Maryland EPR bill downsized before passage

The version of a Maryland Senate bill signed earlier this week by Gov. Wes Moore includes a considerable number of changes made f rom earlier drafts, including the removal of entire clauses from the formerly 39-page bill.

Senate Bill 222 (SB 222), as initially drafted by the state’s senate, spelled out numerous responsibilities and potential penalties tied to an extended producer responsibility (EPR) system for packaged products sold in Maryland.

The sizable number of eventual revisions include redefining the EPR bill in the opening paragraphs and title of the bill. What had been titled the Reducing Packaging Materials—Producer Responsibility is now called the Statewide Recycling Needs Assessment and Producer Responsibility for Packaging Materials Act.

Throughout the 39-page document, entire clauses and sections of the EPR-related bill have been crossed out.

That list includes legislatively backed systems to review organics, composting and recycling collection and processing plans throughout the state initially and periodically thereafter.

The bill signed by the governor has left parts of the law related to the definition and handling of packaging materials in place. However, entire pages of this part of the law also were deleted during negotiations, including a legislatively backed fee and penalty structure.

Maryland has kept in place a producer responsibility advisory council, consisting of up to 21 members appointed by the Secretary [of the Environment], representing a broad range of interested stakeholders, including representatives from local government recycling agencies, not-for-profit groups, recyclable materials collectors and processors, retailers and trade associations.

Also part of the signed bill are instructions for the Office of Recycling in the Department of the Environment to procure a statewide recycling needs assessment. The Office of Recycling has been instructed to hire an independent consultant with an assessment scope that includes an analysis of the state’s current solid waste streams, including discarded materials generated in the state by local jurisdiction, type and material.

The analysis also will examine current disposal and diversion methods and “associated costs and revenues for [both] solid waste disposal programs [and] for recycling programs, collection and tipping fees.”

The needs assessment is the most comprehensive aspect of the law and includes a look at the reuse infrastructure in the state, an evaluation of commingled recycling processing facility worker conditions wages and benefits and “opportunities to increase employment in the recycling industry by material type.”

The version of the Maryland EPR law signed by Moore can be found here.