An Act To Amend Title 16 Of The Delaware Code Relating To Reducing The Automatic Provision Of Single-use Eating Utensils, Condiment Packets, And Other Items.
HB 111, as amended by House Substitute No. 2, would reduce the automatic provision of single-use food service items by Delaware food establishments. The bill generally prohibits restaurants and similar food establishments from giving customers utensils, napkins, condiment packets, straws, beverage stirrers, or beverage splash sticks unless the customer explicitly requests them. It also requires establishments to offer a way for customers to request these items when placing orders, including by phone or online, and bars employees from asking why the customer wants them. At the same time, it allows self-service stations where these items are available on request.
The bill defines the covered items and clarifies that it does not apply to packaging or containment items such as cups, boxes, wrappers, bags, and sandwich picks. It also exempts several categories of institutions from the definition of food establishment, including nonprofits, K-12 schools, early childhood centers, health care facilities, certain state-operated youth facilities, and Level IV and V correctional facilities. The measure is intended to take effect in stages, with the substantive restrictions beginning January 1, 2026, and the penalty provisions taking effect two years after enactment.
HB 111 would amend Title 16 of the Delaware Code by creating and enforcing a statewide "skip the stuff" framework for takeout and delivery orders. It would impose a default opt-in rule for single-use utensils and related items, establish a warning process and escalating civil penalties for repeat violations, and cap annual penalties at $1,500 per food establishment. The bill would affect restaurants and other food establishments that provide prepared food for pickup, delivery, or takeout, while carving out several public, nonprofit, educational, health care, and correctional settings.
The bill appears to have been framed positively as an environmental and waste-reduction measure, with the synopsis and findings emphasizing reduced solid waste, lower disposal costs, and alignment with similar laws in other jurisdictions. The available record does not include committee testimony or vote totals, so there is no direct evidence of opposition or support from recorded debate. Based on the bill text alone, the overall sentiment is pro-environment and pro-consumer choice, with an emphasis on reducing unnecessary single-use items rather than banning them outright.
The main points of potential contention are the burden on food establishments, the scope of covered items, and the enforcement structure. Restaurants and delivery platforms may need to change ordering systems to provide request options across all channels, and some may view the rule as an added compliance requirement. Another possible issue is the exemption list, which excludes nonprofits, schools, health care facilities, and certain state facilities, raising questions about why some institutions are treated differently. The bill also distinguishes between items that must be requested and items like cups and boxes that remain outside the restriction, which may be a point of interpretive or implementation concern.