01/30/2025

Industry converges in NY over EPR bill it says would create de facto ban

Plastics News | Steve Toloken | Jan. 29, 2025

Industry converges in NY over EPR bill it says would create de facto ban

Plastics companies and environmentalists converged on the New York legislature Jan. 28 as lawmakers restarted a debate on recycling and plastics waste that could be the industry's biggest challenge in statehouses this year.

At issue is a bill that would set up an extended producer responsibility system for packaging and try to force a reduction in plastics packaging use by 30 percent over 12 years.

The Plastics Industry Association staged a lobbying fly-in in Albany, calling the plan a de facto plastics ban, while environmental and faith groups brought in 200 people to meet with lawmakers and rally in support.

The legislation nearly passed in 2024, only stalling in the state Assembly in the final hours of the session in June, after it had passed the Senate 37-23.

Now, with the clock restarting in a new session, plastics companies and other industries are gearing up to again.

"There's a little bit of frustration that it feels like Groundhog Day," said Matt Seaholm, president and CEO of the Washington-based Plastics Industry Association. "This has been multiple sessions where we've raised our concerns and made recommendations."

The ambitious legislation, the Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act, would not allow chemical recycling to count toward recycling targets and would put fees on packaging to reimburse governments for waste management costs.

It would also require all packaging types — including plastics, glass, paper and metals — to meet a recycling rate of 70 percent in 12 years, and prohibit toxic chemicals such as PFAS, vinyl chloride, lead and mercury, in packaging.

Other business groups in the state are also lining up in opposition.

The Business Council of New York State put out a lengthy statement Jan. 27 arguing that the bill would raise costs for consumers and "significantly restricts the sale of plastic packaging and other targeted materials."

"We believe this legislation falls well short of our objective of having a fair, workable, consumer-protective packaging and material management system," said Ken Pokalsky, vice president of government affairs for the business council.

Seaholm, who led a group of about 10 plastics firms to Albany, said 100 business groups and companies in many industries oppose the plan, including packaging industry group Ameripen.

The plastics association would prefer a packaging EPR plan more like one that passed Minnesota in 2024, Seaholm said. Some industry groups had said that plan was more focused on "core" recycling functions.

Reducing taxpayer burdens

But environmental and faith groups, who brought 200 people to the capitol Jan. 28 to lobby, said they wanted to build on momentum from 2024, when the bill nearly passed both chambers.

They pointed to concerns over waste management, arguing that recycling cannot solve problems with plastics waste, and noting risks to human health from petrochemical pollution and microplastics.

"New Yorkers are stuck paying hundreds of millions of tax dollars every year to bury and burn waste at polluting landfills and incinerators," said Judith Enck, president of Beyond Plastics and an organizer of the Jan. 28 rally. "We can't keep letting taxpayers foot the bill for plastic pollution, especially with the negative climate and health impacts that come with it."

The environmentalists said more than 300 organizations and companies signed on to a memo of support to the EPR bill last year, and they noted that 30 city governments, including the New York City Council, urged Albany to pass the EPR bill last year.

The lead sponsor of the EPR bill in the Assembly, Deborah Glick, D-Manhattan, said in a statement from the environmental groups that EPR would "incentivize sustainable packaging and shift the financial burden of waste away from taxpayers and municipalities."

The conservation groups were also backing an expansion of the state's bottle bill, which would include raising the deposit return to 10 cents, from a nickel that it was set at since the law passed in 1983.

At the rally, the sponsor of the bottle bill expansion, state Sen. Rachel May, D-Syracuse, faulted Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, for not including EPR language in her budget proposal, as she had in past years.

She called on state leaders to put more focus on waste reduction.

"We are going to be really taking this fight to the legislature, to the governor, to make sure that we are really thinking in terms of waste reduction," May said.

‘Priority No. 1'

Seaholm said New York's EPR debate could be the top battleground for the industry in state legislatures this year, given its large population and that if it passed, New York would be the second-largest state, after California, to adopt packaging EPR.

"We've got our eyes on a number of balls but … I think it's safe to say that New York is probably priority No. 1," he said. "New York has a tendency to move fast on things like this. We know it's already passed the Senate [last year]."

He said the plastics association sees the bill as a de facto plastic ban, partly because of its restrictions on chemical recycling, or advanced recycling, as the association calls it.

"It's really the combination of a source reduction component with unattainable recycling rates," Seaholm said. "Combined with the exclusion of advanced recycling to count towards those recycling rates, you put it all together, and it is a de facto ban for most plastic packaging."

He said cost of living and affordability is becoming a more important political issue in the state, and that could impact the EPR debate.

"Some of the political dynamics around affordability could make this bill, as written, a challenge to get across the finish line," Seaholm said. "But if they're willing to make amendments and improve it and get it to a workable EPR bill, some of those affordability issues start to fade away. … But we're just not there today."