PDA logoPDA
Back to Sustainability & Circularity
300Module 7 of 7

Reuse & Refill System Design

Returnable packaging models, cleaning protocols, consumer UX, and economics.

7 minutes
reuse
Next: Production & Procurement
Lesson Video
Reuse & Refill System Design
Module Content

1) Executive Summary

Most important insights
  1. Definitions and proof points are codified. ISO 18603 and EN 13429 define when packaging qualifies as reusable—including system conditions and assessment procedures. Specs and SOPs must align to claim reuse.
  2. Hygiene is gating. US FDA Food Code 2022 + 2024 Supplement allow certain refills of consumer-owned containers under conditions; sanitizer actives/limits in 21 CFR 178.1010 with EPA tolerances in 40 CFR 180.940. EU/UK rely on general hygiene law and FCM rules.
  3. EU PPWR elevates reuse. PPWR (in force 2025) introduces reuse obligations/targets, HORECA BYO allowances, and minimum conditions for systems for reuse—design must preserve hygiene/safety across rotations.
  4. UK convergence via EPR + DRS. Base EPR fees 2025–26 are flat; modulation ramps later. UK-wide DRS scheduled for 1 Oct 2027; plan deposit logic, return-point density, and data capture.
  5. Identification is a linchpin. GS1 GRAI + ISO 17364 (RFID) standardize tracking of returnables; GS1 Digital Link ties deposits/instructions and reverse logistics to on-pack codes.
  6. Consumer UX drives returns. Mature DRS achieve 80–95%+ returns; optimize deposit value, return-point density, and “scan & go” refund flows.
  7. Economics hinge on rotations and failures. Break-even vs single-use depends on tare mass, trip distance, backhaul rate, wash energy/water, and loss/breakage. Minimize tare, maximize nesting; OPEX dominated by reverse logistics + washing.
Recommended actions
  • Lock standards early: reuse spec per ISO 18603 / EN 13429; hygiene SOP per FDA Food Code / 21 CFR 178.1010 (US) or Reg. (EC) 852/2004 (EU/UK).
  • Design for washing and tracking: wash‑proof or wash‑off labels; encode GRAI/QR/RFID for deposit, custody, and QA.
  • Prototype the full loop: consumer → return point → aggregation → wash → QC → refill; tune deposit and UX.
  • Data‑enable compliance: instrument return events and cleaning records for PPWR, EPR, and bottle bills.
Key risks (12–24 months)
  • PPWR secondary acts and harmonized standards updates (systems for reuse conditions).
  • UK EPR fee modulation + DRS implementation details (DMOs, labelling).
  • Retail/venue adoption of refill under updated Food Code; state/local adoption lags.

2) Definitions & Concepts

Glossary
  • Reusable packaging: Designed for multiple rotations in a managed system meeting hygiene/safety (ISO 18603; EN 13429).
  • Refill: Replenishment into a durable container—refill‑at‑home, refill‑on‑the‑go, or factory refill.
  • DRS: Deposit Return Scheme—refundable deposit to incentivize returns.
  • RTI/RPI: Returnable (transport/packaging) items; track via GS1 GRAI; RFID per ISO 17364.
  • Sanitization: Reduction of microorganisms to safe levels; sanitizer actives/limits in 21 CFR 178.1010.
Concept map
  • Policy → PPWR (reuse), UK EPR/DRS, US Food Code → Retail/manufacturer system design
  • Models → Refill‑at‑home | Refill‑on‑the‑go | Return‑on‑the‑go (DRS) | Return‑from‑home
  • Enablers → Hygiene SOPs + validated chemistry → Wash‑tolerant materials/labels → Asset ID (GRAI/RFID/QR) → Data capture
  • Outcomes → Return rate, loss/breakage, wash energy/water, transport intensity, UX → Economics & LCA

3) Standards, Regulations, and Governance

Cross‑cutting standards
  • ISO 18603 (reuse requirements/assessment) applied via ISO 18601; EN 13429 (EU reuse).
  • GS1 GRAI + GS1 General Specifications; GS1 Digital Link for on‑pack connectivity.
  • ISO 17364 (RFID for RTIs/RPIs).
United States
  • FDA Food Code 2022 + 2024 Supplement: conditions for refilling consumer‑owned containers.
  • Sanitizers for food‑contact: 21 CFR 178.1010; tolerances in 40 CFR 180.940.
  • Bottle bills vary by state—barcode/marking and logistics implications.
European Union
  • PPWR in force (2025): reuse obligations/targets; HORECA BYO; minimum conditions for systems for reuse.
  • Hygiene/FCM: Reg. (EC) 852/2004; Reg. (EC) 1935/2004; Reg. (EU) 10/2011 (repeated‑use testing).
  • SUPD: 90% separate collection for beverage bottles by 2029—many MS expand DRS.
United Kingdom
  • EPR base fees 2025–26 flat; modulation later; reporting obligations published.
  • UK‑wide DRS go‑live 1 Oct 2027; glass scope differs by nation.
  • FSA practice guides support refill/decant enforcement under retained hygiene law; cosmetics refill guidance via trade bodies.
Regional differences (summary)
TopicUSEUUK
Definition of “reusable”No central federal def.; use ISO 18603 for claimsEN 13429 & ISO 18603; PPWR contextEN 13429/ISO 18603 retained
Retail refillAllowed with conditions per Food CodeAllowed under hygiene law + operator HACCPPermitted per FSA guides/local enforcement
Sanitizers21 CFR 178.1010; EPA tolerancesEU BPR governs disinfectantsUK BPR (retained)
DRSState bottle bills varySUPD targets; PPWR enables/harmonizesUK‑wide DRS 1 Oct 2027
EPRPatchworkPPWR reshapes obligationsBase fees 2025–26; modulation later

4) Evidence Base & Benchmarks

  • ISO 18603 / EN 13429: reusable packaging requirements; conformity via ISO 18601 / EN 13427.
  • RFID/ID: ISO 17364 + GS1 GRAI for asset management at scale.
  • US retail refills: FDA Food Code 2022 + 2024 Supplement; sanitation steps.
  • Sanitizer chemistries: 21 CFR 178.1010 with 40 CFR 180.940 tolerances.
  • PPWR: reuse obligations/allowances; hygiene conditions for systems for reuse.
  • DRS return rates: mature systems ≥80–95% with right deposit and convenience.
Where data conflict

Cup/bottle LCAs vary due to distance, return rate, washing energy, and loss. Normalize scenarios via calculator parameters (see §7).

5) Design & Production Implications

Rules of thumb
  • Enable repeated emptying/refilling without damage; maintain hygiene/safety across rotations (ISO 18603; PPWR minimum conditions).
  • Materials/finishing: robust PP/PET/HDPE or returnable glass; validate stress‑cracking vs alkaline wash; specify wash‑off or wash‑resistant labels per loop strategy; align end‑of‑life with APR if recycled at retirement.
  • Geometry: wide mouths, internal radii, no dead‑legs; closures/liners tolerate repeated torque and chemistry.
  • Traceability: encode GS1 GRAI (barcode/QR/RFID); consider GS1 Digital Link for deposit/refund flows.
  • Manufacturability: control dimensions post thermal cycles; ensure inks/varnish compatibility; reserve quiet zones for codes (GS1).
Format trade‑offs (qualitative)
  • Glass: +chemical/thermal tolerance, +premium; −weight/transport, −breakage risk.
  • PET/PP: +low tare, +shatter‑resistant; −wash temp/chemical limits, potential haze.
  • Stainless (kegs/dispensers): +long life; −CapEx.
  • RPCs/totes: +pooling economies; require robust ID and cleaning SOPs.
Supplier perspective

Specify cycles‑to‑failure targets, max wash temp/chemistry, rotation count warranty, and allowable cosmetic wear; run cleaning validation (OQ/PQ) and document pass/fail criteria.

6) Sustainability & Compliance

  • Claims discipline: only claim “reusable” with ISO/EN‑conformant pack + system and evidence of rotations.
  • PPWR: evidence hygiene, safety, and standardization in systems for reuse; HORECA BYO at no extra cost.
  • UK EPR: modulation may favor recyclable end‑of‑life for failed returnables; design fallback aligned to APR/OPRL.
  • Labelling ecosystems evolve; align recyclability claims for retirement scenarios.
  • Evidence gap: regulators rarely prescribe deposits or minimum rotations—track return, loss, hygiene NCs.

7) Workflow & Tooling

Checklists
  • Print‑ready: reserve deposit/return marks; abrasion‑resistant inks; GS1 code remains scannable after N cycles.
  • Pre‑press: validate label/ink vs wash; barcode quiet zones; wear simulation.
  • Compliance: ISO 18603/EN 13429 statement; Food Code/EU hygiene SOP; sanitizer listing (21 CFR 178.1010).
  • Recyclability fallback: APR/OPRL‑aligned end‑of‑life if loop fails.
Decision trees
  • Choose reuse model: risk profile, channel, expected turns, backhaul feasibility → Refill‑on‑the‑go vs Return‑from‑home vs DRS.
  • Select substrate: required wash temp/chemistry → shortlist → stress‑crack/label integrity → end‑of‑life compatibility.
Calculator blueprints
  • Cost per use (CPU) = (container + onboarding)/(rotations×(1−loss)) + reverse‑logistics + wash + QA + fees.
  • LCA break‑even: use count where reuse GHG < single‑use baseline based on tare, distance, wash energy, grid mix, loss.
  • Deposit optimization: deposit value × convenience elasticity → predicted return rate (seed with pilot data).
Template specs (RFQ)

Reuse basis (ISO 18603/EN 13429); target rotations (P90); max wash temp; sanitizer family; label/adhesive/ink specs; GRAI encoding; abrasion/scuff standards; barcode grade after N cycles; inspection criteria; deposit/marking panel.

8) Category‑Specific Guidance

Beauty & Personal Care (cosmetics)

POS refilling must achieve hygiene equivalent to industrial filling; protect bulk from contamination; tamper prevention; batch/lot and refill event records; consumer instructions; claims compliant with cosmetics rules.

Food & Beverage

US retail refills: follow Food Code allowances for beverages/non‑TCS; sanitize per Parts 4‑6/4‑7; approved sanitizers per 21 CFR 178.1010. EU/UK: HACCP‑based controls; DRS containers: ensure durable/scannable marks.

Household (detergents, cleaning)

Validate chemical compatibility (alkali/acids/solvents) with containers/labels; maintain child‑resistance over cycles; hazard communication legible after wear.

9) Case Studies (sketches)

City café network — reusable hot cups (US)

Approach: Apply Food Code 2022 + 2024 Supplement; deposit cup pool with on‑prem RVM; peracetic‑acid CIP; QR refunds.

Result: Pilot return >80% with reduced disposables; scale contingent on SOP adoption and UX.

Reusable beverage bottles (EU)

Approach: Bottle to ISO 18603; crates tagged (ISO 17364 + GRAI); caustic/peracetic wash validated; APR‑compatible PET label for retirement.

Result: 25 targeted cycles; monitored loss and code grade per rotation.

UK grocery refill aisle (dry goods)

Approach: HACCP under FSA guides; sealed gravity bins; cleaning intervals documented; OPRL labels for refill pouches; EPR data capture.

Result: Uptake improved with staff assist + loyalty credit; hygiene NCs fell after SOP standardization.

10) Common Pitfalls & Red Flags

  1. Claiming “reusable” without a managed system and evidence of rotations.
  2. Under‑engineering for washing: label/ink failures, stress cracking, liner creep—test with actual sanitizer/temp profile.
  3. No identification: missing GRAI/QR leads to asset loss and audit risk.
  4. UX friction: low return‑point density or slow refunds depress return rates.
  5. Compliance blind spots: cosmetics POS refill without hygiene equivalence; US retail refills outside Food Code allowances.
Previous: Barrier Properties & Shelf-LifeNext: Production & Procurement