer to have sufficient land and money to build freestanding sheds dedicated to storing redeemed containers awaiting pick-up?

Welcome, Neighbors

    The third issue has to do with importation of containers from neighboring states that do not currently require deposits on non-carbonated beverages. Unquestionably, passage of A.2517 would unleash a flood of bottles and cans across state borders into New York for redemption, placing additional handling and storage burdens on retailers. In fact, the bill sanctions the practice of redeeming out-of-state containers at New York stores as long as the enterprising consumer limits it to two cases (48 containers) at a time!

Universal Application

    Lastly, a word about fairness. In some parts of New York, our members operate down the road, or even right across the street from, a competing store operated by a Native American tribe. More often than not, when you buy a soft drink at a tribal store, you will not be charged the nickel deposit, because tribes typically claim immunity from state laws. If a nickel is sufficient to deter people from littering, it's also enough to influence their choice of where to buy. When they choose to buy outside the reach of the bottle bill, not only does it cost us business, but the policy goal behind the deposit law is thwarted.

Summary

    For smaller stores with limited space and limited staff, redemption and storage of bottles and cans is already a nuisance. Expanding the deposit law to non-carbonated beverages would make it a nightmare.

    Until these ramifications are fully examined and addressed, the members of the New York Association of Convenience Stores remain opposed to expanding this law and urge the Assembly not to pass A.2517.

James S. Calvin

President, NYACS

January 28, 2005