The second day of the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors (NAW) v. Feldon bench trial in Oregon moved from explaining the structure of the state’s new recycling law to examining how it affects businesses that operate across state lines.
The trial focuses on whether Oregon’s Plastic Pollution and Recycling Modernization Act (RMA) places an unconstitutional burden on interstate commerce. Much of Wednesday’s testimony centered on the practical difficulties of identifying which companies are responsible for packaging fees, calculating those fees, and managing regional distribution networks.
NAW continued building its case that Oregon’s implementation of the recycling law reaches beyond the state’s borders. Oregon argued that the problems described by witnesses reflect business choices or early implementation hiccups, not flaws in the law itself.
The court heard from four new witnesses after NAW finished its direct examination of Cory Rodriguez, vice president of sales for R.J. Schinner Co., Inc.
Related: State Releases Final Guidance for AB 130 VMT
A distributor’s compliance burden
Rodriguez testified about the effort required to identify and weigh multiple layers of packaging, assign the correct fee rates for different materials, and track products through complex distribution chains.
He estimated his company spent roughly 1,000 hours developing systems to comply with Oregon’s reporting requirements. On cross-examination, Oregon noted that much of that work was initial setup and would likely decrease over time.
James Winkle, chief financial officer of Harbor Wholesale Foods, described his company’s efforts to understand the recycling statute. Winkle said Harbor reviewed product data, contacted suppliers, and attended educational webinars.
He also testified that Harbor initially received about $230,000 in fees the company believed were incorrect and was told to pay them while waiting for possible future credits. Oregon pointed out that Harbor had not used the formal process set up by the Circular Action Alliance to challenge those fees.
Related: Appellate Court Vacates and Remands Fluoride Case
Edward Allen, president of WCP Solutions, described the difficulty of figuring out which companies in the supply chain count as “producers” under the law. His company distributes thousands of products from many suppliers, making it hard to know whether packaging fees had already been paid by someone else.
Allen also talked about unexpected fee increases hitting businesses with thin profit margins and raised concerns about the transparency of changing fee schedules.
How California does it differently
Rick Tomlinson, president of the California Strawberry Commission, testified about why California strawberries are almost always sold in plastic clamshell containers. The packaging serves multiple critical functions, including protecting product quality during transport.
