17:50
The Colorado Experience
Michigan Recycling Coalition
Overview
This video details the development and implementation of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) for packaging in Colorado, presented by Liz Chapman of Recycle Colorado. It outlines the legislative journey, starting from earlier waste diversion initiatives like the Resource Recovery and Economic Opportunity Fund and the Front Range Waste Diversion Fund. The presentation highlights the challenges of stagnant recycling rates, the crucial role of stakeholder engagement, and the specifics of Colorado's EPR law, including its funding mechanism, producer obligations, exemptions for small businesses, and the establishment of the Circular Action Alliance as the producer responsibility organization (PRO). The video also touches on the advisory board's role and offers recommendations for other states considering similar legislation, emphasizing the importance of adequate timelines and broad stakeholder input.
How was this?
Save this permanently with flashcards, quizzes, and AI chat
Chapters
- Recycle Colorado, initially the Colorado Association for Recycling, has a long history of advocating for waste reduction policies.
- Early initiatives like the Resource Recovery and Economic Opportunity Fund (2007) established landfill tipping fees to fund recycling and composting programs and public drop-off center rebates.
- Despite funding, Colorado's recycling rate remained stagnant between 14-16% from 2007 to 2019, prompting further legislative study.
- The Front Range Waste Diversion Fund (2019) increased landfill fees to generate more revenue for waste diversion efforts, but still proved insufficient to significantly improve recycling rates.
Understanding the historical context of recycling policy in Colorado demonstrates the gradual build-up of support and the identification of persistent challenges that eventually led to the adoption of EPR.
The establishment of a 14-cent per cubic yard tipping fee at landfills, with funds directed towards community recycling programs and drop-off center rebates.
- Data showing stagnant recycling rates informed the state legislature, leading to a subcommittee study in 2019 on how to advance recycling.
- A subsequent EPR study in 2020 by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) explored the feasibility of a producer responsibility program.
- Extensive stakeholder engagement, including over 77 meetings, was critical in building consensus among diverse groups like national companies, local businesses, governments, and environmental organizations.
- The producer responsibility bill and the establishment of a Circular Economy Development Center were passed in 2022 as a result of these studies and collaborations.
This chapter illustrates that significant policy changes like EPR require extensive research, data-driven justification, and broad coalition-building to overcome inertia and achieve legislative success.
Conducting over 77 stakeholder meetings in the lead-up to drafting the EPR bill to ensure diverse input and support.
- The EPR program mandates free, convenient recycling services for all residents, aiming for a standard where curbside trash service is matched by curbside recycling service.
- The program is funded by producers (brand owners) of packaging sold in Colorado, with an exemption for businesses with $5 million or less in gross sales in the state.
- The program will be operated by an industry-created non-profit, the Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO), under the regulatory oversight of the CDPHE.
- An Advisory Board composed of non-producer stakeholders will provide input to ensure the program's practicality and feasibility.
This outlines the core mechanics of Colorado's EPR law, defining who is responsible, how it's funded, and how it will be managed, providing a blueprint for how such programs operate.
Exempting businesses with $5 million or less in gross sales in Colorado from EPR participation to protect smaller local businesses.
- The Circular Action Alliance (CAA) has been selected as Colorado's PRO and is also active in other states like Maryland, aiming for a cohesive approach to EPR.
- Founding members, including major recognizable companies, have invested significantly in the CAA before being legally mandated, demonstrating commitment to the program's success.
- The PRO develops a plan for statewide recycling implementation, which is reviewed by the Advisory Board and CDPHE for feasibility.
- Evidence from Europe and Canada suggests that EPR programs do not significantly increase consumer prices, as producer fees are typically very small fractions of a cent per product.
This highlights the operational arm of the EPR law and addresses potential concerns about cost pass-through to consumers, grounding expectations in international experience.
Major companies investing hundreds of thousands of dollars into the Circular Action Alliance as founding members to ensure a functional program.
- Colorado's experience suggests that legislative checkpoints like the Joint Budget Commission can create compressed timelines, potentially rushing needs assessments.
- It is recommended to allocate at least 12 months for needs assessment and scenario creation to ensure thoroughness.
- Consistent communication and collaboration with other states pursuing EPR are essential for harmonizing definitions and approaches.
- Extensive stakeholder engagement and the establishment of an effective Advisory Board are crucial for practical and feasible program design.
These recommendations offer valuable lessons learned from Colorado's EPR implementation, providing practical advice for other jurisdictions to avoid similar pitfalls and ensure a smoother rollout.
The recommendation to allow at least 12 months for needs assessment and scenario creation, a lesson learned from Colorado's compressed timeline.
Key takeaways
- Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is a policy approach where producers are given financial and/or physical responsibility for the end-of-life management of their products' packaging.
- Stagnant recycling rates, even with existing funding mechanisms, often necessitate more comprehensive solutions like EPR.
- Successful EPR legislation requires extensive stakeholder engagement to build consensus among diverse interests, from industry to environmental groups.
- Colorado's EPR program aims to provide universal, free recycling access to residents, funded by producers, with specific exemptions for small businesses.
- The operational success of an EPR program relies on a well-structured Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) and an active, informed Advisory Board.
- International experience suggests EPR programs do not lead to significant increases in consumer prices.
- Adequate timelines for research, needs assessment, and program design are critical for the effective implementation of EPR legislation.
Key terms
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO)Recycle ColoradoResource Recovery and Economic Opportunity FundFront Range Waste Diversion FundColorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE)Circular Action AllianceStakeholder EngagementAdvisory BoardPackaging Law
Test your understanding
- What were the key challenges that led Colorado to consider an EPR program for packaging?
- How does Colorado's EPR law define 'producer' and what are the criteria for exemption?
- What is the role of the Circular Action Alliance within Colorado's EPR framework?
- Why is stakeholder engagement considered essential for the successful development and implementation of EPR legislation?
- What lessons has Colorado learned regarding the timeline for implementing EPR that can inform other states?