Reducing Waste in National Parks Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Quigley, Mike [D-IL-5]
- Committees
- Natural Resources Committee (primary)
- Last action
- May 23, 2025
Bottom line
The bill aims to significantly reduce plastic waste in national parks by phasing out disposable plastic products, while balancing environmental goals with operational feasibility and visitor safety.
What it actually does
This bill directs the Director of the National Park Service (NPS) to establish a program within 180 days to reduce disposable plastic products in units of the National Park System. It mandates regional directors to eliminate the sale of water in disposable plastic products and the sale/distribution of other disposable plastic products to the greatest extent feasible, considering factors like costs, waste reduction, infrastructure, and visitor safety. The bill also requires proactive visitor education and biennial evaluations of the program.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this bill is a crucial step towards reducing plastic pollution in America's cherished national parks, protecting wildlife, and preserving natural beauty for future generations. They contend that reducing single-use plastics aligns with environmental stewardship principles and encourages sustainable visitor behavior, especially given the long-term environmental damage caused by plastic waste.
Opponents contend
Critics might express concerns about the practical challenges and potential negative impacts on visitor experience and concessioner revenues. They may argue that a broad ban could lead to inconvenience for visitors, especially in remote areas where alternative water sources are scarce, potentially increasing risks of dehydration or disease if visitors resort to unsafe water sources. Some may also highlight the significant infrastructure costs for refill stations and the financial burden on park concessioners.
The bill is concise and clearly written, making it accessible for a reader to understand its core provisions and implications within a short timeframe.
Section 2(a)
Establishment of Disposable Plastic Products Reduction Program
This section requires the Director of the National Park Service to create a program within 180 days of the bill's enactment aimed at reducing disposable plastic products across all units of the National Park System. Once established, regional directors are responsible for implementing this program within the parks under their jurisdiction. This sets the foundational framework for the bill's objectives.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that establishing a formal, system-wide program ensures a coordinated and consistent approach to plastic reduction, demonstrating the NPS's commitment to environmental sustainability.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against the establishment of a program itself, though concerns may arise regarding the scope and implementation details.
Tradeoffs
The tradeoff is the administrative effort and resources required to establish and manage such a program, balanced against the potential environmental benefits.
Section 2(b)
Elimination of Sale and Distribution of Disposable Plastic Products
This provision mandates regional directors to eliminate the sale of bottled water in disposable plastic products and the sale/distribution of other disposable plastic products "to the greatest extent feasible." This feasibility determination must consider 13 specific factors, including operational costs, waste reduction, infrastructure for refill stations, contractual implications for concessioners, visitor safety (e.g., dehydration), and public health. Parks that previously banned bottled water sales can continue to do so.
Section 2(c)
Proactive Visitor Education Strategy
This section requires each regional director to develop a visitor education strategy for their respective park units. The purpose of this strategy is to proactively inform visitors about the new program, manage their expectations regarding water availability, and explain the rationale behind the reduction or elimination of disposable plastic products. This aims to ensure visitors are prepared and understand the environmental goals.
Section 2(e)
Biennial Program Evaluation
This provision mandates that each regional director conduct an evaluation of the plastic reduction program at least once every two years. The evaluation must assess various aspects, including public response, visitor satisfaction with water availability, changes in buying behavior related to disposable plastic products, public safety (specifically cases of dehydration or disease from unsafe water sources), and disposable plastic bottle collection rates. The findings must then be submitted to the Director of the NPS and the Secretary of the Interior.
The bill requires regional directors to consider 13 specific factors when determining the feasibility of eliminating disposable plastic products. These factors range from operational costs and waste eliminated to contractual implications with concessioners, infrastructure costs for refill stations, public health testing, visitor safety (dehydration, disease), and input from various stakeholders.
Section 2(b)(1)(A)-(M)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to provide detailed guidance and flexibility for implementation, rather than an attempt to be evasive. However, the detail means that the actual impact will depend heavily on how these factors are weighed by individual regional directors.
Case for: Supporters argue that these detailed considerations are crucial for ensuring a practical and responsible implementation that avoids unintended negative consequences, such as compromising visitor safety or financially crippling concessioners. It allows for tailored approaches to diverse park environments.
Case against: Critics might argue that the extensive list of factors, particularly the 'greatest extent feasible' clause, could create loopholes or lead to inconsistent application across parks, potentially undermining the bill's core objective of reducing plastic waste. It could also lead to protracted debates over what constitutes 'feasible' in different contexts.
Estimated impact: These factors will significantly influence the pace and extent of plastic product elimination in each park unit, potentially leading to varied outcomes across the National Park System.
The definition of 'disposable plastic products' is broad, including not only disposable plastic beverage bottles but also 'carryout bags made from film plastic,' 'plastic food ware, including plastic food ware products marketed as compostable or biodegradable,' and 'expanded polystyrene products.'
Section 2(f)(2)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for defining terms used throughout the bill. However, its placement means the full scope of the bill's impact on various plastic items might not be immediately apparent.
Case for: Supporters argue that a comprehensive definition is essential to effectively address the full spectrum of plastic waste generated in parks, preventing a narrow focus that might simply shift the problem to other plastic items. Including 'compostable or biodegradable' plastics acknowledges that these often don't fully break down in natural environments.
Case against: Critics might contend that such a broad definition, particularly including 'compostable or biodegradable' plastics, could impose undue burdens on concessioners who have already invested in these alternatives, and might complicate supply chains unnecessarily. It could also be seen as overreaching if the primary concern is non-degradable plastic litter.
Estimated impact: This definition significantly expands the scope of the bill beyond just bottled water, impacting a wide range of products used by visitors and concessioners, including food packaging and shopping bags.