As EPR programs proliferate around the world, it is clear that they share some common characteristics but that there are also significant differences among them. One common characteristic of most of the programs is some form of product/package take-back by industry. Or, put another way, some internalization of waste management costs by producers. The purpose of the following checklist is to summarize the policy options for these take-back programs. Such a checklist can serve three purposes: 1. As a guide for policy makers when they are designing programs to assure all major policy options have been considered. 2. In matrix form, to facilitate comparisons among EPR programs for a given product/package sector in different countries and for different product/package sectors within a specific country. 3. As a guide for future research on the costs and benefits of EPR It would be helpful if the OECD could include a policy checklist in the EPR Guidance Manual it is preparing. Voluntary harmonization of the format for describing programs and of definitions can facilitate comparisons of programs. Harmonization of definitions and reporting requirements, when possible, can also simplify and reduce the costs of compliance by multinational companies. This checklist is not intended to be definitive but rather can serve as a first step in preparing such a document. Stakeholders need to have an opportunity to comment on such a list and to suggest additions or changes based on their experience with EPR.