A Senate panel has delayed action on a contentious bill that mandates packaging producers and manufacturers to create stewardship plans aimed at reducing landfill waste. The New Jersey Business & Industry Association (NJBIA) opposes the legislation, known as the Packaging Product Stewardship Act.
Ray Cantor, NJBIA's Deputy Chief Government Affairs Officer, criticized S-3398 as overly burdensome and impractical. "We could get behind a good extended producer responsibility (EPR) bill, but unfortunately this is not it," Cantor stated before the Senate Environment and Energy Committee meeting where the vote was scheduled.
Senator Bob Smith, who chairs the committee and sponsors the bill, announced a postponement until January 6 to address stakeholder feedback. "The more we work on it, the more complicated it gets," Smith said during the meeting.
Currently, the bill requires certain manufacturers and distributors to implement plans for reducing solid waste from packaging and pay an annual surcharge to improve recycling systems in New Jersey. Cantor argues that these requirements are unrealistic and overlook decades of successful recycling efforts in the state. "It would essentially create a ban of advanced recycling of plastics," he added.
The proposed legislation stipulates that any stewardship plan must be approved by New Jersey's Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). However, Cantor expressed doubts about DEP's capacity to handle such reviews due to pending regulations on other environmental issues.
Cantor also highlighted concerns over excluding chemical conversion processes from being defined as recycling within the bill. This exclusion could hinder advanced recycling technologies aimed at reusing plastic materials. "By excluding that chemical conversion process from the definition of recycling, it eliminates any incentive to use advanced recycling," he noted.
Despite ongoing efforts by businesses to reduce packaging waste and explore new recycling methods, Cantor emphasized support for workable EPR laws seen in other states but reiterated opposition to this particular proposal.
