Senate panel advances bill to bar facilities from discharging plastic pellets, adopts industry-targeted amendments

DENVER — The Senate Transportation and Energy Committee on Thursday voted to advance Senate Bill 16, a measure that would prohibit facilities that make, use, package or transport preproduction plastic materials — commonly called nurdles or pellets — from discharging them into Colorado waters or onto land.

Senator Cutter, the bill sponsor, told the committee the measure targets pellet pollution at source. “We’re not prohibiting plastic at all in this. We’re just saying clean up your mess,” Cutter said in opening remarks. Co-prime sponsor Senator Wallace said the bill is aimed at facilities rather than individuals and would bar the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) from issuing permits that allow pellet discharges.

Supporters — environmental groups, public-health advocates and recreation organizations — described pellets as persistent microplastics that are difficult to remove once released and harmful to wildlife and human health. Rachel Jaeger of Environment Colorado said pellets can be “lost to the environment at almost every step of plastic production,” and Dr. Sarah Carpenter, board chair of Healthy Air and Water Colorado, warned that micro- and nano-plastics have been found in human organs and may cause inflammation and other harms.

Industry witnesses and the plastics trade group offered amendments and cautioned against vague definitions and punitive language. Charlotte Driesen, director of Operation Clean Sweep at the Plastics Industry Association, told the committee the industry supports a goal of zero resin loss and proposed removing the criminal-penalties component in favor of proactive compliance measures such as employee training, equipment upgrades and third-party inspections. Driesen provided a fiscal estimate for implementing compliance measures — roughly $550,000 in a first year and about $360,000 annually thereafter — and urged alignment with federal permitting frameworks.

The American Chemistry Council similarly recommended narrowing definitions and ensuring the bill would not conflict with federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) or multi-sector general permits (MSGP). “Because the bill relies on vague and overly broad definitions, the criminal penalties provision for plastic discharge could create uncertainty,” the ACC witness said.

Proponents countered that federal law alone has not prevented pellet pollution and that Colorado should remove the option for state-issued permits that would allow discharges. Danny Katz of the Colorado Public Interest Research Group said the bill’s intent is to ensure a Colorado-based permit for pellet discharge would not be available: “What we’re trying to do here is say here in the state the state shall not grant that permit to companies in Colorado.” Recreation interests described routine finds of pellets along rivers and train corridors, and faith-based and climate coalitions urged action on moral and ecological grounds.

During the amendment phase the committee unanimously adopted three sponsor amendments. L002 moved the bill’s effective date, L004 narrowed the definition of preproduction plastic materials to address concerns from Metro Water Recovery, and L005 exempted specific water-treatment facilities (Metro Water Recovery and South Platte Renew), specified that company — not individual employees — would be liable for a discharge, and clarified the locations and forms of discharge to be covered (including trains and vehicles as point sources).

After final remarks from sponsors clarifying that the bill does not create a new permitting regime and asserting it does not institute a new criminal offense but rather adds pellets to existing discharge provisions, the committee voted 5–3 to send SB16 to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation.

Vote at a glance: the committee reported five votes in favor and three opposed. The committee adjourned after the vote; further action will occur on the Senate floor or in subsequent committees.

This article is based on testimony, sponsor remarks and committee proceedings at the Senate Transportation and Energy Committee hearing on SB16.