AF&PA Can’t Join NAW’s Oregon EPR Lawsuit, Judge Rules

Why It Matters

The ruling defines who can avoid EPR fees, directly affecting the fiscal viability of Oregon’s pioneering packaging recycling program and sets a precedent for associational challenges nationwide.

Key Takeaways

• Injunction covers only NAW members as of Feb 6
• AF&PA denied intervention; deemed untimely
• DEQ fears fee shortfall if injunction extends past July
• New NAW members cannot claim exemption under injunction
• Trial set for July 13, 2026

Pulse Analysis

Oregon’s Packaging Recycling Modernization Act was the first state‑level extended producer responsibility (EPR) framework for packaging in the United States, mandating fees collected by the Circular Action Alliance. When the National Association of Wholesaler‑Distributors secured a preliminary injunction in February, it halted fee collection for its members, creating uncertainty for the program’s cash flow. The July 13 trial will test whether the injunction can stand, and the recent clarification by Judge Michael H. Simon narrows its reach to members listed before the injunction, preventing a wave of post‑injunction joiners from exploiting the relief.

The Department of Environmental Quality, which administers the fee structure, warned that the limited injunction could jeopardize the program’s financial stability if it extends beyond the trial date. With only a March deadline for the first 2026 fee installment, DEQ reported sufficient receipts to sustain operations through July, but projected shortfalls if the court’s order persists. By rejecting AF&PA’s motion to intervene, the court also signaled that expanding the case to additional industries would be deemed untimely and could delay the already‑tight trial schedule, preserving procedural efficiency but leaving other producers exposed to enforcement.

Beyond Oregon, the decision reverberates across states experimenting with EPR schemes. Colorado’s recent lawsuit by the Independent Lubricant Manufacturers Association mirrors the Oregon dispute, challenging the structure of producer‑responsibility organizations and fee disclosure requirements. As more jurisdictions adopt similar laws, the outcomes of these early cases will shape how trade groups organize legal defenses, influence fee‑collection mechanisms, and determine the overall sustainability of EPR programs nationwide.