Recyclers praise ‘powerful' plastics bill in Washington state

Washington state lawmakers are debating what would be a new approach in U.S. plastics policy — a massive bill combining producer responsibility, recycled-content requirements and bottle deposits — to dramatically raise recycling rates.

The plan is supported by local governments and environmental groups in the state. One industry group, the Association of Plastic Recyclers, called it a "gold standard" in a Jan. 17 state Senate hearing that had so many people sign up to comment it stretched into a second day.

Other plastics groups, however, raised concerns even while praising the overall goals. The American Chemistry Council, for example, objected to language it said could limit deployment of new plastics recycling technology, an apparent reference to chemical recycling.

The new bill, introduced in early January, comes after lawmakers spent considerable time in 2021 and 2022 debating but ultimately failing to pass producer responsibility legislation.

Supporters of the legislation said Washington needs to follow the four other U.S. states that have passed EPR for packaging laws in the last two years, and they repeatedly pointed across the Canadian border to British Columbia as an example of an older packaging EPR and bottle bill system that works.

The legislation, the Washington Recycling and Packaging Act, could have a big impact on recycling more plastics packaging, including by increasing post-consumer recycled (PCR) content, APR said.

"The bill's powerful combo of EPR, a deposit system and PCR requirements is the gold standard to improve recycling," APR said on Twitter. "If passed, this bill will position [Washington] as a national leader to end plastic waste."

At the hearing, APR Chief Policy Officer Kate Bailey called the bill "best in class" and said it's based on working EPR systems around the world.

"Our members have the capacity right now to recycle nearly twice as much plastic as we do now," she said. "Our greatest challenge is that we are not collecting enough bottles, jugs, tubs and other plastics from households and businesses."

Bailey joined APR in November after working for nearly 20 years for nonprofit recycler Eco-Cycle Inc. in Boulder, Colo., where she played a key role in drafting EPR legislation that Colorado passed in 2022.

She urged senators to keep the bill's central provisions as they refine it to address concerns, saying it's "based on programs working successfully in dozens of countries around the world."

"I am testifying in support of all of the components of this bill as a best-in-class solution to address these challenges and urge you to keep this bill intact as a model program for the rest of the country," Bailey said. "Last year, in my previous role, I wrote and passed the producer responsibility law in Colorado. I know personally that what you have before you is a big lift. But I also know firsthand that it is doable."

Some details of the bill, as currently written, would be worked out by state agencies and industries in the next three years.

It would require companies to set up producer responsibility organizations to manage packaging waste and have those programs operating by mid-2027, a time line some said was too quick.

As well, the bill would put a 10-cent deposit on beverage containers, with a minimum recycling rate of 60 percent by 2028 and 80 percent by 2031.

It would also require that 5 percent of those containers be reusable in 2028, rising to 25 percent reusable by 2035.

The legislation has complicated requirements for recycled content, setting different targets for thermoformed containers, plastic cups, cannabis packaging, flower pots and pesticide containers.

In 2021, the state passed mandated recycled content for beverage containers and trash bags. At the time it was one of the country's more far-reaching plastic mandated content laws.

Many industry groups said they had concerns, including the American Chemistry Council.

Tim Shestek, senior director of state affairs at ACC, said a provision of the bill that requires state government approval for any "alternative recycling process" could make it difficult to meet the legislation's goals.

"We believe [it] would limit the ability of new and innovative technologies that can be utilized for companies to meet future compliance obligations," he said. "Given the likelihood that a future producer responsibility organization would establish ambitious recycling and recycled content requirements, we believe it's imperative that as many tools and processes be available to industry so they can recycle and reprocess as much packaging as possible."

The language echoes policy fights over chemical recycling in state legislatures. ACC said Michigan became the 21st state last month to adopt pro-chemical recycling laws favored by industry.

Environmental groups have pushed back both in both federal and state governments, saying the technology should not be used, and that debate appears to be playing out in this legislation.

Chemical recycling policy was not a big part of the hearing, however, with the bottle bill provisions taking a much higher profile.

Various waste management, grocery and retail trade associations in the state strongly urged lawmakers to drop the container deposits, even as they supported the overall goals of the legislation. Many said they wanted to continue negotiations.

A lobbyist for Waste Management, the largest provider of recycling services in the state, said a bottle bill would jeopardize that company's investments, including $56 million in upgrades in the state that the company announced in late 2022, by pulling valuable materials out of curbside systems.

As well, the Washington Refuse and Recycling Association said the bottle bill was one of several concerns it had in the complicated, 143-page bill.

"The bottle bill in Washington state is unnecessary," said Vicki Christophersen, a WRRA lobbyist, arguing that the state has very good recycling rates.

She said Washington has a 48 percent statewide recycling rate, compared with 16 percent in Colorado, which passed its own EPR program last year.

Retailers argued a bottle bill would burden them with processing and storing containers.

But backers of the bottle bill said it would boost container recycling rates up to those of Oregon, which has a deposit system. Oregon recycles 80-90 percent of its containers, said a representative from the Oregon Beverage Recycling Corp.

Christophersen said markets for recycled plastic need to be stronger for the materials WRRA members collect and process.

"The reality is right now it's cheaper to buy virgin plastic than it is to buy material that we're producing," she said.

City governments and environmental groups said they see the legislation pushing Washington toward British Columbia's model, and said they supported the entire bill.

Heather Trim, executive director of Zero Waste Washington, said British Columbia's EPR program has raised its recycling rate from about 50 percent in 2014 to over 90 percent.

"Fundamentally, that program has been really, really successful," she said.

A few city government officials spoke at the hearing about visiting British Columbia, seeing its system and wanting to apply that model.

"We've taken our recycling system as far as we can, and a change is needed," said Pat McLaughlin, director of solid waste for King County, which includes Seattle. "Recycling levels have now stalled. It's time to bring the missing stakeholders, the product producers, to the table."