The year 2024 has been one of intensive regulatory activity related to extended producer responsibility (EPR) for packaging in the first four states with laws. By the end of the year, California, Colorado, Maine, and Oregon each plan to adopt foundational regulations necessary to conduct their programs. These regulations will have a lasting impact on the costs and incentives within the programs.
By the end of the year, California, Colorado, Maine, and Oregon each plan to adopt foundational regulations necessary to conduct their programs. These regulations will have a lasting impact on the costs and incentives within the programs.
Colorado completed its primary rulemaking in June, with a set of rules that took effect on July 1 and that largely reflected the provisions in its statute.
In Oregon, the public comment period for its second of two rulemaking phases closed in July, and adoption of a finalized set of rules is planned for November 2024.
The Oregon rules outline the structure of certain program fees and lay out obligations for recycling facilities, among other provisions.
California and Maine released initial drafts of their regulations for comments earlier in the year, and they are developing revised drafts for further comments.
California’s proposal is extensive, covering processes for producers to request exemptions and a framework for approving third-party certification entities for composting requirements, among other issues.
Maine’s proposed rules include detailed producer fees and mechanisms for reimbursing local governments for managing waste.
Industry Implementation
EPR programs in the four states are also beginning to ramp up efforts to operationalize the producer responsibility organizations (PROs) that will run their programs.
In California, Colorado, and Oregon, the Circular Action Alliance is in position to run the programs in their initial years.
Program planning is underway in Colorado and Oregon, and the first plan is slated for approval in Oregon ahead of the July 1, 2025, launch date of its program.
In Maine, the state will contract out for the PRO role in 2025 or 2026. The PRO must develop a program plan to guide implementation and set expectations for all participating parties.
Clearly, much work remains to get packaging EPR programs up and running in these four states.
Their successes and failures will deliver important lessons that will shape future legislation, rules, and plans for other states that might follow, including Minnesota, which passed its EPR law in June.
2025 Outlook
Beyond EPR, state governments are pursuing other packaging-related regulatory activities under other areas of law, including rules on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
Maine recently issued a draft of rulemaking concepts for its updated PFAS in Products Program, which will implement significant modifications to the scope and rollout of restrictions on various products with intentionally added PFAS.
On the federal level, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency updated its voluntary Safer Choice and Design for the Environment Standard, including a prohibition on intentionally added PFAS in packaging and a general requirement to use post-consumer recycled content and be recyclable or reusable.
California is updating an initial material characterization study that will inform what materials can make recyclability claims pursuant to Senate Bill 343, though the timing of its release is unclear.
Lauren Aguilar is a government affairs associate at the firm Serlin Haley, a lobbyist for FPA based in Washington, D.C. Andy Hackman also is a lobbyist with Serlin Haley. Gregory Melkonian is a regulatory and government affairs analyst for the firm.