by Scott Cassel, CEO and Founder
The Product Stewardship Institute was the only nonprofit focused on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) to join a stakeholder consultation meeting organized by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Washington D.C. PSI was invited to the meeting, which also included national nonprofits Ocean Conservancy and Surfrider, among others, at the request of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and was recommended by OECD, which works closely with PSI and had previously invited the organization to present on U.S EPR activity at an OECD event in Tokyo.
With 38 member countries, the OECD works to establish international standards to help solve social, environmental, and economic problems. The focus of the September meeting, which included environmental nonprofits and waste management experts, was to assess the performance of the United States in regards to the environmental — and, especially, environmental justice — impacts of “marine litter.” (Also known as “marine debris,” this refers to waste discharged into a coastal or marine environment; the majority is plastic.)
Participants assessed national and international commitments and contributed recommendations for improvement. Scott Cassel, PSI’s CEO and Founder, presented on how state packaging EPR laws will reduce plastic pollution, especially when considered with other legislative measures such as single-use plastic bans, post-recycled content (PCR) mandates, and enhanced deposit return systems. Over the past two years, packaging EPR laws influenced by PSI’s model EPR legislation were enacted in Maine, Oregon, Colorado, and California; in 2023, nine state bills are expected to be introduced (or re-introduced).
Cassel pointed out that the nation’s fragmented recycling infrastructure and policies, lack of a consistent materials management policy, and depleted technical capabilities are challenges to the implementation of statewide packaging EPR policies. He noted that although waste management is delegated to the states, there is a critical need for greater state harmonization or a national solution that could be found in the federal Break Free From Plastic Act, which may be re-introduced in 2023 (PSI’s model also informed that bill’s EPR component).
Although it is unclear what authority the United States EPA has to promote policy that is not directly delegated by Congress, Cassel highlighted that it does have the ability to provide guidance and technical support on issues such as packaging labeling; a standard definition of recycling; and goals for source reduction, reuse, recycling, and post-consumer recycled content. He also asked EPA to support national efforts driven by state and local governments.
PSI’s own experience bears this out: Beginning in 2003, the organization worked with the EPA to facilitate a multi-stakeholder dialogue — which included industry, government, and recycled paint manufacturers — and develop a legislative model for paint EPR. In 2009, Oregon used the PSI model to enact the country’s first EPR law; since then, PSI has helped enact paint EPR laws built on the same model in 10 states and the district of Columbia. Paint EPR programs have collected more than 51 gallons of paint, recycled over 72% of all latex paint collected, saved governments and taxpayers nearly $300 million, and established more than 2,000 collection sites, over 70% of which are at voluntary retail locations.
Cassel recommended that the EPA replicate this model and help solve the marine litter problem through a national packaging EPR strategy. The OECD report generated from the meeting will be discussed at a joint meeting of the OECD Working Party on Environmental Performance (WPEP) in 2023.