March 23, 2023
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
401 E State St
Trenton, New Jersey 08608

Dear Sirs,

Our comment on implementation of Rigid Plastic Container Law by State of New Jersey

The Japan Machinery Center for Trade and Investment (“JMC”) is a non-profit organization.
It was established in December 1952 in accordance with the Japanese Export and Import Trade Law
under the authorization of the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan. The objective of theJMC is to engage in activities that enhance the common benefit of member companies and promote
the sound development of international trade and investment by the machinery industry. JMC
comprises member companies engaged in machinery and systems-related exports and foreign
investments such as machinery manufacturers, trading houses and engineering companies. At present,
the total number of JMC member companies is about 240.
Our committee handles environmental and product safety issues regarding products for trade and isstrongly concerned with overseas environment- and product safety-related regulations on products.
From this standpoint, we would like to comment on implementation of the Rigid Plastic Container
Law by the State of New Jersey.

Rm. 401, Kikai Shinko Bldg., 3-5-8 Shiba-koen Minato-ku, Tokyo 105-0011, JapanTel : 81-3-3431-9230 , Fax : 81-3-3436-6455
E-mail : morikawa@jmcti.or.jp
URL : https://www.jmcti.or.jp

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact our secretariat (Mr. Chiaki Morikawa, E-mail:morikawa@jmcti.or.jp)).

Sincerely yours,

KANNO Yasuhiko
Chairman
Environment Law Committee2Our comments on implementation of Rigid Plastic Container Law by State of New Jersey
We have learned from the following FAQ that in order to implement “An Act concerning the use ofpostconsumer recycled content in certain containers and packaging products (abbreviated as “this act”)
and supplementing Title 13 of the Revised Statutes”: Senate Bill S2515), the state Department ofEnvironmental Protection (hereinafter referred to as “NJ DEP”) will develop implementing regulations.
https://www.nj.gov/dep/dshw/recycled-content/recycled_content_faqs.pdf)
We are pleased that the implementing regulations will enable manufacturers to take specific steps tocomply with this act.
We have been vigorously committed to protecting human health and the environment, to reduce
plastic waste worldwide, to voluntarily promote assessment activities that take into account the entire
life cycle, and to comply with national regulations. In particular, we have been active in complying
with regulations on plastic waste by a number of countries, including the U.S. and those in Europe.
We support the intent of this act to stimulate the market for recycled materials by mandating the useof recycled materials in rigid plastic containers in order to reduce the amount of plastic disposed of in
New Jersey landfills and to make better use of resources. However, the implementation of this act on
rigid plastic containers used for electrical and electronic equipment (hereinafter referred to as “EEE”)
would impose a significant burden on industry, including manufacturers and importers, as well as theAmerican public, in exchange of its contribution to achieving above objective. Therefore, we would
like to request that the implementation of this act be carefully considered.
EEE holds a significant amount of precision equipment, and high-quality rigid plastic packaging
may be essential to delivering the products to customers in the State of New Jersey withoutcompromising their performance. The rigid plastic container of EEE is not just a packaging material,
but also an important component that plays a role in protecting the quality of EEE over the long term,
and the introduction of recycled materials requires extremely careful and long-term consideration.
On the other hand, some rigid plastic containers for EEE are also used by consumers to store EEE
after purchase, and these packages are unlikely to be disposed of immediately and landfilled, so we
believe that regulating them will not contribute much to achieving the original purpose of this act.
Therefore, in light of the above advantages and disadvantages, we believe that it is appropriate toexclude rigid plastic containers for EEE from the scope of this act.

3

If the NJ DEP’s conclusion, after sufficient review of the advantages and disadvantages of this act,
is that it should be applied to some EEE rigid plastic containers, we would like to ask you to harmonize
the regulations across the U.S. so as not to impede the distribution of EEE throughout the U.S.
Thus, we would like to submit the following comments to ensure that the implementation of this act
does no more harm to the EEE industry (including manufacturers and importers) or the American
public than is necessary to achieve its legitimate objectives.
1. Exclusion of rigid plastic containers of EEE from the scope of this act
EEE is used in a wide range of fields, including medical equipment, infrastructure equipment, andtelecommunications equipment, as well as consumer electronics, and are goods constituting the basisof the lives of U.S. citizens.
As a component part of EEE, the rigid plastic container of EEE plays an important role in protecting
EEE from shock during transportation, as well as protecting EEE from moisture, toxic chemicalsubstances, and dust in the environment during storage. For this reason, rigid plastic containers for
EEE are required to meet the same strict quality standards as EEE. When the recycled materials areintroduced, it is expected that the required quality standards will not be met due to aging deteriorationof the resin, contamination of toxic chemical substances, etc., requiring long-term consideration
including major design changes.
Due to this background, the current situation is that taking into consideration the advantages anddisadvantages of using recycled material, the recycled materials have hardly been introduced into rigid
plastic containers for EEE. When implementing this act, uniformly requiring the use of recycledmaterials for EEE rigid plastic containers will lead to a degradation of EEE quality and will be a great
disadvantage not only to the EEE industry (including manufacturers and importers) but also to many
U.S. citizens.
For the above reasons, we would like to request that rigid plastic containers of EEE be excluded
from the scope of this act.
2. Harmonization of rigid plastic container requirements across the U.S.: (align withCalifornia Rigid Plastic Packaging Container Law)
Even if NJ DEP’s full risk assessment determines that certain EEE rigid plastic containers need to beregulated, we would like to ask that the applicable rigid plastic requirements be harmonized across theU.S. so as not to impede distribution and trade into the U.S.
Specifically, in implementing this act, we would like to request that the scope of application beconsistent with the existing California Rigid Plastic Packaging Container (RPPC) Law ※1 (hereinafter4referred to as CA RPPC). When exporting to the U.S., we generally cannot restrict EEE’s shipments
to only certain states, and all products exported to the U.S. will need to conform to a law enacted insingle state.
※1
https://calrecycle.ca.gov/Plastics/RPPC/
Currently, we are ensuring compliance with the CA RPPC for all EEE shipped to the U.S. and arepromoting the introduction of the recycled materials or source reduction for clamshell packages, etc.
We are also working to ensure that all EEE shipped to the U.S. complies with the CA RPPC. If this act
imposes requirements beyond the CA RPPC, EEE entities will be required to comply with theadditional requirements for all products shipped to the U.S. This will require significant design changes
and a long evaluation period to ensure quality. If EEE entities cannot ensure quality by the deadline,
they will be forced to abandon shipments of their products and electronic components, to the great
detriment of the industries and U.S. citizens.
Therefore, we would like to make the following recommendations based on the differences with theCA RPPC. The following is an explanation of the requirements of this act that exceed those of the CA
RPPC. The requirements for “rigid plastic containers” in this act and the CA RPPC are largely
equivalent, but this act omits the following requirements.
(1) The definition of rigid plastic container is broader than the existing CA RPPC and covers awider range of EEE packaging materials (containers without lids; parts trays, etc.).
Extracted from CA RPPC § 17943. Definitions
Rigid plastic packaging containers are capable of at least one closure (including but
not limited to closure occurring during the production or manufacturing process),are sold holding a product, and are composed entirely of plastic except that rigid
plastic packaging containers may have:(A) Caps, lids, labels, handles, hinges, and other incidental packaging elements madeof non-plastic material; and(B) Additives such as pigments, colorants, fillers, and stabilizers that are part of theplastic polymer compound.

As a result, a wide range and vast variety of rigid plastic packaging containers that “are NOT capableof at least one closure (containers without lids)” and “plastic packaging containers that are NOT
composed entirely of plastic,” which were previously not subject to the regulation, are now includedin the list of containers, for example, from “trays used to store semiconductor components for
mounting electronic components” to “trays used to store small EEEs and their components.”
EEE manufacturers will need an enormous amount of man-hours and a long study period to selectthe recycled materials and ensure their quality, and if they are unable to deliver them by the production

5schedule deadline, they will be forced to stop shipping their products throughout the U.S. As a result,U.S. citizens will suffer great disadvantages, including difficulties in obtaining EEE that they need fortheir daily lives.
For these reasons, if the scope of application is to include rigid plastic containers for EEE, we would
like to request that “containers that are NOT capable of at least one closure (containers without lids)”
or “plastic packaging containers that are NOT composed entirely of plastic” be excluded from thescope, consistent with the CA RPPC.
(2) “Source reduction”, which is allowed as an option in CA RPPC, is not allowed in this act, andthe use of PCR (post-consumer recycled) materials is mandatory.
CA RPPC Container Compliance Options
Source Reduction (achieved by):
Reduced Container Weight: The RPPC’s weight must be reduced by at least 10%.
(14CCR Section 17945.3 (d)(2))
Product Concentration: Product held within the RPPC must be concentrated by at least
10 %. (14CCR Section 17945.3 (d)(3))
Product Concentration and Reduced Container Weight Combination: The RPPC has acombination of increased product concentration and reduced container weight. (14CCR
Section 17945.3 (d)(4))
Comparison to Similar Products: The RPPC, when compared to another productmanufacturer’s container that is alike in material type, shape, and volume, must weigh at
least 10% less. (14CCR Section 17945.3 (d)(5)We believe that reducing the volume or weight of the product as source reduction will achieve theoriginal goal of the New Jersey Rigid Plastic Container Law. Therefore, we would like to request thatthe exemption be granted if source reduction is addressed as a Container Compliance Option.
3. Exclusion of certain EEE rigid plastic containers from the scope of application
Although there is some overlap with the explanation in 2. above, we would like to request that at least
the following EEE rigid plastic containers be exempted from this act. While revisions to current law
may be required for 1. and 2. above, we believe the following interpretation can be clarified by DEP
by means of issuing guidance without amending the current text of the act.

6

(1) Trays for electronic parts
Trays for electronic parts are the type of containers that store electronic components such as semiconductorsand are attached directly to mounting machines when mounting on printed circuit boards. They play animportant role in protecting electronic components from impacts, moisture, gases, and toxic chemical substancesin the environment during transportation, storage, and mounting. Currently, it is difficult to introduce therecycled materials because they may impair the performance of electronic components and lead to degradationof EEE safety. We would like you to clarify that these trays are part of the manufacturing equipment and out of
scope of the requirements in the Act.
(2) Plastic trays packaged in paper boxes
Small EEEs are often packaged in plastic trays containing the EEE itself and its accessories and other parts,
which are then further packaged in cardboard or other paper boxes. This plastic tray plays an important role inprotecting the EEE from impacts, moisture, gases, and toxic chemical substances in the environment duringtransportation and storage. In addition, since small EEE is directly touched and used by consumers, special
consideration must be given to the use of toxic chemical substances and the safety of the EEE, and it isdifficult to introduce the use of the recycled materials. This package falls under the category of multi-material
packages that the NJ DEP interprets as out of scope in the first place, and should be considered out of scope inthe same way as blister packs, etc. As such, if the tray alone is not a complete package and is only complete asa package when integrated with a packaging component made of other materials, such as a paper box, wewould like you to clarify that it is not subject to this act.
(3) Corrugated cartons with plastic window
Some small EEEs are shipped directly packed in corrugated cartons with plastic windows, not in plastic trays.
Since such packages fall under the category of multi-material packages in the first place, we would like torequest that it be clarified that they are exempt from the scope of the act, as is the case with blister packs.

(4) Reel-type tape carrier packages
Reel-type tape carrier packages are plastic packaging containers that are attached to mounting
machines to transport and store semiconductors and other electronic components and to mountelectronic components on the printed circuit boards. These packages play an important role inprotecting electronic components from shocks during transportation and storage, and during mounting
machine operation, as well as from moisture, gases, and toxic chemical substances in the environment,
making it difficult to introduce recycled materials.
We would like you to clarify that these packages are not subject to this act because they also function
as part of the manufacturing facility. In the first place, this reel-type tape carrier package should be
excluded from the scope of application because it is flexible and irregularly shaped and does not meetthe requirement of a rigid plastic container that “is capable of maintaining its shape while empty or
while holding other products.”

7

(5) Cushioning materials such as EPS
As for EEE, especially for precision equipment, cushioning materials made of EPS or other rigid
plastic materials are used to protect products from vibration and impact during transportation.
Although some of these cushioning materials are shaped to wrap the products, it should be clarified
that they are not subject to this act because they are not intended to function as containers.

We would appreciate it if you would consider how to implement this act in a way that achieves its
objectives and is not detrimental to industry (including manufacturers and importers) and U.S. citizens,with reference to the above comments.
End8