Navigating Legislation: Insights on EPR Implementation ChallengesNavigating Legislation: Insights on EPR Implementation Challenges
In this Waste360 Q&A, Dan Bacehowski, EPR lead/senior client manager at HDR, advises on navigating next steps for municipalities, hauling companies, and materials recovery facility (MRF) operators. He discusses who may end up paying for what, and broaches delegating authority to the producer responsibility organization (PRO).
February 3, 2025

Developing extended producer responsibility bills (EPR) for packaging and getting them passed into law is a complex, time-intensive process. Even once the rules are rubber stamped, there is plenty of work left.
In this Waste360 Q&A, Dan Bacehowski, EPR lead/senior client manager at HDR, advises on navigating next steps for municipalities, hauling companies, and materials recovery facility (MRF) operators. He discusses who may end up paying for what, and broaches delegating authority to the producer responsibility organization (PRO).
Waste360: When do you start preparing for EPR?
Bacehowski: If you are a municipality, processor, hauler, or member of an organization championing a packaging EPR bill, get involved in bill discussions early. That way you can help provide input on the framework and requirements via your lens.
If EPR has already passed, start preparing for program implementation by developing a relationship with the PRO and EPR-related state regulatory contacts to understand when reimbursement contractual discussions can start and how your existing contracts may fit within the system. You may need to adjust to align with the PRO’s contractual needs.
Waste360: Once the framework is carved out and the law has passed, how do hauling companies, MRF operators, and municipalities each prepare?
Bacehowski:
a hauling company Engage with the PRO and share accurate information about your customers, routes, education practices, contracts, and costs to facilitate a seamless reimbursement application process.
a MRF operator Engage with the PRO and share accurate material quantities, feedstock compositions, throughput capacity, material sortability, processing technology, potential equipment replacement or improvement needs, contamination, residue, education efforts, processing costs, end markets, and existing contractual information.
a municipality Engage with the PRO and share collections and/or processing contract information (if managed through the municipality), education or stakeholder engagement efforts and costs for those programs, unique recycling ordinances, and community characteristics (population, multi-family housing info, languages spoken, etc.). If a municipality operates its own collection services or facilities, these capital and operating costs are also helpful to the PRO.
Waste360: How and when do you bring in producers?
Bacehowski: Producers should be brought in during legislation development to provide input on the language, helping achieve consistency across the country. These systems are not state-specific and often rely on regional approaches to develop a sustainable and circular system for packaging materials.
Waste360: How did Colorado handle assigning responsibility to the PRO compared to Maine, Maryland, or Oregon?
Bacehowski: Colorado designated responsibility to the PRO earlier than other states, requiring the PRO to manage the statewide needs assessment in advance of program planning.
Both Maine and Oregon’s needs assessments were managed by regulators in those states, even compartmentalizing assessments to specific parts of the system (like collections, processing, or end markets).
Waste360: What was each state’s rationale in determining who would manage this early work?
Bacehowski: In the case of Colorado, the state had momentum and support within the legislative body, and the state regulators may not have had necessary funding and bandwidth to lead the needs assessment. As a result, the legislators were required to approve the vision for the future system included in the assessment.
Maine and Oregon wanted more control over the initial steps, with the desire to limit producers’ influence over each step toward implementation.
Waste360: In crafting EPR, what might be different considerations in one state vs another?
Bacehowski: Considerations may include job growth, targeted material diversion improvement, greenhouse gas reduction, plastics pollution, access to services through an environmental justice lens, cost burden to public agencies, and input from residential customers.
Waste360: What would PRO’s funding supplement within a municipality?
Bacehowski: This varies by state. The money could supplement education, salaries of education coordinators, collections contract payments, municipally led collections costs (equipment, trucks, drivers, fuel), municipally led transfer station operations, municipally led/operated MRF costs, and potentially others.
Waste360: How do you determine packagers’ fees? What may impact fees?
Bacehowski: This is determined by the volume of packaging material sold within a state, recyclability of packaging material (like end-market viability, multi or mono-material, resin type, sortability, and circularity), and environmental impacts like greenhouse gas emissions or litter.
Waste360: How is environmental justice considered in an EPR program?
Bacehowski: Most states are looking to improve access to services and education and reduce cost, often with an emphasis on multi-family housing and rural communities. Improved education often includes improved engagement with non-English speaking community members.
The needs assessments include a socioeconomic and demographic review of communities, then an assessment of the recycling system through those lenses.
Waste360: Why are EPR states really paying attention to EJ?
Bacehowski: These underserved communities are often where the most systems improvements can occur – added services, increased volumes of material collected, reduced contamination, and education. Additionally, systems were not often historically designed to meet these communities’ needs.
Waste360: I understand there can be gaps in existing data. How do you formulate performance metrics and determine costs with limited information?
Bacehowski: You do your best to fill in data gaps by surveying multiple stakeholders within the state and requesting information from channels where versions of the information may exist, like service providers, municipalities, homeowners’ associations, and industry organizations.
If gaps persist, cost estimates are modeled from similarly sized/demographics communities within the state as well as with consultant expertise.
Waste360: What have been some of your greatest learnings as you work with states to help model a realistic program?
Bacehowski: Improvements to statewide systems have to begin with the end in mind. Without responsible end markets needing material, increased volumes of any material type is not viable.
Waste360: Can you update us on the two states you currently support in preparing for their EPR programs?
Bacehowski: We’ve been working in Colorado with their PRO, Circular Action Alliance (CAA), and regulator, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), to conduct the needs assessment, which was completed in early 2024. Now we are assisting CAA with program plan development for their draft submittal in February 2025 with the approved plan expected to be ready in 2026.
In Maryland, we are working with the Maryland Department of Environment (MDE) on a needs assessment. The draft report will be delivered to MDE by January 2025, and legislation could be introduced this year.
Waste360: What’s the next step?
Bacehowski: Our HDR EPR team is pursuing work with multiple states throughout the country in 2025, including Illinois, California, and Minnesota. In 2026, we’re excited about Washington, Michigan, potentially Tennessee, and multiple other states that have introduced legislation.
Other states that we may expect to move EPR for packaging legislation forward in the next few years include Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Indiana, South Dakota, and likely others in the New England and Mid-Atlantic areas. These states are learning from the policies that are working well for their predecessors and introducing legislation that meets the needs of all parties, which is encouraging.
You May Also Like