Policy & Advocacy

Question: Who will be the voice of recycling? NRC or KAB?

Answer: As noted in our July 15 response to a comment in the “Looking Ahead” section – our intent is for the “NRC unit” of KAB to remain laser-focused on recycling, to maintain and expand its brand and to remain as the “voice of recycling” in the United States.

The proposal states that NRC will remain a Washington-based entity; does that mean it will lobby the federal government for its mission? Even if it is contrary to KAB mission or goals? Will there be legislative advocacy?

NRC’s Washington presence is intended to not only inform legislation, but to support recycling and keep the attention of both legislators and federal agencies on the importance of the issue. KAB’s mission is to engage individuals to take greater responsibility for improving their community environments, and its goals are to prevent litter, reduce waste, and improve public spaces thereby creating greener communities. Our review of each other’s current policies and advocacy leads us to believe that there would be no circumstances where the goals and mission of the two organizations would be in conflict.


Will KAB and the new NRC Board support the concepts of zero waste and/or producer responsibility?

Answer: As stated in our July 15 response to question in “Questions for KAB” section, policy setting for the NRC Unit will be vested in the Executive Board (formerly referred to as the NRC Advisory Council) chosen by the members. In keeping with NRC's history, it will continue to serve as a forum for differing points of view on how to resolve challenging recycling issues. Likewise, should the Executive Board develop consensus around certain policies, taking in to account the diverse nature of a national coalition, NRC will advocate those positions. As a starting point, KAB believes that the zero waste goal is entirely consistent with KAB’s mission.


What will happen when a local KAB affiliate and state recycling organization are on the opposite side of an issue? Where will the support go? What will happen if KAB is asked to support a policy in a state?

Answer: As noted in our answer to the question, “What is KAB's position on advocacy by NRC members & affiliates?” under the “Content of Proposal” Section, KAB and NRC as a combined national organization do not intend to interfere in any way with the KAB and NRC affiliate independence regarding policy advocacy. Both organizations have a long established practice of encouraging our respective affiliates to take policy positions and undertake advocacy as they see fit in their states and communities. Diversity of membership and opinion remains a core value of both organizations.

If a state recycling organization is taking a policy position that is consistent with an established position of NRC, then the combined national organization would support that position.

Will we see NRC executives or KAB executives lobbying against our efforts of zero waste and producer responsibility in our state? What recourse will we have if this happens?

Answer: We assure you that you will not, so recourse is a moot point. As stated in our response to the previous question, the combined organization will not become involved in any state advocacy effort unless requested to do so, and only if the advocacy is consistent with an established NRC position.


Why does KAB want to purchase NRC? What is the benefit to KAB? Why is KAB more interested in recycling and waste reduction now than it has been in the past? What will KAB do to further the mission of NRC? Will KAB change its mission statement to incorporate items from the NRC mission statement?

Please refer to our answers to the questions, What attracted KAB to this merger? What do they gain? and What value does an association with KAB have for the NRC? in the “History of KAB and NRC Discussions” section.

How will KAB use the NRC name? Which projects and lobbying efforts will be done under the name of NRC and which will be done under the name of KAB?

Please refer to the proposal documents, which state that NRC will operate as a distinct unit of KAB. We envision the “public facing” image of both organizations to remain essentially the same. Of course, KAB will talk about the work NRC is doing in the larger context of its organization and impact.

The NRC agenda will be set and guided by the NRC Executive Board (formerly “Advisory Council”), with appropriate input from the membership. Efforts developed under this construct will ideally “fly the NRC flag.”

What if this merger does not work out for either organization? Is there an escape clause?

There is no escape clause in the legal approach that must be taken to consummate the combination of the two organizations. As we note, technically the NRC Corporation will dissolve and its assets and liabilities assumed by the KAB Corporation. The two organizations see no reason – mission-based, programmatic, advocacy, or financial – for the combination not to be successful. In short, the vote of the members is final, effective immediately, and thus, critically important.

Question: To what degree will the proposed new organization work to change packaging (to reduce litter and additional waste-stream growth)?

Answer: KAB and NRC fully support all efforts by business and industry to “source reduce” the amount of packaging or to use packaging made from more sustainable materials and processes. Ultimately, these decisions are made by an “unwritten compact” between producers and consumers. As a combined organization, we will continue to educate consumers about smart choices in products and packaging, and will applaud industry efforts to innovate and reduce.

Policy decisions on ALL issues will be weighed by the NRC Executive Board (formerly referred to as the NRC Advisory Council) for their merits and acted upon appropriately.