Producers moving toward EPR readiness

Editor’s note: Learn more about policy trends and many other topics at the 2025 Plastics Recycling Conference on March 24-26 in National Harbor, Maryland. 

With about six months to go until the first extended producer responsibility program for packaging in the U.S. goes live, producers are still largely unprepared but moving in the right direction, those monitoring the transition said.

Resource Recycling has checked in periodically with compliance experts to see how producers are doing with regards to compliance readiness. In December 2023, many companies had not started thinking about the complex and time-consuming process of gathering needed data on packaging. In addition, rules and requirements were still murky. 

By April, there had been little movement, those watching the industry said, though some companies were starting to think about Oregon’s July 1, 2025, start date that once seemed so far away. In its most recent round of rulemaking, Oregon announced a pre-registration deadline of March 31, by which producers are asked to submit 2024 supply data. 

Geoff Inch, senior vice president of producer services for PRO Circular Action Alliance, told Resource Recycling that the numbers have grown disproportionately in Oregon as the deadline approaches, which matches the surge in signups that came before Colorado’s Oct. 1 registration deadline in 2024. 

“We definitely see a surge in registrations related to specific regulatory deadlines,” Inch said. “That really helps.” 

There were particularly high levels of activity in December, he added, once the participant producer agreement was ready. More than 2,400 total producers are now registered with CAA, and around 540 of them are considered top-tier producers, CAA noted in its Dec. 11 quarterly update, meaning they each report more than $2 billion in global revenue annually. Of that number registered, 95% are obligated producers in California, 89% are obligated in Colorado and 88% are obligated in Oregon.

Along with the registration, just under 700 producers have signed participant producer agreements, which allows them access to the reporting guidelines CAA has created, Inch said. 

“That’s a really important moment in the journey with us because it really lays out in detail what you need to do to get your data, what qualitative information we’re going to ask for in our portal,” he said. “I think it’s clarified for a lot of producers sort of exactly what the expectations will be for reporting.” 

Michael Washburn, a consultant on sustainability and public affairs for Washburn Consulting, said he’s seeing obligated producers fall into three categories: those who have no idea they need to be working on compliance, those who are working on it, and those who “are fully aware and are making the strategic choice to not comply.”

“I just find this baffling,” he said of the last group. “I think they either believe they won’t be found, which I think is fantasy, or they think that there won’t be robust enforcement.”

Some may also be holding out for laws to be repealed or changed, he added, but “everything in that category is incorrect.” 

“The laws are very explicit. When you are found you will pay your fees, back to the inception of the program, plus penalties, plus interest, and don’t be shocked if your company ends up listed in an article,” he said. “So why would you take that chance? And the states talk to each other. You build that reputation.” 

Inch added that “there’s really no advantage to sitting on the sidelines – there’s only penalties.”

He said CAA is required by law to post the list of registered producers on their website in several states, which “gives people a lot of visibility to who’s in there – it also gives them visibility to maybe who’s not.”

“We know that people are watching those lists,” Inch said. 

Washburn said even with 2,400 producers registered, that leaves “a lot of companies on the sidelines.” Some of them will get on board after the program starts, he added, especially as companies that have already registered and paid start calling out their competitors who have not.  

“If I were an obligated producer and I was paying the fees, and I had done the work, and I had organized my team, and I had prepared my data and I was in compliance, I would be pretty active in seeking out if my competitors were on the registry,” Washburn said. 

In addition, CAA is required to share a list of any non-compliant producers with state regulators. 

“Our leading action is to work with them to bring them into compliance, between CAA and the producer as much as possible, but after a period of time, if we can’t do that, we’re also required to escalate that to the regulator,” Inch said. “There will be enforcement tools that the regulators have.” 

Washburn anticipates getting an influx of clients in January, and while he’ll offer them support, he said at this point there’s no guarantee they will be ready for March 31. However, it’s worth starting, he added, because it’s better to be able to show regulatory bodies that you’re trying to get in compliance “than if you get discovered and you say, ‘Yeah, I haven’t done anything.'” 

“It’s all going to get real here in a few months,” Washburn added, and “it’s going to be messy, which is not to say it won’t work itself out.” 

Trade associations and CAA have done “an exquisite job of making information available – the question is, is there a receptive audience?” Washburn said. 

Inch echoed that advice, saying that for any producers who are just becoming aware or have not yet registered, the best thing to do is start by registering at the CAA website.

Registering “kicks off the series of events on the journey with CAA. It gets you all the legal agreements that you need in front of you. It gets you the opportunity to sign up for educational webinars, leads you to the guidance and it also allows you to to work with us on any individualized questions you may have in order to sort through your unique obligations or your unique reporting requirements.” 

CAA is also aware that gathering the needed data will be a big effort for producers, Inch said, and has worked to try to find a good spot between gathering what is needed and keeping the start-up as simple as possible. 

“We’ve had to find a balance in our guidance, just recognizing that this is the first time for many of our companies, especially small- and medium-sized companies that maybe haven’t been tracking this from a policy perspective for years,” he said. 

CAA also provides suggested methodologies for estimating data that producers can’t get right away, Inch said, to make sure it can be verified and accurately compared to other producers. 

“We’ve given really clear guidance on where they can estimate and how they can estimate, and then it’s really important that they disclose those methodologies to CAA so that we can work with them on anything that may look like an inconsistency,” he said, adding that CAA will be doing report validations in Oregon during the second quarter. 

Washburn emphasized that producers can’t ignore EPR reporting in the hopes that it goes away, especially as more and more states explore passing packaging EPR laws. 

“This is just going to get to be even busier, which is another reason in my mind to step it up,” he said. 

A version of this story appeared in Resource Recycling on Jan. 3.