Background
Growing State Action on Packaging Waste through Extended Producer Responsibility
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs are gaining traction across the country as states address packaging waste and plastic pollution. The central principle of EPR is to place responsibility for the full lifecycle of product packaging on producers.
State proposals commonly include elements such as needs assessments, source reduction mandates, statutory rates and dates for reducing packaging weight and plastic use, reuse and refill requirements, reimbursement for recycling services, and requirements for recycled content in packaging.
ACI and its members support and recognize the importance of well-designed EPR programs to achieve waste reduction goals while ensuring packaging maintains its essential functions.
Why It Matters
Data-Driven EPR Ensures Effective Outcomes
ACI and its members believe that effective programs must be guided by accurate baseline data. Needs assessments are essential to determine what packaging is in the market, how it is being recycled, and where gaps in performance exist. From there, Producer Responsibility Organizations (PROs) can establish realistic, transparent goals in consultation with stakeholders. Without this foundation, lawmakers risk enacting rigid statutory mandates that may fail to account for real-world recycling challenges, while burdening producers without improving outcomes.
What's Next?
ACI's Principles for Effective and Workable EPR Policies
ACI continues to advocate for EPR policies that are effective, realistic and responsible. Specifically, ACI supports:
- Comprehensive Needs Assessments to guide program design
- Goals established by a PRO informed by data
- Recognition of past source reduction achievements
- Equitable cost-sharing across the recycling value chain
- Avoiding packaging materials bans without viable alternatives
ACI is prepared to work with Congress, state legislatures and stakeholders to inform the development of EPR programs that deliver measurable environmental benefits for consumers and that are backed by applicable data.
Related Materials and Resources
- Circular Action Alliance
- State EPR law comparison
- ACI's Circular Packaging Roadmap
- Member Tools - ACI members can get practical EPR reporting support, guidance on designing recycling packaging and ACI's packaging principles.
Truth in Labeling
Background
Fragmented Regulations Drive Interstate Commerce Challenges
Retailers, consumer packaged goods companies and their suppliers face the growing threat from a patchwork of state laws governing recycling claims on packaging. This inconsistent regulatory landscape creates confusion for interstate commerce, as certain states require specific state labels. Manufacturers that do not exclusively distribute to these states would have an extremely difficult time altering the label of some of their products—which would then only be valid in that specific state.
Currently, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulates advertising claims under federal law. While the FTC has issued “Green Guides” to help inform what entails a false marketing claim, including those related to recyclability, enforcement can be sparse, and manufacturers may want to use new marketing claims.
Why It Matters
Uniform Rules Support Accurate Recycling and Disposal
Without a uniform federal framework, businesses must navigate competing state requirements, increasing costs and operational complexity. Consumers, meanwhile, receive mixed signals on whether packaging is truthful in its recyclability as advertised. A clear federal standard will reduce confusion, foster trust in environmental claims and help ensure packaging is disposed of correctly and efficiently.
What's Next?
The Packaging and Claims Knowledge (PACK) Act
The PACK Act is a good solution to the issue because it amends the FTC Act. This would make the FTC the primary regulatory authority when it comes to recyclability packing claims. It would also require collaboration with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Act would create independent certification programs that follow FTC’s guidance to avoid misleading claims. It further preempts state laws that conflict with federal requirements, solving any future interstate issues.
Related Materials and Resources
Recycled Content Mandates
Background
Setting the Foundation for Circular Packaging
Recycled content mandates require that packaging contain a specified percentage of material sourced from post-consumer recycling (PCR) streams. These mandates aim to drive demand for recycled plastics and other materials, reduce reliance on virgin resources and stimulate investment in recycling infrastructure. ACI supports the goal of advancing a more circular economy and recognizes that increasing the use of PCR content is a key part of that vision. ACI also believes mandates must be carefully designed to reflect market conditions and complement existing federal regulations that govern packaging and labeling for cleaning products.
Why It Matters
Achieving Realistic Sustainable Goals
If governments set recycled content targets without robust market analysis, producers may be unable to source sufficient PCR at the required quality and price, diverting material from other valuable applications and driving up costs without improving recycling outcomes. Infrastructure gaps can compound these challenges, as recycling facilities may lack the capacity or technology to supply the quantity and quality of recycled material needed to meet aggressive targets.
What's Next?
Partnering With Lawmakers for Practical Solutions
ACI urges lawmakers and regulators to begin with comprehensive market assessments before establishing or escalating recycled content targets. Timelines for compliance must allow manufacturers to plan and invest and include an exemption process that recognizes packaging considerations that are not conducive to PCR inclusion. PCR goals should take into consideration progress that has already been achieved.