Last Friday, New York state Senator Pete Harckham announced that the Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act (PRRIA) had passed the state Senate. The legislation would reportedly “require companies to reduce their overall packaging use, improve the recyclability of their products, fund recycling and reuse infrastructure, financially support municipal recycling programs, and reduce toxins in packaging.”
However, according to Packaging Dive, the state legislature’s formal session ended without the state Assembly bringing the bill to a vote. The NY state Senate website confirms the bill passed the Senate, but remains in committee in the lower house.
Should the bill become a law, it would set requirements for recycled content and plastic-reduction thresholds. It would also ban certain chemicals from packaging products and establish an extended producer responsibility (EPR) structure where fees would go toward New York recycling efforts. The legislation would cover materials such as paper, cardboard, corrugated cardboard, wood, glass, PET, HDPE, expanded polystyrene foam, polystyrene, bioplastics, generic plastics, plastic film, other plastics, ferrous metals, aluminum, tinplate, generic metals, and mixed materials including laminates, according to Packaging Dive. The bill also would establish a nine-person toxic-packaging task force to review toxicity in packaging and recommend any additional substances for future consideration.
This is the latest in a long line of legislation looking to curb plastic waste and limit chemicals, including PFAS chemicals, commonly used for food packaging and even on apparel. One focus of Friday’s debate over the bill was reportedly the inclusion of PVC as one of the banned substances.
PRRIA’s recycling targets included a 35% minimum for glass containers made in New York and 40% for paper bags sold or distributed in the state, adding to the rules that New York alone has set for plastic and paper bags. Companies would ultimately need to reduce the “primary plastic packaging material” in products they sold or distributed by 25%, which reportedly is a lower figure than previous iterations of the bill.
While the bill received support from environmental groups such as Beyond Plastics, other trade groups such as the American Chemistry Council, American Forest & Paper Association, American Beverage Association, the Consumer Brands Association and even Kraft Heinz opposed it.
Following the bill’s failure to make it through on Friday, a spokesperson for the American Beverage Association said the group supports EPR systems that increase recycling rates and create a circular economy for bottles, though would not be enacted as law, having advocated for the same thing in Minnesota and Colorado unsuccessfully.
The bill had already gone through multiple changes. Sen. Harckham listed edits and concessions such as raising revenue threshold for covered producers, using a producer responsibility organization model already used by certain industry groups, and adding flexibility in how affected companies can meet targets.
Harckham said he hopes New York can be a leader in this movement, given its economic stature in the U.S. That stature gives it the position to enact legislation that might not pass elsewhere, as affected companies would not be dissuaded from doing business in New York.
“We are one of the largest economies in the world,” Harckham said. “Manufacturers will be adjusting because there is a national movement to do this.”
If the bill passes, New York would join Minnesota, Oregon, Maine, Colorado and California as states that have passed packaging EPR laws. Maryland and Illinois last year passed study bills, and could be on their way to enacting EPR laws, too.
The bill had already been delayed last week after a printing error forced the bill’s amendment for the second night in a row last Wednesday, pushing the bill to the deadline on Friday. Already a much-debated topic, the bill will surely undergo more debate and possible amendments when the legislative session reconvenes.
