Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Battery Epr topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission debates battery EPR elements; no final vote, staff to recirculate draft
Summary
The commission discussed a draft battery EPR recommendation, focusing on whether to align with PRBA model legislation, the treatment of embedded batteries, and the scope of covered battery types; no formal vote was taken.
Get email alerts on the Battery Epr topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Massachusetts Product Stewardship Commission discussed a draft recommendation for rechargeable and primary battery EPR but did not take a formal vote. Commissioners and industry guests debated whether to recommend the Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation/PRBA-style model, whether embedded batteries should be included, which battery formats to cover, and whether retailer take‑back should be mandatory or voluntary. Why it matters: Batteries are widely used in consumer devices; how they are regulated affects recycling logistics, safety, manufacturer responsibility and the scope of any producer-funded program. During the discussion Renita Traver (recorded in the transcript as "Miss Traver") argued in favor of adopting the PRBA model legislation, saying it has been adopted in multiple states and was "well studied." Several commissioners and public commenters pushed back on particular elements. One commissioner identified municipal concerns about convenience and costs and said embedded batteries pose technical and regulatory complications if the state does not already have an electronics EPR law that would capture embedded batteries. Traver noted the PRBA model typically excludes embedded batteries and that adding embedded batteries now would provoke industry opposition and complicate implementation; she said such changes often appear in later iterations of laws. Commissioners agreed to remove a question from the draft that asked whether retailer take‑back programs should be mandatory; the transcript shows consensus to delete that item because most stakeholders did not advocate mandatory retail take‑back. Commissioners asked staff to circulate a revised draft, including references to recently adopted state laws and links to model legislation. Several industry representatives participating from out of state urged harmonization across states and noted an ongoing EPA convening on batteries. No motion or formal vote was recorded on the battery recommendation during the meeting; staff said the item will be recirculated, commissioners will have an opportunity to provide further written comments, and the item will be revisited at a subsequent meeting.

