Sponsors (8)
The bill funds a federal study to give governments, businesses, and communities evidence and guidance to expand reuse/refill systems—potentially reducing waste and creating opportunities—while not providing funding or requirements for implementation, which could shift adoption costs to businesses and taxpayers and leave future regulatory impacts uncertain.
Local and state governments gain federally produced, actionable analysis to design reuse and refill programs that can reduce waste and disposal costs.
The public gains greater transparency and a harmonized evidence base as the federal report makes evaluations publicly available and supports alignment of state, local, and international best practices.
Small-business owners receive a clear assessment of the economic costs and benefits of deploying reusable/refill systems to inform their investment decisions.
Small businesses and local governments may face the upfront costs to adopt reuse/refill systems the report identifies as beneficial because the bill does not provide funding or mandate implementation.
If the report's findings later prompt regulatory action, businesses could face additional compliance costs that are not estimated in the study.
Identifying needs for equitable distribution may reveal gaps that require public investment, potentially increasing taxpayer obligations, including for low-income communities.
Based on analysis of 2 sections of legislative text.
Requires EPA to publish, within two years, a public report evaluating feasibility and best practices for reuse and refill systems across selected sectors.
Official title: To require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to prepare a report on reuse and refill systems, and for other purposes.
Introduced February 4, 2026 by Joseph Neguse · Last progress February 4, 2026
Requires the EPA Administrator to prepare a public report, within two years of enactment, that evaluates the feasibility and best practices for reuse and refill systems across selected sectors (for example: food service, consumer food and beverage, cleaning and personal care products, shipping, and public schools). The report must assess system types and scales, equitable distribution approaches, job creation potential, economic costs and benefits to businesses and waste managers, government supports needed, and barriers to wider adoption, drawing on state, local, foreign examples and stakeholder input. Defines "Administrator" and ties the statutory definition of "State" to the environmental statutes, but creates no direct regulatory mandates, funding authorizations, tax changes, or operational programs — it is an EPA study and feasibility evaluation with stakeholder consultation requirements and a two-year deadline for publication.