The National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors (NAW) has filed a federal lawsuit challenging Colorado’s Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program for packaging, arguing that the state’s fee-setting structure gives unconstitutional authority to a private organization.

The case, NAW v. Ryan, was filed in federal court alongside a request for a preliminary injunction that would temporarily halt enforcement of the program while the legal proceedings continue.

The lawsuit marks the third constitutional challenge NAW has brought against a state packaging EPR program.

Dispute Centers on Fee-Setting Authority

Colorado’s packaging EPR system is administered by the Circular Action Alliance (CAA), the producer responsibility organization (PRO) approved by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE).

The industry-funded program officially began requiring producer participation in July 2025, with mandatory producer fees taking effect in January 2026.

Under the approved program, CAA is responsible for:

• Collecting producer fees
• Funding net recycling costs
• Expanding recycling access
• Increasing packaging and paper recycling rates
• Managing statewide packaging stewardship activities

NAW argues that Colorado’s legislation improperly delegates government authority by allowing a private organization to establish and collect mandatory fees from businesses.

Four Constitutional Claims Raised

According to the lawsuit, NAW challenges several aspects of the law.

The association argues that the program:

• Delegates government fee-setting authority to a private entity without sufficient public oversight
• Requires businesses to join and financially support CAA as a condition of operating in Colorado
• Restricts businesses from passing fee information on to customers
• Allows mandatory fees to support advocacy activities that businesses may not endorse

NAW contends these provisions violate constitutional protections relating to due process and freedom of speech.

Industry Concern Extends Beyond Manufacturers

NAW said the law affects not only manufacturers but also wholesale distributors.

According to the association, distributors often have limited influence over packaging design but may still be classified as producers under Colorado’s legislation.

The organization argues that additional packaging compliance costs may ultimately be passed through supply chains to businesses and consumers both inside and outside Colorado.

Latest Challenge in Broader Legal Strategy

The Colorado lawsuit follows similar legal action filed by NAW against Oregon’s packaging EPR program.

Earlier this year, a federal court granted NAW members a partial injunction in that case while broader legal proceedings continued.

NAW has also joined a separate multi-state legal challenge against California’s SB 54 packaging EPR legislation.

The association says it is pursuing earlier legal action in states implementing producer responsibility programs rather than waiting until regulations are fully established.

Colorado Program Already Facing Separate Litigation

The state’s packaging EPR framework has also been challenged by the Independent Lubricant Manufacturers Association (ILMA).

ILMA previously argued that Colorado’s fee structure could significantly affect companies operating on narrow profit margins.

That case remains pending, while Colorado’s packaging stewardship program continues operating without interruption.

EPR Programs Continue to Face Legal Scrutiny

For the packaging industry, the lawsuit highlights ongoing debate over how Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) systems should be structured and administered.

As more U.S. states implement producer-funded recycling programs, legal challenges are increasingly focusing on governance, fee-setting authority and regulatory oversight alongside broader discussions about packaging sustainability and circular economy policies.

Last Updated on 31/07/2026 by Jota Machinery