Summary#

Colorado’s enacted SB 26-171, “Disposal of Preproduction Plastic Materials,” changes state law. It repeals a provision added by SB 26-016 and adds a rule to the Colorado Revised Statutes; the stated goal is to keep preproduction plastic materials from being disposed of at locations without a solid-waste-site certificate. The rule is scheduled to take effect August 12, 2027, subject to the referendum condition in the act.

• A person must not dispose of preproduction plastic materials at a location that has not received a certificate of designation to operate as a solid waste disposal site and facility.
• The bill uses the definition of “preproduction plastic materials” in another law; that definition is not included in the supplied material.
• The bill does not ban disposal of these materials altogether. It restricts the locations where they may be disposed of.
• The act repeals a provision identified as section 25-15-329, added by SB 26-016. Without that earlier law, its effect cannot be verified.

What it means for you#

• People and businesses disposing of these materials: Starting on the effective date, they must use a location with the required certificate. The bill does not set out an application or approval process for disposal.
• Solid waste site operators: The permitted disposal location must have a certificate of designation. The bill does not require operators to accept these materials.
• Other residents: The bill does not directly change household waste rules, taxes, fees, or benefits, based on the supplied text.

Money#

No cost information is in the available material.

• The bill gives no estimate of public spending, staffing, business costs, fees, or savings.
• It does not state a fine or other penalty for violating the disposal rule.

What is unclear#

• The definition of “preproduction plastic materials” is in a separate law not supplied here, so its full scope cannot be confirmed.
• The bill does not explain how compliance will be checked or enforced, or what consequences apply to a violation.
• The effect of repealing section 25-15-329 cannot be verified without the text of SB 26-016 and the relevant current law.
• The act says it takes effect August 12, 2027, but provides for a referendum petition and possible voter approval. The supplied material does not say whether a petition was filed.

Case for#

• A possible argument for the bill is that it directs disposal to locations with a certificate to operate as solid waste disposal sites and facilities.
• This could make the permitted disposal locations clearer by setting a specific condition: the location must have a certificate of designation.
• The rule applies to any person disposing of the covered materials, rather than naming only certain businesses or industries.

Case against#

• The bill does not explain how compliance will be checked or what happens after a violation, leaving key parts of enforcement unclear.
• The definition is in another law, and the supplied material does not show which materials are covered.
• The rule limits where disposal may occur, but the bill does not say whether certified locations have the capacity or willingness to accept these materials.
• The repeal may change existing law in a way that cannot be assessed from the supplied text.