Commission hears electronics EPR briefing; commissioners request more analysis on convenience and costs

The Massachusetts Product Stewardship Commission heard a detailed briefing on electronics Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) models in the United States and then held a robust discussion with commissioners, municipal representatives and industry stakeholders. Jason Linnell, executive director of the National Center for Electronic Recycling (NCER), presented state-by-state program differences, collection models, funding approaches and per-capita collection trends; commissioners requested additional local cost data and asked staff to circulate links and state examples cited during the presentation. Why it matters: Electronics are a significant and evolving waste stream. Policy choices about covered products, convenience (collection access), funding methods and treatment of embedded batteries will determine how much material is diverted from disposal, who pays and how convenient recycling will be for residents. NCER’s presentation summarized U.S. experience: about 25 states plus the District of Columbia have some form of electronics recycling law, with substantial variation in covered products, covered entities (households, schools, small businesses), funding approaches (market-share, manufacturer fees, clearinghouse models, and point-of-sale fees in a few states), and collection strategies (municipal collection sites, nonprofit drop-off, retail take-back, curbside or mail-back in limited cases). Linnell explained that per-capita pounds collected has declined in many states, in part because the average weight of devices has fallen as cathode-ray-tube equipment has been replaced by lighter flat-panel devices. Commissioners raised recurring questions. Several requested clearer state comparisons and more municipal cost data. Commissioner Janet Dominance said she would provide municipal cost information from the Massachusetts Product Stewardship Council and Product Stewardship Institute research. Commissioner Neil Ryan emphasized convenience and equity, saying fees at drop-off can discourage residents and lead to illegal dumping; he said he wants "no fees to the consumers" where possible. Tracy Triplett from the Attorney General’s Office asked about coordination between electronics and battery EPR programs; Jason Linnell said coordination is still evolving and most states currently treat the two programs separately. Public commenters from industry — Daniel Zotos (Redwood Materials), Scott Cassello and Jeremy Jones (former electronics-company employee, now with American Coatings Association) — urged harmonization across states and noted ongoing federal-level convenings on battery and electronics recycling. The commission did not take a final vote on electronics EPR. Commissioners asked staff to gather additional information, including: comparative state statutory language and links; municipal cost estimates for collection, transfer and on-site processing; and further analysis of convenience standards (distance/coverage, events vs. permanent sites). Commissioners and staff discussed next steps: staff will circulate NCER slides and links; the commission will consider additional meetings or referral of detailed follow-up work to an appropriate advisory body so the January final report can include clearer, state-comparison analysis.