Packaging Action Plan

Packaging Task Force
Washington State Department of Ecology 
F-WRRLC-91-105 
Jan91

Focus
Packaging Action Plan

The Packaging Action Plan was developed by the Packaging Task Force under legislative authority granted by Chapter 431, Section 48, 1989 Laws of Washington, a part of the Waste Not Washington Act. The plan identifies methods of reducing the volume, weight and toxicity of packaging entering the waste stream, increasing its recyclability, and increasing use of recycled content in its manufacture. The report is that of the Packaging Task Force, not the Department of Ecology. There is not consensus on all the recommendations in the report from all Task Force members.

Task Force Recommendations

Major recommendations follow, and dissenting views are noted:

• Under existing law, local governments can not ban packaging until July 1, 1993. After that date, existing law allows them to prohibit the use or sale of packaging without restriction. The Task Force proposes that after July 1, 1993 banning authority would be vested in the Department of Ecology. It is proposed that the state permanently preempt local government authority to ban packaging, and that state authority be structured in the following ways:

1. All packages would be required to use post-consumer recovered material in packaging. Exemptions shall be granted for packages used at least five times in the same or a substantially similar distribution system, or for packages of which the manufacturer demonstrates that waste reduction and/or source reduction necessitates use of virgin material, or for packages for which there is no post-consumer material supply, or for packages which are prohibited by state or federal regulation from containing post-consumer recovered material; and

2. A target recycling rate would be set for each packaging material. The Department of Ecology could ban packages made of materials not being recycled at the statewide target recycling rate provided that:

a) cause is shown for the ban; and
b) a viable substitute exists which is recycled in the state at the statewide target recycling rate for that material; and
c) the substitute does not increase the net weight or volume of disposed waste. Any party could petition Ecology for review of a package (Environmental, citizen members and the Task Force representatives from the City of Seattle, Thurston County and Whatcom County object to these restrictions on banning. Some believe that setting recycling rates will discourage composting of paper.); and

3. Intentional addition of the most toxic heavy metals used in packaging would be banned. Further recommendations would be made to the Legislature regarding prohibition on the sale or use of other toxic constituents of packaging.

• Establish a Western Regional Packaging Board to educate packaging professionals about package design for waste reduction, reuse and recycling (Two different structures have been proposed.);
• Establish a 10% waste reduction goal by 1993 (reported in 1994) which shall increase by 2% a year until 1998 for a total of 20% reduction (by weight) (Environmental members, and representatives of Whatcom County and Thurston County believe that weight alone is not a sufficient measure and/or that the 20% goal is too low. See Appendices Q-9 and Q-10 for details);
• Work to amend federal regulations to allow lightweighting of corrugated shipping containers used to ship goods by common carrier;
• Require use of post-consumer recycled material in packaging. Packages used at least five times in the same or a substantially similar distribution system, or for which the manufacturer demonstrates that waste reduction and/or source reduction necessitates use of virgin material, or for which there is no supply, or which are prohibited by state or federal regulation from containing post-consumer recovered material shall be exempt (Environmental members believe that this exemption creates an intolerable loophole.);
• Require that if the claim is made that a package is made of recycled content, it must contain at least 25% post-consumer recovered materials (by weight). If the content level is less than 25%, the package may contain a statement identifying the content as a percent of the total package weight;
• Enact legislation requiring that rigid plastic containers distributed in Washington State bear a code signifying the type of plastic resin used (Environmental members and the representative of Thurston County believe that plastic codification systems will institutionalize use of plastics, an undesirable development.);
• Enact legislation encouraging manufacturers of flexible plastic packaging distributed in Washington State to label the product with a code signifying the type of plastic resin used;
• (Environmental members and the representative of Thurston County believe that plastic codification systems will institutionalize use of plastics, an undesirable development. See Appendix Q-13 for details.);
• Conduct a five year public education program aimed at changing consumer behavior, including:

- A multi-media packaging reduction campaign
- The conduct of solid waste audits of selected businesses with fifty or more employees (The Task Force proposes that this activity be voluntary. The Whatcom County representative proposes that it be mandatory. See Appendix Q-12 for details.)
- A year long pilot project on bulk distribution systems;

• Establish a Packaging Council comprised of fifteen members with equal representation of industry, government, and the public with authority to

- Set minimum permissible levels of post-consumer recycled content required in packaging;
- Collaborate with Ecology in the setting of target recycling rates for packaging materials;
- Monitor progress toward the ten percent (10%) waste reduction goal by 1993 and recommend to the Legislature package design standards and other measures if the strategies identified in this report fall short of that goal;
- Recommend to the Legislature the banning of toxic constituents in packaging;
- Make recommendations to the Legislature regarding package labeling systems, and changes in the flexible plastic coding system in its first annual report;
- Advise the Department of Ecology on provision of a five year education strategy identified above;
- Make other recommendations relating to packaging as appropriate; and
- Make a specific recommendation concerning its continuation or termination in its 1996 report to the Legislature.

• Conduct in-depth waste stream composition sampling regularly;

• Institute rate incentives for all solid waste utility customers in Washington State;

• Institute price preferences or set asides for state procurement of goods packaged in packaging made from secondary materials, and for source reduced products, if possible; and

• Educate purchasing officers from both public and private sectors about purchasing goods packaged in packages made of post-consumer recovered materials.

• Increase the solid waste disposal tax to pay for the state's obligations identified in this action plan. (Environmental members and representatives of the City of Seattle, Thurston County, Washington Waste Management Association, Tacoma Recycling and Whatcom County object to this funding mechanism.)