The bill would set ambitious recycling benchmarks and mandate shifts toward reusable packaging. (Dana DiFilippo | New Jersey Monitor)
A Monday legislative hearing on a controversial bill that calls for a dramatic decrease in single-use plastic packaging ended without a vote after calls for changes to the measure by supporters and critics.
The bill, which has been raised in the Senate Environment and Energy Committee no less than five times this session, would set ambitious recycling benchmarks and mandate shifts toward reusable packaging. Bill sponsor Sen. Bob Smith (D-Middlesex), the committee’s chair, said the bill would return for the panel’s Feb. 10 meeting.
“I thought we made tremendous progress since the last meeting. It sounds like we didn’t,” Smith said Monday.
Though environmental advocates broadly support the bill, they expressed worry over exemptions that would allow some packaging to continue unchanged if replacements are technologically or financially unfeasible, including packaging that contains toxic materials controlled elsewhere in state law.
They cautioned that those exemptions are too subjective, would be abused by manufacturers, and would last so long — 10 years — that they would hamper overall efforts to reduce plastic waste.
“There’s also an exemption if the producer has inadequate resources to comply. How is that going to work? Will New Jersey DEP need to hire forensic accountants to look at the books? Because many companies will say they don’t have the resources to comply,” said Judith Enck, president of Beyond Plastics.
Supporters of the bill also took aim at a provision that would allow packaging producers to form groups called producer responsibility organizations, which would be tasked with coming together to produce a “packaging product stewardship plan” for the group of companies.
The regulations targeting plastic packaging should more closely resemble vehicle emission regulations, which car manufacturers must meet themselves, they said. The producer responsibility organizations called for by the bill would have little control over what types of packaging end up being used, they said.
“The legislation lays out who’s on the governing board, and it’s mostly packaging companies and trade associations. They are not the ones that are deciding what a company’s going to use as their packaging choice,” Enck said. “They’re not in the room with Amazon or Kraft Food when they decide to package food.”
They added the bill’s packaging reduction goals should be applied to all types of packaging instead of just plastic over concerns that the use of disposable paper and other types of packaging not covered by the bill’s definition of plastics would swell in response.
“Paper and cardboard should also be included,” said Marta Young, a zero-waste organizer with Clean Water Action. “The amount of waste that can be produced when you eliminate one product — other equally problematic packaging could be included.”
Industry representatives cautioned that the bill’s packaging reduction goals are too ambitious and out of line with regulatory schemes in other states.
California set its packaging reduction benchmark to 25%, and Washington state was unable to determine a practical benchmark because of a lack of data, said Andrew Hackman on behalf of packing industry groups Ameripen and the Flexible Packaging Association.
Other critics warned against limiting the use of existing packaging technologies without clear replacements in hand, noting state environmental regulators are issuing waivers for the use of polystyrene packaging despite a 2022 ban because of a lack of alternatives.
“We get concerned about putting these deadlines on products. We don’t have a crystal ball. We don’t know when that alternative is going to be available,” said Ed Waters, senior director of government affairs for the Chemistry Council of New Jersey.
Multiple industry representatives urged lawmakers to include exemptions for packaging used in business-to-business transactions, noting such packaging could be recycled without entering consumer recycling streams.
“This was done in Minnesota. It’s in Colorado, and Oregon and California also have certain language that would allow packaging that is returned, essentially as part of the distribution, and recycled to be exempted,” said Jacob Cassady, director of government relations for the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers.
The state’s effort to limit plastic packaging follows a 2022 ban on single-use plastic bags and certain polystyrene containers.