EPA ordered to study reuse systems—a roadmap for circular economy

What it does

This bill requires the EPA to study and report on reuse and refill systems for products and containers across various sectors (food, beverages, cleaning products, shipping, etc.) within two years. The report must evaluate feasibility, best practices, job creation potential, economic costs and benefits, infrastructure needs, and barriers to implementation—consulting with stakeholders and reviewing programs in states and foreign countries.

Why we flagged it

The bill's sole operative mechanism is a directive to the EPA to research and publish a report on reuse and refill systems. It creates no new regulations, subsidies, or restrictions—only a fact-finding and transparency obligation.

What the text implies

• The report's findings and recommendations may form the basis for future EPA rulemaking or congressional legislation on packaging and waste management, potentially affecting packaging manufacturers and waste-management companies.
• By studying 'equitable distribution' and 'communities of varying population size,' the bill signals interest in environmental-justice framing, which could influence future policy toward stricter producer responsibility or extended producer liability (EPL) schemes.
• The consultation requirement with 'reuse and refill system stakeholders' may give early visibility and input to companies already operating in the circular-economy space, potentially advantaging first-movers.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

The bill mandates a factual, public study of circular-economy infrastructure with no direct restrictions on citizens or removal of protections. It creates transparency about waste-reduction alternatives and their economic viability, which can inform future policy and consumer choice. The study itself imposes no costs on the public.

Named in the bill

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Solid Waste Disposal Act, States, Local governments, Reuse and refill system stakeholders

Where it stands

1 cosponsor: 1 Republicans.

• Jun 18, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in Senate”
• Jun 18, 2025 — Referred to Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works · Congress.gov: “Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works”
• Oct 29, 2025 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Capito without amendment.”
• Nov 20, 2025 — Passed the Senate · Congress.gov: “Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S8398; text: CR S8398)”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

14 lobbying clients named this bill on 17 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $2,031,173 in lobbying spend. A filing names 9 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 94% of bills with at least one filing.

Jeff Merkley, the sponsor, reported $514,925 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• American Forest & Paper Association — $710,000 on 1 filing
• Ocean Conservancy — $403,000 on 2 filings
• Oceana Inc — $280,000 on 1 filing
• World Wildlife Fund, Inc. — $220,000 on 1 filing
• Paper Recycling Coalition — $120,000 on 2 filings

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.