June 18, 2025 (Waste Dive) –
First published on
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
The state legislature did not pass a contentious extended producer responsibility for bill as its work wrapped up this week. The legislature’s formal session came to a close in the wee hours of Wednesday without the Assembly bringing the bill to a vote.
This is the second time in as many years that the Senate passed the bill but the Assembly didn’t take a vote on it.
The abrupt end to the state legislative session stalls supporters’ bid for a EPR program this year, but lawmakers say it will likely come up again next year. It’s already been an eventful year for EPR laws, as Maryland and Washington became the sixth and seventh states to adopt such policies in May.
The Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act, a bill sponsored by Democratic state Sen. Pete Harckham, passed May 28. Along with creating an EPR program for most materials, the bill also set specific recycling or reuse rates for of at least 25% by 2030 and 75% by 2052. For certain non- , rates would be 35% by 2030 and 50% by 2037.
The bill would have also restricted the state from counting chemical recycling technologies as recycling and called for phasing out PFAS and certain other chemicals from .
Beyond and the League of Conservation Voters were among the bill’s lead supporters. The groups said the bill had provisions specifically to advance waste reduction goals and would target toxic chemicals in .
“While President Trump is launching a full-on assault on the environment, the state Assembly sided with the multibillion dollar companies pumping toxic chemicals and microplastics into our environment and our bodies,” said Beyond President Judith Enck in a statement Wednesday. “It’s deeply disappointing that we’re in this position again.”
Groups had also highlighted the bill’s aim to provide funding for recycling infrastructure and set specific reduction goals meant to hold brands responsible for making more environmentally friendly design choices.
Other supporters included the city of , municipalities like Albany and Rochester, and several faith-based groups.
Yet the bill faced fierce opposition. groups, including Ameripen, the Can Manufacturers Institute, the Flexible Association, the Biodegradable Products Institute, the Industry Association and the Carton Council, instead threw their support behind a competing EPR bill they said was more realistic to implement, but that bill did not move forward this year.
The Flexible Association said it has for years provided feedback to lawmakers that could bring proposed EPR legislation in line with “best practices we have helped to shape in other states that have already enacted and are implementing related laws.”
“The proposed legislation that failed this week in Albany did not take that approach,” said Dan Felton, FPA’s president and CEO, in an emailed statement Wednesday.
“FPA is pleased that many legislators within the State Legislature recognized this, and we look forward to working with them and other stakeholders in the future to shape programs and outcomes in the state that will create a more circular economy for flexible while at the same time recognizing its value to consumers and the economy,” Felton continued.
Petrochemical trade groups such as the American Chemistry Council and the Industry Association also opposed Harckham’s bill, saying it would cost too much and impose burdensome regulations.
Focus reported that groups including ACC have spent thousands of dollars on attack ads and lobbying to combat the bill.
Meanwhile, in neighboring New Jersey, business interests are pushing for a recycling needs assessment bill. The broader and Paper Product Stewardship Act is also in play.
Recommended Reading
-- Déjàvu? EPR bill unpopular with groups awaits fate in Assembly Dive -- After late push, EPR bill runs out of time Dive -- Tracking recycling laws by state By Megan Quinn • Updated June 6, 2025
(c) 2025 2022 Industry Dive. All rights reserved. Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (Syndigate.info).
* All content is copyrighted by Industry Intelligence, or the original respective author or source. You may not recirculate, redistribute or publish the analysis and presentation included in the service without Industry Intelligence's prior written consent. Please review our terms of use.