The commission heard a detailed briefing on PaintCare — a manufacturer‑run paint‑product stewardship program — from Penny McCall and PaintCare staff, followed by extensive public and commissioner Q&A, and then voted in a straw poll to prepare a formal recommendation endorsing an EPR law for architectural paint aligned with the PaintCare model used in neighboring states.

Penny McCall, Senior Vice President for Government Affairs at the American Coatings Association, described the program’s development and operations, saying the industry “was approached by the Product Stewardship Institute” and that stakeholders agreed to a stewardship model that placed program operation with a stewardship organization. Scott Cassell, CEO and founder of the Product Stewardship Institute, and PaintCare staff answered technical and policy questions. PaintCare staff said their model is statewide, funded entirely by a point‑of‑sale fee paid by consumers (implemented by manufacturers remitting fee revenue to the stewardship organization), and overseen by a state environmental agency.

Key operational details presented to the commission included:
- Program footprint: PaintCare operates in 11 U.S. states and is working in Illinois and Maryland; when Illinois and Maryland begin operations PaintCare will cover about one‑third of the U.S. population.
- Funding: 100% of PaintCare revenue comes from a per‑container fee assessed at retail; typical fees described were roughly $0.30–$0.65 for pints/quarts, $0.65–$1.35 for 1–2 gallon containers, and $1.50–$2.45 for 5‑gallon containers; a common per‑gallon example cited was $0.75–$0.80.
- Network and access: PaintCare works with municipal household hazardous waste programs and recruits retail collection sites; in the 11 states PaintCare reported about 2,500 year‑round collection sites (about 2,400 retail locations) and over 9,500 one‑day events historically; the organization aims to offer a collection location within 15 miles for residents.
- Material outcomes: PaintCare estimated that about 80% of leftover collected paint is latex (water based) and that recycling/re‑processing rates for latex typically run about 70–80% depending on state; solvent‑based paint accounts for roughly 20% of the collected stream and is managed separately.

Commissioners and members of the public pressed on cost impacts, cross‑border retail competition, municipal staffing burden, how commercial painters and large generators are served, program accountability and oversight, and definitions (including whether aerosols and other “paint products” are included). Tracy Triplett from the Attorney General’s Office asked about whether members could gather information outside public meetings; staff described the advisory approach and said advisory groups and program plan materials would be public.

After discussion, the commission approved a motion to prepare a formal recommendation asking the legislature to enact an EPR law for paint aligned with the PaintCare model used in Connecticut, Maine, Rhode Island, Vermont and New York and requested that staff seek enactment by July 31, 2026. The straw poll motion passed (one recorded opposed). Staff will circulate draft recommendation language to commissioners for review before the next meeting.

Speakers also urged that any enabling statute include clear legislative intent, strong oversight agency authority, and measurable goals tied to statewide waste reduction objectives so DEP can require program plans to meet state recycling and reuse targets.