WHEREAS, sustainable management and circularity of materials are critical to safeguarding both environmental health and national security by ensuring that essential resources are available for future generations and reducing the need for raw material imports from foreign adversaries.

WHEREAS, strengthening domestic manufacturing by reducing dependency on hostile foreign governments and building resilient, secure supply chains is vital to the long-term stability of our nation and critical for economic and environmental resilience.

WHEREAS, many states have enacted Extended Producer Responsibility (“EPR”) Packaging laws, which hold product manufacturers and producers responsible for the environmental impacts of their packaging by assigning cost-sharing responsibilities for state and local recycling programs, aligning with national goals for sustainability and resource conservation.

WHEREAS, many of these state solutions could be enhanced by granting businesses more authority and flexibility in how EPR programs are designed and executed, particularly in how recycling infrastructure is developed and maintained, to meet environmental and economic objectives more efficiently.

THEREFORE, NOW BE IT RESOLVED THAT [insert state] expresses its support for the following principles with an emphasis on protecting the environment, sound resource conservation, and national security:

• Incentives should drive holistic environmental solutions, not bans or mandates: EPR programs should be grounded in market-driven incentives that promote sustainable packaging design and reduce waste, helping to conserve natural resources while fostering innovation. Market forces should be leveraged wherever possible to ensure that environmental goals are met without excessive regulation.
• Private-sector managed, with regulatory alignment: EPR systems should be managed by a producer-led Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO), ensuring that environmental goals are met through private sector innovation and efficiency. The PRO should collaborate with affected parties to develop robust management plans, set collection targets, and publish lists of recyclable materials that align with national recycling goals. The PRO must also ensure the creation of a reliable collection network, the expansion of recycling services, consumer education, and transparent reporting, all while enhancing the nation’s environmental resilience and reducing unnecessary waste.
• Reinvest revenue for environmental and system improvements: All revenue generated by EPR programs must be reinvested into the system to strengthen domestic recycling infrastructure, reduce environmental waste, and improve system performance. These efforts will help decrease reliance on foreign materials and bolster the security of our supply chains. Under no circumstances should these funds be diverted to non-recycling-related uses or general state funds.
• User-friendly and accessible: EPR programs should be designed to be convenient and simple for consumers, encouraging broad participation. Wherever possible, existing infrastructure should be optimized to make recycling more accessible and cost-effective, with the goal of improving environmental outcomes.
• Financially and environmentally sustainable: EPR programs should be cost-effective, minimizing financial burdens on producers and consumers while achieving measurable environmental results. The programs should aim to balance material recovery and recycling with financial sustainability, ensuring both economic and environmental resilience.

Align programs with measurable environmental results: EPR programs should focus on achieving tangible outcomes, including reductions in packaging waste and minimize environmental harm. These goals should be aligned with national resource security priorities, ensuring that our packaging and recycling systems contribute to both sustainability and national resilience.