    [Senate Hearing 118-173]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 118-173

                   HEARING ON SOLUTIONS FOR SINGLE-USE WASTE:
                   EXPANDING REFILL AND REUSE INFRASTRUCTURE

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                        SUBCOMMITTEE ON CHEMICAL SAFETY,
                    WASTE MANAGEMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE,
                            AND REGULATORY OVERSIGHT

                                     of the

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                          ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION
                                   __________

                                 JULY 27, 2023
                                   __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works

                   [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

            Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

                                    ------

                      U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    54-167                    WASHINGTON : 2025

                   COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                      THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware, Chairman
              SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia, Ranking Member

    BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland         KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
    BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont             CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming
    SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island     MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
    JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon                 PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska
    EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts      JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
    DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan            ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
    MARK KELLY, Arizona                  DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
    ALEX PADILLA, California             LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
    JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania

                   Courtney Taylor, Democratic Staff Director
                   Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director

                                  ----------

       Subcommittee on Chemical Safety, Waste Management, Environmental
                       Justice, and Regulatory Oversight

                         JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon, Chairman
                   MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma, Ranking Member

    BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont             JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
    SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island     ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
    EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts      DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
    JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania         SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
    THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware (ex         Virginia (ex officio)
      officio)

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                                 JULY 27, 2023

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

    Merkley, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator from the State of Oregon........     1
    Mullin, Hon. Markwayne, U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma..     2

                                   WITNESSES

    Meng, Dacie, Policy and Institutions Senior Manager, North
      America, Ellen Macarthur Foundation............................     3
        Prepared statement...........................................     6
        Responses to additional questions from Senators:
        Carper.......................................................    11
            Whitehouse...............................................    16
            Sullivan.................................................    16
    Schmid, Clemence, General Manager, Loop Global...................    20
        Prepared statement...........................................    22
        Responses to additional questions from Senators:
            Carper...................................................    28
            Whitehouse...............................................    31
            Sullivan.................................................    33
    Debus, Tim, President and CEO, Reusable Packaging Association....    35
        Prepared statement...........................................    37
        Responses to additional questions from Senators:
            Whitehouse...............................................    42
            Sullivan.................................................    44

                              ADDITIONAL MATERIAL

    Letter to Senator Merkley and Senator Markwayne from:
        Closed LOOP Partner..........................................    59
        Mercari......................................................    61
    Mercari 2023 Reuse Report........................................    62

                       HEARING ON SOLUTIONS FOR SINGLE-USE
                        WASTE: EXPANDING REFILL AND  REUSE
                        INFRASTRUCTURE

                                  ----------

                            THURSDAY, JULY 27, 2023

                                   U.S. Senate,
             Committee on Environment and Public Works,
             Subcommittee on Chemical Safety, Waste Management,
               Environmental Justice, and Regulatory Oversight,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:45 a.m. in
    room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, the Hon. Jeff Merkley
    (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
        Present: Senators Merkley, Mullin, Carper, Whitehouse.

                OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF MERKLEY,
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OREGON

        Senator Merkley. Good morning. Welcome to the third hearing
    of the Chemical Safety, Waste Management, Environmental
    Justice, and Regulatory Oversight Subcommittee on environmental
    and public health dangers and solutions in regard to plastics.
        The folk singer, Pete Seeger, once said if it cannot be
    reduced, reused, repaired, rebuilt, refurbished, resold,
    recycled or composted, it should be restricted or redesignated
    or removed from production. We are here to explore that
    philosophy in the context of how to have our containers and
    packaging have longer life and serve us better than the single-
    use world we are often living in.
        Generations have grown up believing the mantra of the three
    Rs, reduce, reuse recycle, and then everything is resolved. We
    know with plastics only about 8 percent is recycled. I think
    this past year it dropped to 6 percent. Instead, it gets the
    three Bs: it is buried, it is burned or borne out sea. It
    really has a remarkable, almost near eternal, life span.
        Plastics break down into smaller and smaller pieces until
    they are microplastics. They are in our lungs, our bloodstream,
    in the breast milk we feed our babies, and are full of all
    kinds of chemicals we do not necessarily want in our bodies,
    our bloodstream or our breast milk. That is to say nothing of
    the massive amount of fossil fuels needed to produce single-use
    plastics.
        I was thinking back to when I was in grade school and
    Alpenrose Dairy had a box on our front porch. They dropped off
    the milk in a glass jar. Then the glass jug went back into the
    box and according to whatever you ordered, other products
    showed up. Those glass jars got used eternally.
        After my senior year of high school, I was working as a
    mechanic. The lunchroom had a vending machine. I would get an
    orange soda in a glass bottle. Every time one was different, I
    would put it up on the wall and by the end of the summer, it
    had 8 to 12 different evolutions because the bottles were
    simply washed and reused, and reused and reused.
        Well, the old sometimes becomes the new. Ideas we had in
    the past are looked at again as we face different issues. With
    reusable containers, consumers can either refill containers or
    return them to be sanitized, refilled or restocked on store
    shelves.
        The Ellen MacArthur Foundation, which is represented here
    today by one of our witnesses, estimates that replacing 20
    percent of single-use plastic packaging with reusables would be
    an opportunity worth at least $10 billion of economic activity.
    The World Economic Forum estimates that reusing just 10 percent
    of plastic products would cut the annual amount of ocean
    plastic pollution by 50 percent.
        This is not theoretical. We are already making recycling
    work in Oregon. Oregon was the first State to require that all
    bottles are returnable with a deposit and 90 percent of our
    bottles are recycled. This program employs about 500 people
    across the State.
        Even some of our Oregon brewers are now using a common beer
    bottle that can be cleaned and refilled up to 40 times, meaning
    the bottles do not need to be crushed, melted or remade after
    every use. That actually does go right back to the experience
    we had early in the bottle bill in my State.
        It is not just bottles we are talking about, not just
    drinks we are talking about. At 25 Fred Meyer stores in the
    Portland metropolitan area and some Giant Grocery Stores here
    in D.C., customers can buy products from name brands like
    Cascade, Clorox, Gillette in reusable containers from Loop, an
    innovative company that is also represented on today's panel.
        We are fortunate to have a few witnesses who will help us
    to learn more about how you build a culture and economy of
    reusables. We are joined by Dacie Meng from the Ellen MacArthur
    Foundation which focuses on the issue of plastics and
    rebuilding a circular economy. We are also joined by Clemence
    Schmid, who is the General Manager for Loop, a social
    enterprise whose mission is ``eliminating the idea of waste.''
    With them is Tim Debus, the President and CEO of Reusable
    Packaging Association whose member companies promote reusable
    transport packaging systems like pallets, bins and containers.
        Thank you all for being here this morning.
        With that, let me turn things over to the Ranking Member of
    the committee, Senator Mullin.

              OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARKWAYNE MULLIN,
                U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA

        Senator Mullin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I would like to start with thanking all the witnesses for
    attending the hearing today. We appreciate your taking the time
    to be with us today. It is not always an easy trip to get here
    to Washington, DC. It is definitely not an easy trip getting
    back home. We do want to thank you for taking the time to
    enlighten us and share your thoughts and your experiences.
        As I said in my first subcommittee hearing, I believe free
    market innovation is the best way to promote sustainability in
    all forms of waste management, whether it be in reusable
    packaging or recycling. However, as we discuss potential
    solutions, we must ensure America's supply chains remain
    productive and competitive in the global market.
        As we have seen in America and in other countries, a one-
    size-fits-all mandate is not necessarily the right solution,
    especially for smaller businesses who are less likely to be
    able to absorb those extra costs. Businesses should not be
    forced to spend time and capital on unnecessary and erroneous
    regulations that do not serve their customers or their business
    model.
        Regulatory overreach has the potential to hamper free
    market solutions, including for reusable and refillable
    packaging. These solutions should not require a heavy hand of
    government to be successful in the marketplace.
        Our Nation's economy thrives when private industry has the
    right to choose how to tackle these hard-to-address issues in a
    way that provides realistic, affordable, and attractive
    solutions for both consumers and businesses. Otherwise, these
    ideas simply will not survive.
        Again, I want to thank our witnesses for being here today
    and look forward to your testimonies.
        I yield back.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much.
        We will now turn to our panel. We are grateful for your
    joining us today and bringing your experiences and knowledge.
        We will begin with Dacie Meng from the Ellen MacArthur
    Foundation.

        STATEMENT OF DACIE MENG, POLICY AND INSTITUTIONS SENIOR
           MANAGER, NORTH AMERICA, ELLEN MACARTHUR FOUNDATION

        Ms. Meng. Thank you so much.
        Good morning, Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member Mullin.
    Thank you so much for the opportunity to testify today on this
    important topic.
        As you said, I am Dacie Meng, the Policy and Institutions
    Senior Manager at the Ellen MacArthur Foundation in North
    America. EMF is a non-profit organization with the aim of
    accelerating the transition to a circular economy in order to
    tackle some of the biggest challenges we face today like
    climate change, biodiversity loss, waste, and pollution.
        This work is more important to me than ever, as I have just
    returned from maternity leave last week after having my second
    son. I am very grateful to be here with you all today and be
    talking about this.
        One of EMF's key areas of focus is plastics. We have
    published and continue working on research on the topic. We
    have mobilized businesses and other leaders toward a more
    circular economy for plastics.
        In collaboration with the U.N. Environment Programme, our
    Global Commitment has united more than 500 organizations,
    representing 20 percent of all plastic packaging produced
    globally, behind a common vision of a circular economy for
    plastics that includes reuse. We have convened the Business
    Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty together with WWF.
        That brings together over 130 businesses and financial
    institutions committed to supporting the development of an
    ambitious, effective, and legally binding U.N. treaty to end
    plastic pollution. The Business Coalition has called for global
    support for reuse policies.
        Today, I will quickly cover why reuse is key to addressing
    plastic pollution; what we mean when we talk about reuse; why
    we need policy intervention; and what policy tools can best
    support reuse systems.
        To start, reuse is key to addressing plastic pollution. No
    single strategy can sufficiently reduce plastic leakage into
    the oceans. Reducing plastic pollution requires a comprehensive
    and integrated set of solutions from material redesign, plastic
    reduction, substitution, and reuse, all the way to improved
    recycling and disposal systems.
        Reuse is an essential component in this mix, and has
    incredible economic potential. As Senator Merkley said,
    replacing 20 percent of single-use plastic packaging with
    reusable materials represents a $10 billion opportunity.
    Furthermore, scaling reuse options and new delivery models is
    key to reducing material consumption, decreasing single-use
    plastic applications, taking effective action against plastic
    pollution, and capturing co-benefits.
        To accelerate collaborative action on scaling reuse, EMF is
    currently working with reuse partners and experts to show how
    scaled reuse return systems can perform economically,
    environmentally, and experientially in comparison to single-
    use.
        No, for what is a reuse or a use return system. Reusing
    packaging means that the packaging is refilled or used again
    for the same purpose for which it was conceived. Reusable
    packaging has been designed to be or has proven it can be
    reused a minimum number of times. By contrast, single-use
    packaging is designed to be used just once.
        When talking about reuse, it may be helpful to think of
    business-to-consumer reuse in four different categories:
    packages refilled at home; refilled on the go; returned from
    home; or returned on the go.
        These systems present countless potential benefits, but
    there are challenges to implementing reuse models in practice
    resulting in the need for policy intervention to fully capture
    the reuse opportunity.
        Reuse will be a crucial piece of the solution to reduce
    plastic pollution, but business as usual cannot get us there.
    Current commitments will only get us a 7 percent decrease in
    plastic flow into the ocean by 2040. We need policy
    intervention to address the barriers to building and scaling
    the shared infrastructure and systems required to make the
    economics work and maximize the environmental benefits of
    reuse.
        The Business Coalition for a Global Plastics Treaty has
    called for policy support to encourage further investment into
    reuse and refill systems recommending realistic targets,
    combined with effective economic incentives, definitions, and
    metrics to shift the supply chain.
        Businesses want a level playing field and they need policy
    to get there. We need ambitious, binding reuse targets to reach
    the scale and shared infrastructure needed. We need measures to
    make the economics work like extended producer responsibility;
    deposit return schemes, tax breaks, grant funding, et cetera.
    We need harmonized definitions and design to help ensure we are
    building efficient, beneficial and scalable systems.
        These policies will keep packaging in the economy at its
    highest value for as long as possible and avoid the production
    of virgin plastics. It is best if these policies are packaged
    together at the Federal level and are consistent with the
    action underway at the global level.
        While local and small-scale solutions have demonstrated the
    opportunity and will continue to play a key role in the
    implementation of reuse systems, we need cohesive Federal
    action to accelerate progress.
        Thank you for your time and I look forward to your
    questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Meng follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Merkley. Thank you. Welcome back from maternity
    leave and congratulations. You said it was your second son?
        Ms. Meng. Yes.
        Senator Merkley. That is just awesome. The best part of
    life is raising those kids.
        We are going to turn next to Clemence Schmid, who serves as
    General Manager at Loop Global. We look forward to your
    testimony.

                     STATEMENT OF CLEMENCE SCHMID,
                      GENERAL MANAGER, LOOP GLOBAL

        Ms. Schmid. Thank you, Chairman Merkley and subcommittee
    members, for the opportunity to speak at this hearing.
        I am Clemence Schmid, General Manager of Loop, a global
    reuse platform launched by TerraCycle. As background,
    TerraCycle, headquartered in Trenton, New Jersey, is on a
    mission to eliminate the idea of waste. We employ over 500
    people providing national recycling, recycled content and reuse
    services in 20 countries for 20 years.
        We run national platforms to collect and recycle, how to
    recycle products and packages ranging from flexible food
    packaging to personal protective equipment, toothbrushes to
    pill blister packs, and even cigarette butts and dirty diapers.
    TerraCycle manages the largest contact lens and eye care
    recycling program in the United States, and is the world's
    leading recycler of coffee capsules and beauty waste to just
    name a few.
        TerraCycle launched Loop in 2019. Loop enables brands and
    retailers to shift from single-use packaging systems to
    reusable ones in the most convenient way possible. As a result,
    we have partnered with the leading retailers in the United
    States, France and Japan from Walmart to Carrefour as well as
    200 leading consumer goods companies from Proctor and Gamble to
    Nestle.
        In focusing on the three most important stakeholders to
    transition from disposable to reusable consumption, consumers,
    brands and retailers, the primary goal of Loop has been to
    enable the transition to reuse in the least disruptive way
    possible.
        For consumers, the shopping experience is the same. Simply
    buy your everyday product at your preferred retailer. There is
    no requirement to clean or refill oneself. The only new concept
    is a fully refundable deposit attached to each container at
    purchase. The deposit is then reimbursed in full upon the
    return of the empty package at any participating location
    regardless of where it was purchased. As you can see here, the
    goal is to make a reusable purchase feel like a disposable one.
        For brands, Loop is able to integrate any disposable
    product from baby food to motor oil to peanut butter, shampoo
    or laundry detergent with the goal of driving the least amount
    of change to existing supply chains as possible. In fact the
    only change to enable reuse with Loop was to shift from
    disposable containers to reusable ones.
        For retailers, everything stays the same as with disposable
    product distribution. The only change is to enable the Loop
    return bin at the front of their store.
        Loop acts as a central platform steward and is
    operationally the waste management function of reuse. We
    collect back the empty use container, sort, store and clean
    them and return deposits. Our objective is make reuse as
    convenient and affordable as single-use.
        Reuse has to be a part of our future. Reuse is better for
    the environment. This has been shown multiple times in
    different studies like third party-reviewed life cycle
    assessments from both the private and public sector.
        Reuse creates more jobs. It creates significantly more
    domestic jobs than disposal or even recycling. Reuse avoids the
    negative impact of disposable plastic production, a form of
    pollution that permanently affects disadvantaged and minority
    communities in the United States.
        Reuse is financially viable. It has run at scale in the
    United States until the 1950's and to date runs at scale in
    Canada with beer all the way to Germany with most beverages as
    well as in the business-to-business sector with secondary and
    tertiary packaging.
        By treating packaging as an asset versus the cost of good
    salt, Loop's platform enables manufacturers to innovate and
    create better packaging. In the process, manufacturers become
    financially motivated to make their packages as long lasting as
    possible.
        Reuse is proven with consumers, brands and retailers. The
    key to unleashing the full environmental and economic
    opportunity is simply to scale, more product available in more
    stores and more return points.
        Scaling reuse requires investment from private actors. To
    invest, the business needs certainty. We believe the government
    can support this in two ways.
        Support through legislation. For example, we are very
    supportive of reuse being a part of Senator Merkley's national
    bottle bill and would recommend not to limit it to bottle only.
        Providing public funding to scale reuse funding should be
    focused on the infrastructure creation and the reuse platform
    operators. Now is the moment to act. Delaying action could
    stall the measurable progress that has been made toward a more
    sustainable future and set us back decades.
        With existing consumer demand and voluntary action
    underway, government support will be the catalyst to turn reuse
    into a full-scale national reality.
        I urge you to actively support reuse through legislation
    and investment. I appreciate the opportunity to provide
    testimony and would be pleased to address any questions.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Schmid follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much for bringing your
    expertise on this model to the panel for discussion and
    education. We appreciate it.
        We are going to now turn to Tim Debus. Welcome.

                 STATEMENT OF TIM DEBUS, PRESIDENT AND
                  CEO, REUSABLE PACKAGING ASSOCIATION

        Mr. Debus. Thank you, Chairman Merkley, Ranking Member
    Mullin, and members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to
    share insights on reusable packaging and the important role of
    reuse infrastructures for not only environmental benefit, but
    also for economic value creation and social wellbeing.
        My name is Tim Debus and I represent the non-profit, global
    trade organization for the reusable transport packaging
    industry. The Reusable Packaging Association, or RPA, consists
    of businesses that supply, use, and provide services to supply
    chain packaging products like pallets, bulk bins, containers,
    and trays, for their continuous use in a managed system
    featuring the packaging's recovery, maintenance, and return for
    their intended purpose.
        Today, RPA member companies are collectively involved in
    handling or servicing billions of reusable transport movements
    each year for commercial goods worldwide. Still, overall,
    reusable packaging is the minority share in the supply chain.
        I want to emphasize three points on reusable packaging as
    part of the solution for single-use waste. First, reuse is not
    about the material or product, but the system. No packaging can
    be considered reusable unless it can be collected, returned,
    and prepared cost-effectively for another use.
        We need to be systems-thinkers when it comes to solving
    complex environmental problems. This is the crux of reusable
    packaging in which collaboration and coordination within
    operating systems lead to eliminating solid waste and
    pollution.
        Also, reusable packaging is material neutral, typically
    made from plastics, wood, aluminum, or glass. The key is
    product design for durability, not disposability, using safe
    and recyclable materials, and having the system in place to
    ensure repeated use and end-of-life recycling.
        Plastic-based reusable packaging can be very effective in a
    managed system where product utility is extended and plastic
    material is valued. In my written testimony, I cite several
    real-world examples of how RPA member companies are keeping
    plastics in circulation and out of the environment.
        My second point is that reuse systems are really about
    getting and generating new economic growth and value. If we
    only consider reusable packing in response to environmental
    problems or sustainability quotas, then we are missing the big
    picture opportunity.
        Reusable products can be designed with feature-rich
    properties that optimize performance in user experience and
    embed technologies for smart data capturing outputs. These
    properties can save money in transportation and warehousing,
    reduce food damage and waste, offer ergonomic designs for
    worker safety, perform with automated or robotic handling
    systems and most excitingly, bring tech-enabled visibility to
    supply chains.
        Reuse also builds resiliency in business operations by
    being available and already available for use, avoiding
    volatile raw material pricing and supply constraints that can
    interfere with the endless manufacturing of single-use
    products. A national strategy that incentivizes reusable
    packaging systems can have far-reaching economic impacts. With
    reuse, we can achieve both economic and environmental
    prosperity.
        My third point is that there are many Federal policy
    opportunities to support reuse infrastructures, but we need to
    prioritize reuse and broaden the material scope. Less than 2
    years ago, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law heavily invested
    to transform municipal solid waste management and recycling.
    Now, Congress has the opportunity to prioritize game-changing
    investments in reuse systems, striking the right balance on
    complementary pieces to the puzzle, reuse for waste prevention,
    and recycling for waste management.
        A national strategy in advancing reusable and refillable
    packaging systems should prevent waste of all material types,
    not just plastics. We should institute consistency across waste
    streams to avoid fragmented efforts in our source reduction
    initiatives and change behaviors and culture for the
    responsible use of all resources.
        A final comment is that is lesser known but is very
    important to our industry, is the need to strengthen
    enforcement of crime laws and prosecutions pertaining to the
    theft of stolen reusable packaging assets. We make great
    products with valued materials and far too often, they are
    getting stolen, diminishing the reuse potential.
        We appreciate the time to be here today and I look forward
    to any questions that you may have.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Debus follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Merkley. Thank you all. We are going to dive into
    5-minute periods.
        Ms. Meng, I think your team is involved in the
    international discussion because plastics in oceans, for
    example, is not just an American challenge but a global
    challenge. I think the Foundation convened the Business
    Coalition for Global Plastics Treaty.
        What is really the core goal of that? Is it to set targets
    or is the goal to have requirements that each nation basically
    says yes, we are going to do X, Y, Z to accomplish those goals?
        Ms. Meng. If I understand your question, it is about the
    global U.N. negotiations around the Global Plastics Treaty and
    whether the Business Coalition will be looking at nationally
    determined contributions or national action plans where
    countries are deciding what they are doing or if there will be
    kind of mandatory components to the International Treaty.
        From EMF's perspective, and I believe also the Business
    Coalition's perspective, we need binding reuse targets on the
    topic of reuse in particular but binding targets in the treaty
    itself. Rather than having countries self-determining what
    those targets will be, of course, they will be implemented by
    the individual countries.
        Senator Merkley. Right now, I believe the U.S. is pushing
    to not have binding targets and set up, if you will, kind of a
    happy talk about what could possibly be achieved. That will not
    get us there.
        Ms. Meng. I agree.
        Senator Merkley. Ms. Schmid, I am picturing, for example,
    the plastic jug that I have with liquid laundry detergent. You
    spoke about fully refundable deposits. In Oregon, we have a
    deposit on bottles, a 10-cent deposit. It has resulted in about
    90 percent return rate.
        Is the concept extending that model to everything else,
    shampoo bottles, laundry detergent bottles, so on and so forth?
        Ms. Schmid. The system is about bringing the value into the
    package. We know deposit is a very good way to do it without
    burdening the citizen. Yes, it is about bringing a deposit on
    everything.
        Senator Merkley. We have a system in Oregon where you throw
    everything into a bag. Then the bag is tossed into a tray at a
    warehouse where a computer takes a picture of it and
    immediately evaluates how much of those things are recyclable.
    It is an amazing system to watch in action and works really
    well.
        If that type of program was extended to other plastic
    bottles of all kinds, do you see that as workable? Has any
    State undertaken to really expand? It is really set up for lots
    of things that look like a soda bottle. Other plastic
    containers are maybe much larger and may be different in shape.
    Can the same basic system be expanded?
        Ms. Schmid. That is about building the infrastructure that
    is tailored for reuse as opposed to recycling as we have. In
    reuse, every container is sorted individually. This is what
    Loop has been demonstrating not only in the U.S. but also in
    Europe and in Japan. The technology would be close to what you
    described, but would be a step up in order to be able to
    isolate packaging, shape, material and content.
        Senator Merkley. I have these bottles. Currently some of
    them are reused through that system I described; some are
    reused like glass bottles. All the plastic ones are essentially
    ground up for recycling which means different types of plastic
    have to be sorted and what, how much can be rebuilt from them.
        You are really, if I understand, you are saying the best
    solution would be for the laundry detergent bottle to be able
    to be refilled and reused, rather than ground up to recreate a
    new product?
        Ms. Schmid. Yes, absolutely. It is much better to reuse
    product that is existing than having to transform it even
    through recycling.
        Senator Merkley. Say that bottle arrives at a central
    warehouse with other recycled plastics, how do we get that
    bottle back to the manufacturer to be refilled and restocked on
    the shelf? Is that really a practical strategy?
        Ms. Schmid. It is happening today in the United States and
    in other countries. That is what Loop is doing.
        The way we operate is, to the point you are describing, we
    are bringing all of the bottles to a central location where
    they are being sorted, stored, cleaned and being sent back to
    each of the manufacturers.
        Senator Merkley. The manufacturer does not have to worry
    about any of the complexities of the cleaning. When you have a
    big container of that particular bottle, you can ship it back
    to the manufacturer and they throw it back into their
    production loop?
        Ms. Schmid. Absolutely correct.
        Senator Merkley. My 5 minutes are up. I will turn to
    Senator Mullin.
        Senator Mullin. Thank you, Chairman. Once again, thank you
    to the witnesses for being here. I will start with Mr. Debus.
        In your testimony, and by the way, your voice carries quite
    well. I was listening to you and I thought maybe you should
    have a voiceover job too. I was impressed by that. It reminded
    me of my colleague from Oklahoma, James Lankford. He has one of
    those voices, too. Not much of a face, but a good voice. I am
    kidding. He is a very good friend of mine.
        In your testimony, you stated reusable packaging companies
    in the supply chain continue to demonstrate success in
    responsible management of plastics. How can reusable packing
    support upcycling and recycled plastic content?
        Mr. Debus. There is a tremendous amount of great activity
    taking place in the market. RPA member manufacturing companies
    as well are taking back 100 percent of their products from the
    user community in order to recycle and reprocess into new
    product manufacturing. It is part of that whole circle system,
    the closed loop, if you will, of bringing back their products.
    They are of value so they can use them and regrind and recycle
    material into other products.
        They also really look to put high recycled content rates
    into their manufactured products. One of our member companies
    has an average of over 80 percent of recycled content in their
    pallets and their bullpens of plastic-based products. They are
    achieving full circularity in terms of utilizing plastic
    products, but then getting those products back and continuing
    to use that material when it is time for its recycling in its
    intended reuse.
        For upcycling, it is basically taking the waste material of
    recycled resin and putting it back into useful products. If you
    look at the EPA waste hierarchy pyramid, it is going from the
    lower part of the pyramid to going up from recycling to source
    reduction of reuse.
        Or in the circular economy technical cycle, it is going
    from the outer loop of recycling to the inner loop of preferred
    activity. It is really an upcycling process of taking the
    plastic material and putting it into useful and valuable
    products that can go from recycling to reuse or waste
    management to waste prevention and allow for tremendous value
    associated with the continued life of that product.
        Senator Mullin. How prevalent is reusable packaging in a
    supply chain right now in different or various markets?
        Mr. Debus. Reusable packaging for the supply chain, they
    are the workhorses of commerce. There is an estimate of all the
    industrial and consumer products that move in this Country,
    over 90 percent on a pallet, for example. They are behind the
    scenes but are ubiquitous in the economies and markets all
    around us. It does range pretty considerably between vertical
    markets.
        The automotive industry, for example, is a big user of
    reusable packaging. They have tighter loops between parts to
    assembly and they definitely have that continuous program in
    terms of distributing products for their use.
        The retail industry is where we have a lot of work that is
    needed. Retail could definitely use some additional penetration
    or adoption associated with reusable packaging. There is great
    variability associated with the market adoption of reusable
    packaging for the supply chain.
        Senator Mullin. When we start talking about reusable, which
    is a great concept, the Chairman brought up the fact that milk
    deliveries used to be done that way, I understand that. Every
    time you touch a product, there are labor costs. Cost is
    associated with anything that we do. It has to be economically
    reasonable for us to be able to do that. When we start talking
    about reusable, you realize that the most cost in every product
    out there is labor.
        How do we combine those two because each time you touch
    that product, every time you touch this bottle, touch a
    reusable product, there are costs associated with that. How do
    you merge those? We have labor costs going through the roof in
    the United States, which is good. I am not saying that is a bad
    thing but it also comes with a cost.
        How do you make that efficient for the consumers?
    Ultimately that is who is buying the product. Do any of you
    want to take that on? That is a hard one, right?
        Ms. Schmid. I am happy to kick off. It is a great question.
        There is cost of labor in production of single-use
    packaging today also, so they are not limited to only reuse. I
    think you are touching on a very good point, where you have
    proof in business modeling exercise. We talked about businesses
    which are scale and are profitable on the reusable side versus
    single-use. That is because you are also making savings on
    reusing your assets as many times as you can.
        Mr. Debus. I was going to say this is where scale or value
    becomes critical because with value, you are able to drive down
    the efficiencies at certain touch points, filling up trucks
    with full loads when they are being transported say from point
    of collection to point of maintenance or back to the packing
    lines, for example. When we talk about scaling reuse, it really
    is about having the volume efficiencies to be able to optimize
    the touch points, drive costs down each step of the way.
        The unique thing about reusable packaging is that it really
    brings the supply chain or consumers together with brands,
    because you all care now about the packaging. The packaging has
    value to it today, whereas today, before with single-use, you
    basically passed that packaging down and absolved yourself of
    no longer having accountability or responsibility for it.
        With reusable packaging, the touchpoint is everyone is
    benefiting from the reusable packaging properties that are
    designed to be able to work within each of those steps along
    the supply chain.
        It really requires coordination and working in partnership
    among those who touch the product to be able to optimize those
    savings as well. That is where that system thinking comes into
    play, is to be able to really generate the biggest economic and
    environmental outcome associated with reuse.
        Senator Mullin. Thank you. I went over my time. I apologize
    for that.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you.
        Senator Whitehouse.
        Senator Whitehouse. Thank you, Chairman Merkley. Thank you
    to our Ranking Member for continuing to focus on the issue of
    plastics because it is an unnatural substance and does not
    biodegrade. It just breaks down into smaller and smaller
    pieces.
        We are seeing it increasingly in things like women's breast
    milk, in things like the contents of a baby's diaper, in things
    like raindrops falling from the sky in Colorado. Focusing on
    preventing this and also understanding what the potential harms
    are of all that microplastic and all that plastic waste I think
    is a very valuable use of the committee's and subcommittee's
    time.
        My plaudits to Senator Merkley for whom this is a great
    cause and passion.
        Ms. Schmid, Senator Sullivan and I have done a couple of
    plastics bills, Save Our Seas and Save Our Seas 2.0, and we are
    in the process of working on Save Our Seas 3.0 right now. One
    of the areas on which I expect we will likely focus is the area
    of recycling and how spectacularly unsuccessful ordinary
    recycling presently is with less than 10 percent of what you
    put in your blue bin actually ending up recycling, with less
    than 2 percent of recycled content in new plastics.
        Trying to figure out how to make recycling work I think is
    going to be a very important piece of this. I would love to
    have your advice on what you think the best things are that the
    Federal Government could do to promote more effective recycling
    and to eliminate sham recycling.
        If you have a quick response, I would welcome it now but I
    would also encourage you to take that back as a question for
    the record and give a more fulsome response if you would care
    to.
        Ms. Schmid. Thank you, Senator Whitehouse, for the
    question. It is a topic that would require a bit more sustained
    response so I will take it back.
        Senator Whitehouse. That would be fine.
        In your sector of the economy, Mr. Debus, are there
    incentives or other things the government could do to encourage
    more reuse? In particular, can we get rid of peanuts, those
    damned little foam things?
        Mr. Debus. Right, make reusable peanuts? That is a nice
    idea. We should talk after the hearing.
        No question about it, the one thing we have to look at is
    that reuse can be very complex in terms of the requirements of
    that whole system to work. Many times it is an investment.
    Companies are putting capital forward to produce a pool of
    reusable assets or are changing their processes internally and
    it requires additional manpower or streamlining operations in
    order to make it work. It is an investment in process change.
        Senator Whitehouse. Do me a favor and make some
    recommendations for us, if you would, on how we can support
    those process changes because I think it is a win-win situation
    if you can get over the initial hurdle of the investment
    required to make the process changes.
        Mr. Debus. Yes. Thank you.
        Senator Whitehouse. Ms. Meng, welcome. Thank you for being
    here.
        The other bill I am working on is called the REDUCE Act.
    That would put a fee on virgin plastic that is designated for
    single-use plastic products. At the moment, one of the things
    that is holding back recycling in that area is it is cheaper to
    make it new than it is to get out of recycling.
        It is very hard to convince economically motivated entities
    like corporations to do things that are against their economic
    interests. It is a policy choice we have to make to put
    recycled plastic and new manufactured plastic on the same
    footing. That is the definition of what economists would call a
    negative externality, that by virtue of using the new plastic,
    you are adding more plastic to the system making life more
    dangerous, adding more waste to the oceans, adding more waste
    to the system and putting more of a burden on people.
        If there is no charge for that, you are letting people get
    away with something that economists would say they should not
    be allowed to get away with. If you are a pure market
    economist, you would want to address this problem. What is
    MacArthur's advice in this area?
        Ms. Meng. Thank you for that question and excellent
    thoughts on the topic.
        I think you are entirely correct that we need to be
    internalizing these externalities and bringing ourselves to a
    level playing field. A fee on virgin plastics does not mean it
    refers to single-use plastics. I think there is a logical way
    to do that. There are countless tools that we can use, but the
    reality is that we need to be doing something to level the
    playing field.
        Senator Whitehouse. Take a look at the REDUCE Act and get
    back to us with any comments or thoughts you might have, if you
    do not mind.
        Ms. Meng. Absolutely.
        Senator Whitehouse. Terrific. Thank you.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for this. Again, I think
    a lot of American corporations have developed a partial market
    economy business model as to free market when it comes to their
    pricing and selling their product but passing on to the public
    and socializing the externalities that they may cause, that
    just is not market theory. The selective use of market theory
    has caused a lot of harm whether in carbon emissions, plastic
    waste or across the board. Thank you for continuing your focus
    in this area.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much. We are looking
    forward to Save Our Seas.
        Senator Whitehouse. Save Our Seas 3.0.
        Senator Merkley. Save Our Seas 3.0, with bipartisan
    collaboration. I know those of us who live on the coast, you
    are doing that with Senator Sullivan, right? I know we hear a
    lot about Alaska's concerns about the Pacific gyre and the
    amount of plastic waste that washes up.
        Senator Whitehouse. We pick it up on our shores with
    garbage bags. They have to pick that up on their shores with
    front-end loaders and dumpsters because of the Pacific flow of
    plastic waste.
        Senator Merkley. Absolutely. Thank you.
        I think it is an interesting point about the economics
    involved. My impression, going back to when Oregon first
    implemented recycling of bottles, and all the bottles were
    glass, is that those who delivered the product were happy to
    have the bottles washed and reused because it was cheaper than
    buying new bottles because it takes a lot of energy to create a
    glass bottle melting.
        It was the folks who made the bottles who, at that point,
    were extremely resistant because obviously they would sell less
    bottles if the existing bottles were reused.
        With plastics, the economics often are different in that it
    can be cheaper, as my colleague pointed out, to make a new one
    than to recycle an existing piece. It is the externalities of
    the impact of that plastic downstream that are not taken into
    account.
        I wanted to ask you, Ms. Meng, as the Foundation has worked
    with partners to implement larger scale reuse and refill, are
    there like a top three, here are the biggest obstacles you have
    encountered?
        Ms. Meng. That is an excellent question. I will look to the
    rest of the panel also for their experience.
        I do think that the challenge we see from folks, is we have
    had businesses asking for a level playing field, because the
    need for shared infrastructure at scale, kind of standardized
    infrastructure, is crucial.
        In an individual company, it is a real challenge to build
    out that infrastructure to establish sufficient collection
    points or access points for consumers. They are looking for
    policy intervention to really help bring folks together to
    collaborate to get the shared infrastructure at scale but they
    need to make it work economically. I think that is the big
    challenge we are hearing.
        Senator Merkley. At scale it just gets a lot cheaper.
        Ms. Meng. Absolutely.
        Senator Merkley. Ms. Schmid, as we think about plastic
    bottles being reused, is there a consumer challenge? Consumers
    get very used, they want their oranges to look orange and their
    apples with no bruises. They are kind of used to that kind of
    perfect product on the shelf.
        Do we find with reused plastic bottles that consumers go,
    why does this bottle have scratches on it? Are consumers
    accepting and are the manufacturers happy with the consumer
    response of reused plastic bottles?
        Ms. Schmid. Thank you for the question.
        Reusable packagings are going to rotate several times. That
    is something, from our own experience, we are seeing consumers
    really willing to accept. It is also in the hands of the
    manufacturer to design the right durable package that is
    meeting their consumer needs.
        Then we have a whole industry that has very strong
    experience in designing product and packaging that delights
    consumers on a daily basis. I am fully confident, based on the
    work we have seen already on the platform to date, we are able
    to deliver against those needs.
        Senator Merkley. Let me ask you the same question I asked
    Ms. Meng. As you work on this project, what are the top three
    challenges you are encountering?
        Ms. Schmid. I would say there is only one challenge. The
    challenge is scale. We talked about it previously in talking
    about labor costs. Costs will be viable once there are
    sufficient units to flow through the system.
        What is required is really a system that is competitive
    versus single-use, also in the number of units that flow
    through the system.
        Senator Merkley. Thank you.
        Mr. Debus, I was picturing these plastic pallets. I am more
    familiar with wooden pallets. I am also familiar with how those
    wooden pallets break apart, degrade and so forth. Are the
    plastic pallets a more durable product? Is that part of why
    they have found acceptance?
        Mr. Debus. They can be, for sure. Many of them are designed
    to last for many years and hundreds of uses. There could be
    some durability properties that plastic pallets offer that wood
    does not.
        We are seeing some great advancements, though, in wood
    pallet suppliers performing reuse capabilities such as offering
    inventory management programs and working directly with
    customers on a managed pool of wood products and wood pallets.
    They can take back, repair and put them in place.
        We are seeing some reuse models even get into the wood
    pallet industry as well. Several of our members are wood pallet
    supplier and pooler companies.
        Senator Merkley. I have so many additional questions but I
    am out of time. I have another hearing that has just started.
    Our chair of Environment and Public Works has arrived. I am
    going to turn the hearing over to you. If you like, continue to
    go as long as you want.
        The hearing is yours. If you do not mind, I will leave.
        Chairman Carper.
        [Presiding.] Do the Lord's work. When I finish my
    questions, should I gavel out?
        Senator Merkley. Yes.
        Chairman Carper. Ms. Meng, how are you?
        Ms. Meng. Doing well, thank you.
        Chairman Carper. It is nice to see you.
        Sometimes we hear from critics of the circular economy
    movement that our reliance on plastic and other single-use
    items has become so ubiquitous that the only policy solution is
    to improve our ability to recycle these products.
        While this is certainly one element of achieving
    circularity, it overlooks two of the most important tools in
    our toolbox. One of those is reduction and the other is reuse.
        I believe that achieving circularity in our economy hinges
    upon our taking an all-of-the-above approach when addressing
    consumption and waste management practices. I am inspired by
    the role that reuse and refill infrastructure could play, can
    play in that transition.
        My question for you, ma'am, would be why is it important to
    consider policy options beyond just recycling as we work to
    create circularity within our economy? The second half of my
    question is, can you share an example with us of a reuse policy
    that has been effective in reducing overall waste? Do you want
    me to repeat those questions?
        Ms. Meng. No, I have notes, excellent questions, and I am
    glad to answer them.
        On the question of why we need to be looking beyond
    recycling, we see that kind of recycling is inadequate, both in
    practice and in theory. There is not enough that we can do with
    recycling due to products that are not easy to recycle like
    flexible packaging, and actual systems in place that are not
    meeting our needs with recycling. We have to look beyond
    recycling for solutions.
        Frankly, some of the solutions outside of recycling are
    more appropriate for different types of products, are more
    suited to the products. Looking upstream is what EMF thinks is
    critical to meeting the challenges we face.
        When we think about looking upstream, we see the great
    opportunity that is there. We see if you replace 20 percent of
    plastic packaging with reusable packaging, it is a $10 billion
    opportunity. If you replace 10 percent of the plastic packaging
    on the market, you can keep 50 percent of plastics out of the
    ocean annually.
        There is a huge opportunity both economically and
    environmentally. We need to be aware of all our options when
    thinking about tackling those challenges.
        On your question about whether there are reuse policies
    that we can point to----
        Senator Carper. A good example or two, if you will, on
    reduction or reuse policy.
        Ms. Meng. Reuse policy that is effective, we have a number
    of policies that are in the early stages that are really great
    on reuse that we are really excited about like reuse targets
    that we are seeing currently negotiated in the EU up and
    running in France in the near term.
        When we think about what we have seen proven time and time
    again, I think bottle bills are a classic example that we look
    to across the U.S. States that we have seen really do drive
    return rates. If we are incorporating reuse into those systems,
    we are in a position to be getting packaging back to be reused
    very efficiently and effectively.
        Senator Carper. Thank you.
        Clemence, who are you named after?
        Ms. Schmid. It is a French name.
        Senator Carper. I thought so. Bienvenue, welcome.
        Ms. Schmid, you mentioned in your testimony that the United
    Nations views reuse, and I think this is a quote, ``the most
    scalable solution to reduce plastic waste at its sources.''
        How has Loop been able to partner with other businesses
    such as Walmart in order to promote reusable packaging? Hat is
    one question. A followup would be, how can the Federal
    Government work alongside the private sector companies to scale
    reuse and refill infrastructure and technology?
        Ms. Schmid. Thank you, Senator Carper, for the questions.
        Loop works with brand manufacturers and retailers to
    transition from a disposable system into a reusable system in
    the least disruptive way. It is really about handling for that
    supply chain the reverse logistic in a way that disrupts the
    existing and very efficient supply chain in the least possible
    way, working with, you named them, Walmart but also over 200
    brand manufacturers including Proctor and Gamble and Nestle.
        We are develop reusable packages that are being enjoyed by
    consumers. Upon return, Loop is collecting them back, sorting,
    storing and cleaning them. We also reimburse the deposit.
        Senator Carper. How do you collect them back?
        Ms. Schmid. We collect back them from the store where they
    are being currently returned by consumers or any other location
    that has a Loop return point.
        Senator Carper. Thank you.
        Ms. Schmid. Do you want me to address the question on the
    economics?
        Senator Carper. Please, if you would.
        Ms. Schmid. What is really important in the Loop system is
    that the package is an asset to the brand manufacturer as
    opposed to the cost of goods sold. In making the package an
    asset, you enable the manufacturer to innovate and create a
    fundamentally better package and a better consumer experience.
        This is what, as a brand manufacturer or producer, you are
    really striving to be able to delight consumers. That is what
    they are able to do much better on a reusable package than on a
    single-use package.
        Senator Carper. Any idea where that idea came from? That is
    a very clever idea.
        Ms. Schmid. The idea for a reusable package?
        Senator Carper. Yes. Has that been around for a while?
        Ms. Schmid. I do not think that is a new idea. I think we
    call it the milkman.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Carper. When I was in grade school, my colleagues
    and I were out on the playground playing. The other kids
    started talking about who they were named after. They asked who
    I was named after and I didn't know.
        That night when I went home, at supper, I said to my dad,
    who am I named after? We do not have any Toms in our family. He
    said speak to the milkman. He said, son, you are named after
    the milkman. That was when we actually had milkmen. We had a
    milkman named Tom. We moved a lot then but we always had the
    same milkman, so who knows. I like milk, I know that.
        Ms. Schmid. I will ask if our milkman was named Tom also.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Carper. Clemence, I have another question if you do
    not mind, dealing with lessons learned. I often like to say in
    life we need to find out what works and do more of that. For
    recycling, we often look to our State or local initiatives that
    are successfully promoting circularity.
        My home State of Delaware recently passed a law that would
    ban food establishments from using single-use, polystyrene
    containers and other plastic items like coffee stirrers. While
    we are still waiting for our Governor to sign this bill into
    law, I look forward to the lessons that we gain from this
    Delaware law and similar legislation.
        I also believe we can learn from the international
    community, from countries beyond our borders, including France,
    about successful reuse and refill policies.
        My next question of you, Mademoiselle, is having worked to
    launch Loop globally across three continents, is that right,
    what lessons can we learn from the international community as
    well as from States and municipalities, when it comes to
    reusable or refillable products and infrastructure?
        Ms. Schmid. Thank you for this very important question.
        The first learning is there is a market demand for reuse.
    Consumers are ready and are already experiencing it in many
    sectors. There is a need to scale and we see this across all
    the markets.
        The second learning I would bring to the committee, as you
    rightly pointed out, is some countries have already taken the
    forefront of working policies together with the business in
    order to foster and propel reuse.
        In my home country of France, which is clearly leading the
    way, and also in Europe, we have seen reuse targets and reuse
    mandates coming through legislation which have fostered the
    creation of the reverse infrastructure and we are seeing the
    market developing extremely fast.
        I would summarize in making sure this government passes
    legislation to support reuse.
        Senator Carper. Thank you.
        Mr. Debus, what are some of the lessons learned from your
    work at the Reusable Packaging Association that might help us
    achieve a more circular economy? How can we encourage other
    industries to pursue policies like incorporating reusable
    shipping supplies which are both good for business and I think
    are good for the environment?
        Mr. Debus. Very much so. Thank you.
        The biggest lesson in seeing reusable systems in action is
    that they create tremendous opportunity and value within the
    supply chain infrastructures and the participating parties.
    There is a lot of discovery that takes place.
        When you are incorporating a reusable packaging system, you
    have to know every step of the way where that package is being
    handled. That opens the eyes for a lot of businesses to see
    other improvement areas that can take place, whether it is in
    their shipping or the warehouse, whether it is in the stores
    and stocking merchandise for a point-of-sale.
        There are a lot of opportunities that come up with reusable
    packaging that people discover and it becomes an ``aha'' moment
    of wait, if we can do this, then this leads to other benefits.
        That is the biggest takeaway that I have seen, especially
    being in the field, that reuse breeds a level of performance
    that companies do not turn away from once they establish that
    system. They do not go back to a single-use model because they
    are generating benefits throughout the whole system. They are
    saving money and providing a better experience for those
    handling the items. There is not a lot of turning back.
        I think as far as cultivating reuse systems, as I mentioned
    earlier, it is an investment so how can policy help with
    investments for the return, the payback that takes place maybe
    a year or two down the line?
        A lot of our companies are looking at the immediate
    reporting, second quarter and how do we achieve efficiencies
    today. Sometimes that investment in reuse can take a year or
    two for the payback or return. Anything now, whether tax
    breaks, or grants, or things that can help generate the
    financial investment in reuse models would be very valuable.
        Senator Carper. One last question for Dacie Meng. I believe
    the reuse and refill infrastructure presents a promising
    alternative to single-use plastics. My guess is you do too.
        In the Environmental Protection Agency's draft strategy to
    address plastic pollution, the agency describes how the Federal
    Government should use its power of acquisition and procurement
    to promote sustainable supply chains for materials that are
    used in Federal buildings.
        Ms. Meng, do you believe that our Federal Government could
    successfully implement reuse and refill infrastructure in some
    of our Federal buildings? What are some of the best examples of
    single-use products that could be replaced by reuse and refill
    infrastructure?
        Ms. Meng. That is a wonderful question. Thank you. The
    EPA's Plastics Strategy is a really exciting development. I
    think this is a key piece of the work we need to be doing on
    reuse.
        I will point you first to GSA which has an advisory
    committee that published a kind of road map exactly on this
    topic for different pilots than can be conducted both by
    procurement officers and facility-specific pilots.
        When we think about what are some of the actions the
    Federal Government can take and what products can be
    transitioned to reuse, the obvious ideas are drinking fountains
    as a replacement, building the infrastructure for reusable
    water or water bottles.
        Then we can look to the food service areas such as
    cafeterias and other things that may be replaced with reusable
    food ware, if that is not already in place.
        I will continue to think on that and get back to you with a
    few additional ideas.
        Senator Carper. Good. You may have a chance to do that. We
    are going to be submitting questions to each of you from our
    colleagues who are not here and some who are here. We call them
    questions for the record, or QFRs.
        We will ask that Senators to submit the questions for the
    record through close of business on Thursday, August 10th. We
    will compile those questions and send them to you and ask you
    to reply to us by Thursday, August 24th.
        In closing, let me thank you all. Merci beaucoup. I thank
    each of you for appearing today and your testimony, but really
    for what you do with your lives. I hope your work provides you
    with great satisfaction. Mine certainly does for me.
        As a point of clarification, Senators will be allowed to
    submit questions for the record through the close of business
    on Thursday, August 10th. Again, we will ask you all to respond
    by Thursday, August 24th.
        I do not know how they say this in French but we have a
    saying here that when something is over, we say, that is a
    wrap. We are grateful to all of you.
        One of my favorite people, favorite leaders, if you will,
    from other countries is the leader of France. President and
    Mrs. Biden hosted a State Dinner for French President Macron
    about a year or two ago. I had the opportunity to chat with him
    a bit there.
        He had spoken to a joint session of the Congress about 2
    years ago. I got to shake hands with him and chat with him
    briefly before he spoke. In his address that day to the joint
    session of Congress, he said these words, ``This is the only
    planet we are going to have. There is no planet B. This is the
    only one.''
        I told him at the State dinner that I have quoted him many
    times in saying that. I have never given him credit for the
    quote. He said, ``We have a special name in France for people
    like you who steal our material without attribution.'' We had a
    good laugh.
        Keep up the good work. You are doing great things for our
    planet, the only one we are going to have. Take care.
        With that, we are adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 10:51 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
        [Additional material submitted for the record follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]