The National Recycling Coalition Measurement Standards and ...The National Recycling Coalition has produced this document as the first step in creating standardized definitions and

L . ' ..M h

The National Recycling Coalition Measurement Standards and

Reporting Guidelines

October 31,1989

National Recycling Coalition 1101 30th St., N.W., Suite 305

Washingtan, D.C. 20007

recycled paper

c L

1 .

I .

I1 . I11 .

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ................................................................................... 1

Preface .............. : ............................................................................................. 1

Project History .................................................................................... 1

Introduction ................................................................................................. 4

A . B . C .

The National Policy on Recycling .................................................. 1

Invitation to Members ...................................................................... 3 . .

Definitions .................................................................................................... 5

A .

B . C .

D . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 . 8 . 9 . IO . 11 . 12 . 13 . 14 . 15 . 16 . 17 . 18 .

Forms of Waste Reduction .............................................................. 6 First Cluster ......................................................................................... 7 Second Cluster .................................................................................... 8 Figure I: Forms of Waste Reduction ............................................ 9 Third Cluster ..................................................................................... 10

NRC Reference Waste Types ......................................................... 10

Other Waste Type Classification Schemes ................................. 11

Figure 3: Examples of Other Waste-Type Classification Schemes .................................................................... 14

Figure 2: NRC Reference Waste Classification Scheme .......... 13

. . *

Definitions ......................................................................................... 15 Commercial Waste .......................................................................... 15 Compost and Composting ............................................................. 15 Discard ................................................................................................ 16 Disposal .............................................................................................. 16 Garbage ............................................................................................... 16 Industrial Waste ............................................................................... 16 Instltutional Waste .......................................................................... 16 Municipal Solid Waste ................................................................... 17

Residential Waste ............................................................................ 17 Resource Recovery .......................................................................... 18

Solid Waste ....................................................................................... 18 Source Reduction ............................................................................. 18 Source Separation ............................................................................ 19 Source Separation Legislation ....................................................... 19 Waste .................................................................................................. 19 Waste Reductior, .............................................................................. 19

. .

Recycling and Recyclables .............................................................. 17

Set-out ................................................................................................ 18

National Recycling Coalition Measurement Standards and Reporting Guidelines. October 31. 1989

.

Table of Contents

IV . Reporting Guidelines ............................................................................. 20

1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 . 8 . 9 .

10 . 11 . 12 .

Actual Data ........................................................................................ 21 Baseline Recycling Systems Description and Data .................... 21 Designated Materials ..................................................................... 2 2 Glossary of Terms and Formulas ................................................. 23 Legislation ........................................................................................ 23

Population, Housing, and Land Use Descriptions .................... 24 Recycling Program Description ..................................................... 24

commercial, institutional, or industrial) .................................... 25 Service Unit ...................................................................................... 25 Time Period ....................................................................................... 26

Population and Household Counts ............................................. 23

Reference Waste (single- and multi-family residential,

Waste Collection and Disposal System ....................................... 26

V . Measurement Standards ..................................................................... 27

1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 .A . 7.B. 7.c.

Capture Rate ...................................................................................... 28 Disposal Index .................................................................................. 28

Recycling Rate ................................................................................... 32

Participation Rate for Curbside Recycling .................................. 32

Diversion Rate ................................................................................. 29 Generation Rate .............................................................................. 30 Recovery Rate ................................................................................... 31

Set-out Rate for Curbside Recycling ............................................. 32

Participation/Set-out Ratio ............................................................ 32

V . Conversion Factors ................................................................................ 36 Figure 4: Sample Weight to Volume Conversion Factors ... 37

VL Conclusion ................................................................................................. 38

VI1 . Notes ............................................................................................................. 39

~ ~~

National Recycling Coalition Measurement Standards and Reporting Guidelines. October 31. 1989

d

1

I. Preface

A. The National Policy on Recycling

In its "National Policy on Recycling" the National Recycling Coalition emphasizes the need for sharing information, and calls for "National Leadership for Research and Development and Technology Transfer." The National Policy on Recycling also cites the need for "... the establishment of a national publicly accessible computerized recycling database to provide an annual report on the national rate for recycling of all commodities recycled from the municipal solid wastestream as defined in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act." 1' The publication of The NRC's National Recycling Measurement Standards .and Guidelines is an essential first step toward the establishment of a national recycling database.

B. Project History

This report is the fourth publication in a process that began with the NRC's Sixth Annual Recycling Congress in Austin, Texas, October of 1987. At that Congress the NRC included in its program a workshop presentation by Trisha Ferrand, titled: "Measuring Success: --Recommendations for Uniform Terminology and Methodology to Evaluate Curbside Collection Programs." At the May 1988 California Resource Recovery Conference in San Diego, California, the concepts introduced in that paper were further refined and presented again in a paper titled: "Database Definitions --Let's Speak the Same Language."

In June of 1988, in response to requests by the membership that the NRC establish national standards for measuring program success, Ferrand Associates was commissioned to produce "NRC Recycling Measurement Standards Draft #1." By August of 1988, Draft #1 was published and circulated to a volunteer committee of recycling experts. Their written comments were inserted into a second printing circulated to all reviewers in September of 1988. This printing was re-titled: "NRC Recycling Measurement Standards Draft #I, August 15, 1988, Annotated, September 20, 1988, With Selected NRC Peer Review Committee Comments Inserted." Written comments were collected again, based on reviewers' responses to reading each others' comments in the annotated draft.

Two workshops were held at the National Recycling Coalition's Seventh Annual Congress in St. Paul, Minnesota to review the terms presented in

National Recycling Coalition Measurement Standards and Reporting Guidelines, October 31, 1989

Annotated Draft #1. The latest set of compiled comments was presented at that workshop (and copies mailed to reviewers not present). Because of time limitations, and the high interest and diversity of opinions revealed in discussing this draft, specific measurement standards and many other elements of Draft #1 could not be addressed in the workshop. Workshop participants however, revised and reached consensus on eight general definitions, endorsed a proposed Standards Development Process (as outlined in Draft #l), and summarized eight principles which they recommended be followed in producing Draft #2.

At the Board of Directors meeting the next day after that workshop, the Board of Directors of the National Recycling Coalition adopted the proposed Standards Development Process and all of the guiding principles endorsed by the workshop participants, but the Board declined to adopt the recommended set of eight general definitions at that time. Ferrand Associates was directed by the Board to produce a second draft of the National Recycling Measurement Standards, incorporating changes as deemed appropriate upon evaluation of the written comments, and incorporating the principles and general comments offered by the committee.

Subsequent to that direction, a workshop of the NRC Policy Committee reviewed a third draft in Rhode Island in June of 1989, and then a preliminary final draft in San Francisco in July of 1989.

A final draft was presented to and adopted by the NRC membership and Board of Directors at the Eighth Annual Recycling Congress in Charlotte, North Carolina, in October of 1989. The membership voted unanimously tb approve publication of that document, essentially as presented, with exception of one significant revision, which was prescribed as follows:

Because so many people expressed concern over two terms above all others in the document, these terms shall be deleted from the document and referred to the Policy Committee for further discussion and action. These terms are "waste management hierarchy" and "integrated waste management." 2

In the motion for ratification, the consultant was directed to also prepare a separate Comments Appendix to provide a record of the discussion relating to these and other terms and concepts that have been considered during production of the final report. The Comments Appendix includes a selection of comments received since the start of the project. Copies of this Comments Appendix can be requested from the National Recycling Coalition.


3

The October 31, 1989 motion for ratification also set forth these two requirements:

The preface shall invite the membership to contribute comments, criticisms, compliments, and recommendations for the 1990 edition;

The Policy Committee shall develop a process and format for annual revision and updates.

Subsequent to this, the Policy Committee has commissioned a follow-up paper from the consultant, titled: "Next Steps for Standards: "Recommendations to the National Recycling Coalition for Ongoing Development of National Recycling Measurement Standards." This paper is to be presented to the Board of Directors at the August 1990 Ninth Annual Congress in San Diego, California.

C. Invitation to NRC Members

All members of the National Recycling Coalition are invited to use the material presented in this Standards document, to report back to the NRC on its utility, and to contribute comments, criticisms, compliments and recommendations for the development of future updates. NRC members are invited to attend future workshops, review materials, and contribute comments on the Standards process.

The utility and validity of the Standards process will continue to rely upon the integration of information, ideas and professional experience from the broadest possible cross-section of our membership. We look forward to y o u participation.


4

11. Introduction

Across the nation, recycling professionals are being asked by all levels of government to set goals and measure their progress. Communities are sizing waste management facilities, awarding grants, and negotiating collection contracts based on projected success in achieving waste reduction goals. However, the language used in establishing these goals and measuring their achievement is rarely comparable between communities.

The National Recycling Coalition has produced this document as the first step in creating standardized definitions and measurement techniques that can be used by all communities. But while the goal is that we all speak the same language, this does not mean that we will all read from the same script. Rather, the process of developing the standards document has made us more keenly aware of differences among communities, and the need to provide more detail and context when reporting program data. These general observations need to be kept in mind when reviewing the recommendations in this document:

Not all measures are relevant to all programs, either because data collection is difficult, or the measures are inappropriate. Participation rates, for example, are commonly used in suburban curbside collection programs, but virtually impossible to obtain in dense urban settings.

Some measurement procedures are better suited to setting goals or evaluating the internal growth of programs rather than making program to program comparisons. For example, a diversion rate (based on 100% of the wastestream), is of interest within a regional program, but of limited validity as a tool for comparison between communities. Better comparisons are made on the basis of residential recycling rates or capture rates, which deal with specific subsets of the wastestream. Individual measurement standards are appropriately used at different stages of and also for different aspects of a program's life: planning, design, operation, and evaluation.

A single formula may validly have a number of different applications, and be based on different wastestreams and materials designated for recovery.

~


5

Precise application of an NRC-approved formula will not redeem imprecise or incomplete data collection. Presentation of formulas should always be done with due regard for background data and program variables.

It is important to appreciate that the measurement formulas are built upon the definitions, and these definitions, in turn, are drawn from a logical framework that classifies waste types and forms of waste reduction in a particular way. Thus, the sequence of presentation of ideas is very significant. Readers are urged to review the sections in the order presented to obtain the best understanding of the material.

111. Definitions

Most of the terms presented here are commonly used words that are problematic precisely because they are so familiar. Each person believes the next person knows exactly what is meant, and so differences in usage are obscured. The purpose of defining these terms in the NRC document is to enable recycling professionals from all sectors to communicate clearly with one another about establishing waste management goals and measuring progress toward those goals. In particular, we are interested in measuring the reduction of wastes through implementation of recycling and composting programs, and we wish to have a common basis for comparison of programs. It is important to refer to a framework that is internally consistent for both definitions and formulas.

In some instances, this means that NRC definitions will differ from colloquial usages or usages which serve other good purposes: rhetorical, educational, or legislative. For example, citizens are asked to "recycle" when what is really meant is "source separate." Many environmentalists and recycling educators never refer to recyclables as waste materials --to make the point that the materials have value, and waste can be avoided. In that context, suck materials are more aptly distinguished as "discards." They do not become wastes until finally disposed, as defined in this document: "placed in a landfill or other repository intended for permanent containment."

For purposes of removing or modifying restrictive zoning ordinances, so as to site a recycling processing facility, recyclables may be exempt by legislation, from the definition of solid waste. But for measurement purposes, recyclables are considered to be wastes since recycling is viewed as a waste management

~~~~ ~-


. . h

strategy. We wish to count the recycling rate as a form of waste diversion. Were it not for the implementation of recycling programs within a waste management strategy, most of these materials would be disposed rather than recycled. "Recyclables" are defined here as: "waste materials that are collected, separated, or processed and used as raw materials or products."

The definitions presented in this section do not serve all purposes, nor do they constitute a definitive glossary of terms. Rather, for measurement purposes, we address a limited subset of terms that relates chiefly to Forms of Waste Reduction and Types of Waste. Hazardous wastes are not addressed. While more terms may be included in future updates, the current definitions constitute the most fundamental areas where consensus is needed to define standard measurement techniques. 3

A. Forms of Waste Reduction It will be helpful to refer to Figure I: Forms of Waste Reduction, when reviewing the definitions and formulas presented in this report. At first glance, this looks like a materials flow diagram or a hierarchy of recommended waste management strategies. But it is neither! Rather, this diagram serves only two limited purposes. First, it is a reminder of all the factors that may account for waste reduction, from the perspective of a single program area. Second, it shows how the NRC distinguishes between various forms of waste reduction.

In the following discussion, the terms appearing in boldface also appear in Figure 1. Some of these terms have been given very specialized definitions by the NRC, which are presented at the end of this section under "Consensus Definitions.

The forms of waste reduction in Figure 1 are clustered into three different groups that may be briefly differentiated as follows: The first group includes pre-discard recycling systems, source reduction, and incidental reduction; these are phenomena that occur apart from the community's waste management system.

The second cluster consists of waste diversion activities. These are activities intended to prevent wastes from being deposited into the community's disposal system after they have already entered that community's waste management system.

~


7

The third cluster, volume reduction for disposal, simply acknowledges that a reduction in the volume of materials to be disposed may be viewed as a form of waste reduction.

First Cluster The term "incidental reduction" refers to reduction that happens incidentally; that is, as a consequence of population decline, economic trends, or weather conditions. It is important, however, to realize that such variables may also increase waste generation and so diminish the impact of even the most aggressive recycling and composting programs. More economic activity means more consumption of materials, and more rainfall may result in more yard waste generation, as well as add weight to open bins of waste at curbside.

"Source reduction" is defined, in part, as any action that avoids the creation of waste by reducing waste at the source. Within the waste management field, this term implies actions intended to encourage conservation of materials. Source reduction programs may consist of educational programs to influence shoppers to prefer items that use less packaging, institution of volume-based fees for waste collection services, or a company policy mandating two-sided photocopying.

"Pre-discard recycling systems" refers to those systems designed to capture materials for recycling, so that the materials do not enter the community's waste management system. This includes most redeemed deposit containers because they usually are recycled, and this recycling takes place independently of the waste management system. Waste exchanges and the recycling of scrap materials as they are generated during the production process, are similar in this respect. If disposal were a cost-free altemative, these activities would continue substantially unchanged. The recycling of scrap materials in house is referred to as a "closed loop" activity because the recycling cycle is guaranteed: all the materials remain under the control of the generator who establishes the system with the intention that there be no opportunity for materials to be discarded.

Deposit containers that are not redeemed fit the NRC definition of waste: "Material discarded by the generator as no longer useful to the generator." These unredeemed deposit containers may then be recycled or disposed like any other containers. Figure 1 uses the modifier "some" next to "deposit return systems," because it is possible to have a deposit system for some materials, to ensure special handling, but not necessarily recycling or waste reduction. A deposit on batteries, tires, autos, or household hazardous wastes might be employed in such a manner.


8

With consideration of these first cluster factors as context, it is'easy to see that any simple measurement of "waste reduction," as per quantities delivered to a landfill, would be incomplete and inaccurate. Although it may be possible, in theory, to identify the correlations between wastes typically generated, reduced, and disposed (with the possible exception of population and deposit containers), these phenomena usually cannot be addressed when evaluating "waste reduction rates." For this reason, it is more useful to measure specific subsets of waste reduction, such as materials or energy recovery or composting and recycling rates because these are more amenable to measurement.

Second Cluster Nearly all of the formulas presented in Section V, "Measurement Standards" relate to the second cluster. This cluster shows activities that may be undertaken to prevent wastes from being disposed in the community's disposal system, after they have been discarded by the generator and have entered the waste management system. Recycling of source-separated materials collected at curbside, for example, is a form of waste diversion because the materials that are collected would otherwise be disposed by the generator. Although curbside recycling collection programs also have been described as "dosing the loop," it is useful to reserve this terminology for forms of recycling that close the loop at, or very close to the the source versus those forms that actually "rescue" materials otherwise destined for disposal. The definition of recyclables in this document is: "waste materials that are collected, separated or processed, and used as raw materials or products."

You will note that "export of wastes to another location" is shown as a form of waste diversion. Certainly this is not a waste management solution to be endorsed by the National Recycling Coalition. However, when evaluating the effect of various waste reduction and diversion programs within a waste management system, it is important to acknowledge this phenomenon, and if possible, to measure it.

The forms of materials recovery shown in Figure 1 appear twice so as to elucidate that a materials recovery rate may include pre-existing activity and/or new activity. Whether a recycling goal credits pre-existing activity or measures only incremental increases over pre-existing activity, is a policy decision to be determined by the affected jurisdictions. However, to determine if new recycling programs are diverting materials from pre- existing programs, it is important to gather data about quantities being recovered in pre-existing programs.


9

Figure 1: Forms of Waste Reduction

I

PRE-DISCARD RECYCLING

dil lad material ----- WASTE 1 DIVERSION 1

INCIDENTAL I REDUCTION I I

Eg: Weather

consumption generation) patterns)

EXPORT OF

OUTSIDE OF RESOURCE RECOVERY

I I

I n MATERIALS I RECOVERY I ENERGY

RECOVERY

Bucline (Pmxieting) New (methane, Steam Electricity

ethanol)

I

DISPOSAL u Incineration 0 Bding or

shdding for

Please note: This diagram serves two limited purposes. First, it serves as a reminder of all the factors that may contribute to waste reduction within a particular program area. Second, it shows how the NRC defines the relationships between various forms of waste reduction. This is not a hierarchy of recommended waste management strategies, nor is it a materials flow diagram. Please refer to text for further explanation.


Often composting and re-use are referred to as forms of recycling, but for measurement purposes, these terms remain distinct so as to facilitate comparison of recycling rates among communities. The generation of yard wastes is so variable between regions, that failure to separate out the composting rate from the recycling rate would skew data and mask the differences among programs when comparing overall recycling rates.

"Re-use" appears twice in Figure 1, because it occurs in two forms: first, as a form of source reduction (pre-discard), and again, under materials recovery (post-discard). The latter case includes salvage operations that recover usable products at a landfill site and may, therefore, be measured and credited in a materials recovery or waste diversion goal.

The term "resource recovery" has been so widely used for so many different activities that it has lost utility as a descriptive term. It is recommended that the more specific terms, "materials recovery" and "waste-to-energy recovery'' be used in lieu of this term.

Third Cluster Simple incineration without energy recovery is commonly thought of as strictly a form of disposal, rather than a form of waste reduction. But solid waste planners must take into account that incineration only partially destroys quantities of incoming materials; a significant remainder must ultimately be disposed of as ash. Thus, from the perspective of a waste management systems planner, incineration may be characterized as a waste reduction measure.

Similarly, "landfilling with baling " may be described as a waste reduction measure because it decreases the volume of wastes to be finally disposed. Disposal, for NRC purposes, is defined as "the placement of waste in a landfill or other repository intended for permanent containment of waste."

B. NRC Reference Waste Types To standardize definitions for types of wastes, it is necessary to decide upon a logical classification scheme by which to organize the definitions. This seems so obvious as to not merit discussion. However, the fierce controversy over defining the simplest of terms has revealed a lack of consensus on purposes. This is to be expected. Particular roles and responsibilities within the sphere of solid waste management greatly affect definitions and items measured. But the value of a definition lies only in whether or not it serves its intended purpose. It need not be asserted that it represents the only valid or correct presentation.


11

The NRC Waste Classification Scheme used here serves a limited purpose: to standardize the way in which portions of the wastestream are categorized. Figure 2 NRC Reference Waste Classification Scheme shows two major divisions: Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) and Industrial Waste. Each includes subsets based on a simplified classification by generator type. MSW includes single- and multi-family residential wastes and institutional and commercial wastes. Industrial waste includes all wastes generated by other types of activities, such as demolition and construction, manufacturing, agricultural operations, wholesale trade, mining, etc.

The primary value of this division is that it roughly separates those wastes that are rather uniformly correlated with population, from those wastes that are highly variable between communities, irrespective of population.

All pertinent subdivisions within MSW should be cited because communities differ in assuming responsibility for managing single-family, multi-family residential wastes institutional, and commercial wastes. In pragmatic terms, this means that comparisons between communities are more apt if measurements address only the MSW fraction, or its specific subsets, while excluding Industrial Waste. To evaluate program impact within a particular community, the preferred reference waste would be 100% of the wastestream, to include MSW and industrial wastes.

C. Other Waste Type Classification Schemes Figure 3: Examples of Waste-Type Classification Schemes outlines some of the other approaches that are used to define types of waste. It is useful to review examples of other classification schemes to better appreciate how the NRC's purposes differs from these.

The classification of wastes by their Collection Sectors is a useful distinction for planning collection systems around recycling and solid waste. A widespread, but confusing, practice is to describe wastes collected under the direction of a public agency as "residential wastes" or "municipal solid wastes," and wastes collected privately as "commercial wastes," the term "commercial" referring as much to the sector doing the collecting as to the sector generating the waste.

The classification by Material Component is used in waste composition analysis to identify the potential for recycling. Although standard categories do not exist for sorting materials in waste composition studies, there is a trend toward expanding the number of such categories. The State of Missouri has conducted studies using 27 categories. The Northern California Recycling

~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~ ~


12

Association has endorsed a standard 12 "Master Categories for Recycling," with subsets that embrace virtually all of the wastestream.

The County of San Diego maintains a program of sorting by 11 "Key Indicator Materials" (KIMs), for purposes of measuring the presence of selected recyclables that have been disposed at landfills. A KIMs recycling rate is then derived by conducting a markets audit to identify KIMs recycled versus KIMs disposed.

Once an analysis is done by material component, wastes can be further regrouped and reported in a waste composition analysis by Management Strategy, as recyclable, compos table, combustible, or disposable.

A classification by Landfill Disposal Class is being used in some areas to establish separate disposal facilities for toxic or hazardous wastes, putrescible wastes, and inert materials.

The typing of wastes by Standard Industrial Code (SIC) and analysis of registered SIC code data within a community can be used to judge recycling potential and to forecast waste generation rates.

Because types of Collection Vehicles correlate rather consistently with material components, many areas set their tipping fees according to vehicle type, as a "stand-in" for material type.

~


13

Figure 2: NRC Reference Waste Classification Scheme

A. Municipal Solid Waste

RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL INSTITUTIONAL COMMERCIAL Single family Mu1 ti-family (Public sector services) (Private sector

(private dwellings) For example: services) Jails For example: Hospitals Theaters schools Finance, Nursing homes Insurance &

Real Estate Retail Estab. Restaurants

B. Industrial Waste (All other nonhazardous generators)

DEMOLITION WHOLESALE TRADE & CONSTRUCTION

MANUFACTURING FORESTRY & FISHERIES AGRICUTURAL SERVICES,

TRANSPORTATION & ETC. OTHER PUBLIC UTILITIES

MINING


14

Figure 3: Examples of Other Waste-Type Classification Schemes

By Collection Sector PUBLIC PUBLIC PRIVATE PRIVATE AGENCY AGENCY (Self-hauled) (Via Contract (Via DPW) (Via contract wl w /refuse

refuse haulers) haulers)

By Material Component GLASS METALS PAPER PLASTIC YARD WASTE For example: For example: For example: For example: For example: Container Alllminlun Office paper HDPE Grass Green F m u s Newspaper PET Brush Brown corrugated Leaves

Noncontainer

Standard Industrial Classification Code WHOLESALE TRADE AGRICUTURAL SERVICES,

MINING FORESTRY & FISHERIES

RETAIL TRADE

MANUFACTURING CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION UNCLASSIFIED

FINANCE, INSURANCE TRANSPORTATION & & REAL ESTATE OTHER PUBLIC UTILITES

By Type of Collection Equipment REAR - & -SIDE-LOADING FRONT LOADER OPEN CLOSED COMPACTORS COMPACTORS DR AG-ONS DRAG-ONS

STAKE BEDS & DUMP TRUCKS

By Management Strategy RECYCLABLE COMPOSTABLE

COMBUSTIBLE DISPOSABLE

By Landfill Disposal Class TOXIC OR HAZARDOUS PUTRESCIBLE INERT

~~~


15

D. Definitions

The following terms are defined in this section:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

Commercial Waste Compost and Composting Discard Disposal Garbage Industrial Waste Institutional Waste Municipal Solid Waste Recycling and Recyclables Residential Waste Resource Recovery Set-out Solid Waste Source Reduction Source Separation Source Separation Legislation Waste Waste Reduction

1. Commercial Waste

Waste which originates in retail or private sector services, for example, financial and insurance offices, retail establishments, theaters, etc.

2. Compost and Composting

Compost A humus-like material resulting from the biological decomposition of organic materials.

Composting As a waste management strategy, composting is the controlled, biological decomposition of organic waste materials into a humus product that may be used as a soil amendment or mulch.


16

3. Discard

To place something into a waste handling system. The item may then be recovered, processed, or disposed of.

Comments This term should not be used synonymously with the term disposal, because that which is discarded is not necessarily disposed.

4. Disposal

The placement of waste in a landfill or other repository intended for permanent containment of waste.

Comments "Incineration" is sometimes described as disposal.

5. Garbage

Putrescible waste, such as food waste, offal, or animal carcasses.

Comments This term is not synonymous with Yrash,'* "refuse," "rubbish," or "solid waste" but is frequently misused as such. "Garbage" traditionally has been a useful term to distinguish food waste from 'dry trash" when garbage was commonly fed to swine.

6. Industrial Waste

All nonhazardous solid wastes other than residential, commercial, and institutional.

Comments Industrial waste may also include small quantities of wastes generated from cafeterias, offices, or retail sales departments on the same premises. In some states, subsets, such as manufacturing or food processing, are defined separately from industrial wastes.

7. Institutional Waste

Material originating from services offered on behalf of the public, for example, from nursing homes, jails, hospitals, and schools.

~- ~~


17

8. Municipal Solid Waste

Includes residential, commercial, and institutional nonhazardous solid wastes.

9. Recycling and Recyclables

Recycling The series of activities by which materials, that would otherwise remain wastes, are collected, separated, or processed and used in the form of raw materials.

Recycling may be further defined by type: primary, secondary, or tertiary. Primary recycling is remaking the recyclable material into the same material in a process that can be repeated a number of times (e.g., newspaper into newspaper, glass containers into glass containers, etc.). Secondary recycling is remaking the recyclable material into a material which has the potential to be recycled again (e.g., newspaper into recycled paperboard). Tertiary recycling is remaking the recyclable material into a product that is unlikely to be recycled again (e.g., glass into glassphalt, paper into tissue paper). 4

Recyclables Waste materials that are collected, separated or processed, and used as raw materials or products.

Comments "Recycling can be thought of as a waste management alternative, not a 'Y' in the road from which one glass bottle sent to a landfill is defined as waste and another glass bottle that has been source separated is not defined as waste." We avoid problems with definitions and accounting methods (especially when calculating percentage recycling fractions) if we acknowledge recyclables as part of the wastestream. Thus, the NRC defines waste as "material discarded by the generator as no longer useful to the generator."5

The appropriate place to begin defining recyclables as desired commodities, and not as waste, is farther downstream, not while still in the hands of the generator who desires to discard them. Recyclables are the by-products (the wastes) of some consumption process, which necessitates the expense of removal.

10. Residential Waste

Solid waste originating from private households.


18

Comments Residential waste is generated in a variety of settings: single-family and multi-family homes; and institutions, such as nursing homes, residential treatment facilities, and jails. However, because private residential wastes are most often collected separately from institutional residential wastes, it is more useful to classify only those wastes from private single-family homes and apartments, as residential waste.

11. Resource Recovery

Any process that recovers value from the wastestream in the form of materials or energy.

12. Set-out

A quantity of material placed for collection.

Comments Programs vary in the way that set-outs are differentiated. Usually a set-out denotes one household's entire collection of recyclable materials. But in Philadelphia, where housing density makes it difficult to discern ownership of materials, each separate container or bundle is counted as a set-out. A single household, for example, may have three set-outs: commingled glass, metals, and newspaper. In New York City, a set-out may consist of a 30 or 40 cubic-yard, roll-off container that holds all of an apartment building's recyclables. Set-out may, of course, refer to trash as well as recyclables.

13. Solid Waste

Any nonliquid, nongaseous waste.

Comments See also "Waste."

14. Source Reduction

Any action that avoids the creation of waste by reducing waste at the source, including redesigning of products or packaging so that less material is used; making voluntary or imposed behavioral changes in the use of materials; or increasing durability or re-usability of materials.

~ -~


19

15. Source Separation

Separation by the waste generator of materials designated for separate collection for some form of materials recovery or special handling.

16. Source Separation Legislation

Legislation that is intended to facilitate collection of designated materials for recycling, composting, or re-use, by specifying how such materials are to be segregated and set out for collection. Such legislation usually prohibits mixing of such designated materials with wastes that are to be disposed. This is often referred to as "mandatory recycling legislation."

Comments The predominant intent of all source separation legislation is to discourage disposal and encourage recycling of selected items within the municipally collected wastestream. This definition makes it clear that such legislation does not constitute "waste flow control" for recyclables; that is, it does not require that generators contribute their materials to a govemment-sponsored collection program. Individual generators retain discretion to donate or sell their materials as they wish. Fines are not issued for failure to produce recyclables at curbside. Rather, enforcement actions focus upon identifying recyclables that are mixed with wastes.

17. Waste

Material discarded by the generator as no longer useful to the generator.

18. Waste Reduction

Decreasing the quantity of materials and/or products that must be disposed.

Comments This commonly does not refer to simple volume reduction, as achieved by baling or incineration; but for measurement purposes, the NRC does include these processes within the realm of waste reduction activity.

EPA uses the term "waste reduction" to refer to the reducing of the toxicity or hazardous character of wastes.


20

IV. Reporting Guidelines

Calculations, such as set-out rate, participation rate, capture rate, and diversion rate cannot stand alone. Even if there was strict, universal adherence to a set of NRC standard formulas for measurement, the use of such formulas would not enable one to conduct a good qualitative analysis of a program, nor would one know, on the basis of such numbers only, whether comparisons between programs in different communities could be validly made. The most useful and accurate applications of such formulas are to measure growth or troubleshoot within a single program. Although recommendations are made here to improve intercomparability of program data, a second major purpose of this work is to increase recognition of the important differences that exist among communities, so as to discourage inappropriate and invidious comparisons.

One of the most important limitations in comparing programs is that the wastestream is not at all uniform from place to place; but this is only one of many variables. For example, a small residential, suburban retirement community with very little commercial activity and no industrial waste generators may find it relatively easy to attain a 50% recycling rate based on curbside collection of glass, metals, plastics, wastepaper, appliances, and the composting of yard waste. This would be boosted by enforcement of mandatory source separation ordinances, volume-based disposal fees, and a parallel system of buy-backs, drop-offs, and reverse vending machines. In contrast, an inner city community with multi-family residences, a high mix of industrial activity, and little vegetation, would find this to be a very different challenge, especially if disposal was perceived as "unmetered," and no ordinances were in place.

This section presents the NRC's recommendations for desirable information to include in case studies, program planning, and program evaluation reports. It is already common practice for much of this information to be included in solid waste management plan documents. Source material should be cited within the report, within footnotes, or as an appendix. Where information is not available, or there are problems with data collection, these items should be addressed by explaining the assumptions used.

When reporting specific measurements, some of these information items are more essential than others for interpreting results or for comparison purposes. To reinforce the importance of identifying these particular items, each formula in Section V, "Measurement Standards" is accompanied by a


21

checklist of variables that are most relevant to that formula. Even in short reports and articles, these particular items always should be included.

Types of background information and variables discussed in this section include the following:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

10. 11. 12.

Actual Data Baseline Recycling Systems Description and Data Designated Materials* Glossary of Terms and Formulas Legisla tion Population and Household Counts* Population, Housing, and Land Use Descriptions Recycling Program Description Reference Waste (single- and multi-family residential, commercial, institutional, or industrial)* Service Unit* Time Period* Waste Collection and Disposal System

* These items are always included when reporting specific measurements.

1. Actual Data

Most reports rely upon samples, estimates, or extrapolations, because of the difficulty in obtaining comprehensive information. In most cases, data needs to be manipulated to produce useful results; most often, this will be an extrapolation or generalization from a sample to the whole. At least a sample of the actual data should be presented, and extrapolations should not stand alone without a good explanation of how they were derived. An explanation should be provided of how the whole relates to the sample and, only then should the estimated result for the whole be presented.

2. Baseline Recycling Systems Description and Data

It is significant to know whether a new recycling collection program is diverting material that otherwise would have been disposed or whether that material is being diverted from another recycling collection system. If municipal source separation and curbside collection programs are to be introduced in an area with active private sector recycling, this is of special concern.


22

Ideally, the pre-existing level of recycling activity should be assessed prior to the setting of goals. All coexisting recycling programs within the program area should be mentioned and described to the extent that data is available. This should include a description of all voluntary programs, depot and buy- back centers, scrap yards, and wastepaper dealers as well as curbside collection programs.

In setting recovery program targets, a policy decision must be made as to whether to count those materials already being recovered in some or all pre- existing programs. The first 10% of materials is the easiest to capture, while building on early gains can be more difficult and may require a different program design to further maximize recovery.

When choosing to count pre-existing activity, be very thorough in the data collection; care must be taken to avoid double-counting of recycling activity, as happens when brokers and collectors handle and report some of the same materials. 6

3. Designated Materials

W e n reporting program statistics or setting targets, each material designated for collection should be fully described in the same manner that the materials are specified for separation. For example, when citing glass, specify whether it's color-separated or mixed; for plastics, whether soda bottles, PET, or other types.

It is particularly important to specify whether yard wastes are collected separately. Although the NRC recommends a separation of recycling and composting rates, some communities and states already have set combined "recycling" targets for glass, metals, paper, plastics and compostables.

Some states and communities report redeemed deposit containers as part of their waste reduction achievement, but the NRC recommends that these statistics be reported separately from recycling rates. This is to enable more valid comparisons of recycling rates between communities with and without such deposit systems.

Calculation of a capture rate offers a good alternative approach to merging data for recovery of deposit containers and other materials. In this case, a description of "designated materials" should include a clear explanation of all the types of materials to be counted and whether redeemed or recovered from the wastestream.

~~~ - ~


23

A few communities are instituting resource recovery systems that include mechanical separation of recyclables from the mixed wastestream. If such materials are to be included in the calculations of rates for waste diversion, materials recovery, recycling, or composting, then this should be clearly reported as such. Otherwise, it would be assumed that these terms refer to source-separated materials. (Separately collected, commingled recycla bles are regarded as source-separated materials, not mixed wastes.) If source separation systems also are in place, it would be better to present independently the data based on the source-separated wastestream versus the mixed wastestream. This will facilitate comparison of source separation activity among communities with and without mechanical separation facilities.

4. Glossary of Terms and Formulas

Each report should clearly state the meaning of each special term used, even if repeating the NRC definitions. While this document will establish a consensus on the use and derivation of various terms, it is better to not yet rely upon the readers' familiarity with the NRC definitions.

5. Legislation

All relevant county and state legislation should be cited, in addition to local ordinances. This could include mandated recycling or waste diversion targets, source separation ordinances, landfill bans, per-container rates, and deposit legislation.

Each form of legislation can affect the results of a community's recycling performance and how it is measured. It is desirable to provide relevant background and statistics if available. In some instances, legislation that has been proposed but not enacted can influence recycling activity and should also be cited, if relevant.

Where mandatory ordinances are in effect, any enforcement programs should also be described.

6. Population and Household Counts

All program reports should include a count or an estimate of the number of persons, the households served, and the housing densities within the program areas.


24

Many resort communities experience seasonal fluctuations in population and have difficulty obtaining accurate statistics. In such cases, it is particularly important to indicate whether the population figure is based on year-round residents, peak population, or a calculated average.

7. Population, Housing, and Land Use Descriptions

If this information can be obtained, the source material should also be referenced:

Description of population: median age, income levels, and education.

Type of housing, density of development, and proportions of single- or multi-family homes: Inclusion of a description of housing density is a good indicator of urbanization and thus good background information for comparison of programs.

Type and extent of commercial development. Gross leasable area (GLA) can serve as a rough indicator; it can be derived from a census of retail trade and may be available from county economic development offices.

Mention should be made of any unusual factors that would cause the wastestream to differ from the community it is being compared to or from national averages. These factors would include climate, generation of special industrial or vegetative wastes, unusually large business concerns, government agencies or institutions, transient resort populations, large retirement population, or a large student population associated with colleges and universities.

8. Recycling Program Description

A detailed description of the recycling program is desirable as an accompaniment to program data. The description may include the following:

Types of collection equipment used Collection schedule Route configuration Frequency of collection per household Whether curbside set-out containers are provided by the program Publicity and educational activities and budget Financial evaluation (costs, revenues and savings) Processing and handling procedures


25

Market prices Ordinances and enforcement activities

9. Reference Waste

This may be the single, most important variable to specify when presenting program data because communities differ so greatly in defining the boundaries of their wastestreams by using so many different classification schemes to describe waste types. For example, when a community reports on its "waste," it may refer to all of the wastes delivered to a disposal site, all of the wastes collected by the public works department, or all of the wastes generated by residences, which may or may not include multi-family residences. In each of these examples a different classification scheme is used: Wastes are defined by management strategy, collection sector, and type of generator, respectively.

The NRC recognizes that these and other classification schemes have evolved to serve a variety of purposes. Therefore, a standard classification scheme is not proposed to entirely replace these usages. However, the NRC proposes the additional use of a simplified classification scheme based on generator, to improve intercomparability of program data. In Section 111, "Definitions," the NRC Reference Waste Classification Scheme is discussed along with a brief review of other classification schemes. Please refer to this section and Figures 2 and 3, for a fuller discussion of this topic. As a minimum standard, each waste type pertinent to the data being presented should be cited as shown in Figure 2: NRC Reference Waste Classification Scheme.

The NRC reference waste classification scheme uses two major categories: Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) and Industrial waste. MSW further consists of four subdivisions: Residential single-family, residential multi-family, institutional and commercial. This information may be supplemented by descriptions drawn from other classification schemes, as appropriate. See also Figure 3: Examples of Other Waste-Type Classification Schemes.

10. Service Unit

In the "Measurement Standards" section of this report, "Service Unit" appears as a reminder that some of the more general measurements, such as waste generation rate, diversion rate, and recovery rate, may be applied equally well on the basis of population, number of households, service route, or by city, county, or state.


26

11. Time Period

Program measurement is based on data for a specified time period and a particular start date, which is designated as the baseline activity level. Whatever the baseline period chosen, the collection date for each data point always should be reported.

When presenting calculations for curbside participation rates, it is particularly important to specify the time period over which measurements were made. With longer periods of measurement, Participation rates will appear higher because some households will source separate materials but not set materials out at every opportunity.

It is also helpful to describe the length of time that a program has been in effect.

12. Waste Collection and Disposal System

These items should be included, and where appropriate, their source material referenced:

Area description and map with relevant waste generation areas indicated

0 Number of households served on recycling collection route and

Tipping fees for disposal facilities

density of housing


27

V. Measurement Standards

"Measurement standards" in this section refers to common techniques for calculating factors used in setting targets, evaluating aspects of program performance, and making comparisons among programs.

Many reviewers warned against simplistic comparisons among programs, if these measurement techniques were to be the sole basis of evaluation. Adherence to NRC reporting guidelines would mitigate this problem by describing the kinds of additional background data and the specific variables that should always accompany the presentation of such calculations.

There also was concern for the quality of data to be used in some of the calculations here. Although precise application of an NRC-approved formula will not redeem imprecise data collection, the difficulty in collecting data should not be a reason to debate the necessity of establishing formulas. As discussed in Section 111, "Reporting Guidelines," all sources of data and the methods used for estimates and extrapolations should be fully documented.

Some of these techniques, such as diversion rate, recovery rate, and recycling rate, can be better understood in relationship to each other. As you review these techniques, please also refer to Figure I: Forms of Waste Reduction, and accompanying text in Section 11, to see how different terms for waste reduction relate to each other. With each measurement technique presented, there is a list of variables to specify when presenting the calculation. These variables are explained in Section IV.

The following measurement techniques are presented:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. A. 7.B. 7.c.

Capture Rate Disposal Index Diversion Rate Generation Rate Recovery Rate Recycling Rate Set-out Rate for Curbside Recycling Participation Rate for Curbside Recycling Par tiapatiodset-out Ra ti0


28

1. Capture Rate

Capture rate = designated - materials recovered total designated materials available

Variables to specify when reporting a capture rate: Designated materials Service unit 0 Time period Reference waste

Guidelines for Appropriate Use and Application

The capture rate refers to actual material recovered with respect to the designated materials available. The capture rate may represent all materials targeted in the program, but more commonly is used to describe individual categories of materials only. Standard reporting practice requires all materials considered in the capture rate to be identified, and preferably, capture rates would be cited for each individual material.

When reporting a capture rate, the defining of designated materials and the method of estimating quantities of available designated materials are very important. The "total designated materials available" ideally would be derived from generation rates, based on wastestream sampling and characterization studies done in conjunction with a recycling audit. Where this data does not exist, "surrogate" data may be borrowed from studies conducted in similar areas or from national estimates. For certain materials, such as local newspapers, it may be feasible to obtain distribution and newsprint consumption figures to estimate the amount of newspaper available. A capture rate for designated materials should include redeemed deposit containers where such programs are in effect. See also the discussion of designated materials in Section IV.

2. Disposal Index

Disposal index = materials disposed per capita at time of measurement materials disposed per capita at reference time

Variables to specify when reporting a disposal index: Designated materials Service unit Population count Reference waste


A per-capita disposal index measures the difference in quantities of materials disposed with reference to a base period. This enables a community to track


29

its progress toward waste reduction. The disposal index presumes nothing about the rate of diversion in the year that is designated as the baseline. For communities using a common base period, it provides a convenient and instructive means of comparison.

Over a two-year period, using 1987 as the reference year, indices for a community might look like this:

Baseline Year 6 lbs./capita in 1987 - 6 - 6 lbs./capita in 1987 6

1 .ooo - - -

Succeeding Years 0.833 - 5 lbs./capiia in 1988 - 5 - - -

6 lbs./capita in 1987 6

0.667 - 4 4 lbs./capita in 1989 - 6 lbs./capita in 1987 6

-

The use of a per-capita measure is preferred over an aggregate disposal measure because results are not affected by increases or decreases in population. But a declining index may or may not be an accurate indicator of the favorable impacts of particular waste management strategies upon the wastestream. Changes may be due to factors entirely outside control of the waste management system; for example, changes in waste generation due to industrial or commercial activity, innovations in product packaging, or an involuntary shift in consumption patterns due to changes in the economy. A more sophisticated analysis would require development of adjustment factors to even out the effect of these variables. See discussion of source reduction and incidental reduction in Section 111.

3. Diversion Rate

Diversion rate = material recovered material recovered and material disposed

Variables to specify when reporting a diversion rate: Designated materials Service unit Time period Reference waste Disposal facility options

(where materials are being diverted from)


30


By the literal meaning of the term "diversion," any re-directing of something - from one place to another is a diversion. When using the term "diversion," the waste material being diverted and the disposal system must be described. Most commonly, when waste diversion is discussed, it is used as an umbrella term for all types of materials recovery: It describes quantities diverted from landfilling or incineration, however, it is important to note that wastes can be diverted by exporting to another disposal site.

In describing a diversion rate, each material that is diverted and every means of diversion should be explicitly cited and included in the overall calculation. Likewise, the reference should be characterized per NRC reporting guidelines.

When comparing communities, detailed descriptions of both waste management systems being studied are needed. For example, composting programs may or may not exist for both programs. The reported recycling rate may or may not be based on the same reference waste. And, a recycling program may or may not include all possible materials, such as plastics, appliances, used motor oil, or multiple grades of paper.

Given these limitations, it is preferable to use a diversion measure only for internal program evaluation. Comparisons among communities are better conducted by addressing well-defined program components, such as the recycling of designated source-separated materials.

4. Generation Rate

Generation rate =

total tons diverted, recovered, and disposed within reference time population

Annual per-capita generation rate =

total tons generated - in 1 vear population of residents

Variables to specify when presenting a generation rate: Designated materials or reference waste Time period Population

Service unit

~~~ ~


31


This is most often used to determine the tons of waste produced per capita. Per-capita generation rates may be expressed in pounds per capita if desired and may be derived for periods other than a year; for example, a weekly rate may be derived. Generation rates may be expressed for total wastes, total recyclable materials, or individual recyclable materials.

"Population" does not refer to residents only. To measure wastes from institutional, commercial, and industrial sources, it is typical to express waste generation in units of pounds per day, per employee. The term, "population" in this context, refers to (in the statistician's meaning of the term) the "population" of employees.

5. Recovery Rate

material recovered reference waste

Annualized per-capita material recovery rate =

material recovered in 12 consecutive months population

Variables to specify when presenting a recovery rate: Designated materials Service unit Population Time period Reference waste


Recovery rates, as with generation rates, may be calculated for various materials and may be expressed in terms of different units of weight and time periods.

The recovery rate, like the recycling rate, uses the reference waste in the numerator, but the recovery rate is distinguished from the recycling rate by being more inclusive. The recovery rate can include all discarded materials that have been recovered through various recovery strategies, including yard waste compost and re-use.

It is common practice for states to reference deposit quantities within a recovery rate. Thus, for states with deposit legislation, the formula for recovery rate is essentially the same as a capture rate:


32

c t total designated materials available

For purposes of improving intercomparability of data, it is recommended that in such instances the recovery rate always be reported in two ways: with and without the deposit containers. See discussion of "capture rate" at the beginning of this section.

6. Recycling Rate

Recycling rate = desimated materials recvcled reference waste

Variables to specify when reporting a recycling rate: Designated materials Service unit Time period Reference waste


This is a subset of a materials recovery rate. Although some communities report composting as a form of recycling and add composting program results into their "recycling rate," this is to be discouraged because it makes comparison among programs inappropriate. Availability of compostablematerial is so variable from place to place, that the inclusion of compostables in the recycling rate skews data and masks the differences among communities. Likewise, re-use programs are so variable among communities that comparisons are better made by reporting these data separately . The defining of "designated materials" and "reference waste" is particularly important in regard to pre-existing versus new recycling activity. Most often, recycling rates cited by municipal program operators do not take into account pre-existing activity by volunteer and private sector operators, because of the difficulty in obtaining accurate data.

7. Set-out and Participation Rate and the Participation Multiplier for Curbside Recycling

A: Set-out rate = number of individual set-outs on collection dav total number of households served

B: Participation rate = number of households source separating total number of households served


33

C: Participation/set-out ratio = participation rate set-out rate

Variables to specify when reporting set-out or participation rate calculations: Designated materials Service unit Household counts Household density Reference waste Frequency of service Time period Definition of "set-out"


A set-out rate is an empirical measure obtained by counting the number of households that set out materials on their assigned collection day and the number of households in the service area. Occasionally, a participation rate is reported based on the counting of set-outs on a single day. This should be described as "set-out rate." The set-out rate is not a measurement of true participation, as participants may choose to set out materials less frequently than the service is provided.

Whenever a set-out rate is cited, it is desirable to also provide information about the geographic boundaries, population, and type of households served (single-family, multi-family, or mixed), the period of time when counts are made, and whether it is per route or all routes together. The time of day that observations are made is important to note, if not done simultaneously with pick-up. Many households do not set out materials the night before the next day's pick-up. Rather, these households set out materials just before they expect the collection truck to arrive, or the sound of the collection vehicle will act as a cue for recyclables to be brought out. This indicates that an accurate set-out count could only be made at the actual time of collection.

Another limitation here is that the definition of "set-out" varies from program to program. Usually, a house that sets out newspaper only and a house that sets out four materials are each counted as a single set-out. However, Philadelphia counts each material as a distinct set-out so that a house may have one, two, or three set-outs. In New York City, the term "set- out" is somewhat synonymous with route stop: A 40-cubic-yard roll-off of commingled recyclables from an entire apartment house will be counted as one set-out. Although counting set-outs is difficult in dense urban areas and in multi-family unit neighborhoods, it may be possible to track set-outs if serial numbers, names or addresses are affixed to each container.

The participation rate is difficult to accurately assess unless carefully tracked for an extended period of time. In a setting where there are single -family detached homes, it is possible to calculate the participation rate by keeping a set-out log, by address, for each and every household. Twelve weeks is a


34

common tracking period. A "participant" is then defined as any household that contributes materials at least once during this period. The frequency and pattern of collection should also be described since these variables can have a significant effect on participation rates.

Program requirements that differ among communities also will affect participation rates. And regardless of program requirements, households within the same program may still perform differently in these ways:

Number of categories separated (perhaps newspaper, but not glass)

Thoroughness with which they separate (some glass, but not all)

Consistency and frequency with which they set out materials. (participate not at every opportunity but every second or third time)

Another difficulty in assessing true participation is that households may separate materials for recycling, but sell or donate them elsewhere, rather than set them out for pick-up.

The participatiodset-out ratio is a multiplier used to estimate participation where set-outs are easily counted but it is not possible to conduct a full participation survey. As a short-cut, the participation rate can be extrapolated from the set-out rate and the participation rate obtained from a sample area.

As a hypothetical example, a participation/set-out ratio of 2.5 might be derived from a program with a 30% weekly set-out rate and 75% participation rate that was documented from a representative portion of the route:

75% particbation rate = 2.5 30% set-out rate

If another similar weekly program were found to have a 25% set-out rate, the 2.5 participation/set-out ratio could be applied to estimate the participation rate:

25.0% set-out rate x 2.5 participatiodset-out ratio 62.5% participation

As noted in the discussion of participation rates, however, attention should be paid to differences in set-out behavior under different collection frequencies.


35

Results of a monthly collection frequency could look like this:

75% participation rate = 1.5 50% set-out rate

This formula hypothesizes that the same number of households participates as with weekly collection, but motivation is higher to not miss a pick-up. If this new ratio of 1.5 were applied as with our prior example, the results would be quite different:

25.0% set-out rate x 1.5 participation/set-out ratio 37.5% participation

In this case, applying an inappropriate multiplier could understate participation by 25%. Set-out and participation behavior may be expected to vary not just with collection frequency but also with demographic factors. The NRC encourages more communities to measure both participation and set-out rates to help build a database of participation/set-out ratios that eventually may be used with some reliability for estimating program participation

The multipliers that Waste Management of North America Inc. has found to be accurate and useful are 2 to 2.5 for weekly programs, 1.5 for bi-weekly programs, and 1' for monthly programs.

Participation may also be inferred by conducting sample surveys by telephone or door-to-door where people report their own participation practices. Although this is subject to bias, it offers another way to judge participation in neighborhoods with multi-family dwellings, where set-outs are not distinguishable by households.

An interesting and potentially useful finding would be the point in a program's history that participation rates begin to "decay," and require a renewed educational and publicity efforts. One reason that participation drops is that one in five households changes its address each year. Thus approximately 20% of households would require more than an annual educational message.

~~ ~~


36

V. Conversion Factors

The density figures provided In Figure 4 on the next two pages represent a compilation taken from several sources.7 Please be aware that figures for your own program could vary as processing and handling circumstances vary. New and sometimes subtle changes in container material or design also can lighten or increase the amount of material per container. Moisture and humidity can affect some weights, especially for paper and yard waste.

Where it is particularly important to be precise, as for contract agreements, for example, it is best to conduct independent weighings to determine densities for materials as handled in your own program.


Figure 4: Sample Weight to Volume Conversion Factors for Recyclables

Material Volume

Newsprint, Loose Newsprint,compacted Newsprint

Corrugated cardboard, loose Corrugated cardboard, baled

one cubic yard one cubic yard

12" stack


Glass, whole bottles Glass, semi crushed Glass, crushed (mechanically) Glass, whole bottles Glass, uncrushed to manually broken

one cubic yard one cubic yard one cubic yard

one full grocery bag 55 Gallon Drum

PET soda bottles, whole, loose PET soda bottles, whole, loose PET soda bottles, baled PET soda bottles, granulated PET soda bottles, granulated Film, baled Film, baled HPDE (dairy only), whole, loose HPDE (dairy only), baled HPDE (mixed), baled HPDE (mixed), granulated HPDE (mixed), granulated

Mixed PET & Dairy, whole, loose

Mixed PET, Dairy and other rigid, whole, loose

Mixed rigid, no film or Dairy, whole loose

Mixed rigid, no film, granulated Mixed rigid & film, densified by

Aluminum cans, whole Aluminum cans, whole Aluminumons

mixed plastic mold technology

one cubic yard gaylord

30" x 48" x 60" gay lord *

semi-load 3 0 x 42" x 48"

semi-load one cubic yard 3 0 x 48 x 60" 3 0 x 48 x 60"

gaylord semi-load

one cubic yard

one cubic yard

one cubic yard gaylord

one cubic foot one cubic yard

1 one full kraft paper grocery bag one 55 gal plastic bag

* Gaylord size most commonly used 40" x 4 8 x 36"

WeiEht in Pounds

360 - 800 720 - 1,OOO

35

300 lo00 - 1200 600 - 1,OOO

1,OOO - 1,800 800 - 2700

125 - 500 16

30-40 40-53

500 700-750 30,000 1,100 44,000

24 500-800 600-900

800 - 1,o00 42,000

average 32

average 38

average 49 500 - 1,Ooo

average 60 50-74

average 1.5 13 - 20

~~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~


Material

Figure 4: Sample Weight to Volume Conversion Factors for Recyclables

Ferrous cans, whole Ferrous cans, flattened

Leaves, uncompacteds Leaves, compacted Leaves, vacuumed Wood chips

Grass clippings

Used Motor Oil Tire - Passenger Car Tire - Truck

Food Waste, solid and liquid fats

Volume


one cubic yard one cubic yard one cubic yard one cubic yard

one cubic yard

one gallon O W

O W

55 gallon drum

weiehtinrounds

150 850

250 - 500 320 - 450

350 500

400 - 1500 7 12 60

412

VI. Conclusion

"Standard" is defined as "something considered by an authority or by general consent as a basis of comparison; an approved model; a rule or a principle that is used as a basis for judgement ....'I 9

While we believe that the recommendations presented here represent the best possible way of reporting and using data, we realize that complete agreement on every individual point isn't necessary for this work to serve as a "standard." Even where there may be disagreement about the application of a particular term or formula, the difference is made clearer by having a standard against which to contrast the alternative. The NRC offers these definitions, reporting guidelines, and calculation methods in that sense of the term: to serve as a common point of departure.

These concepts will have the best utility if indeed they do achieve widespread adoption, that is, if we all indeed begin to "speak the same language." To accomplish this, your participation is greatly needed to encourage the widespread testing and adoption of the NRC's National Measurement


*

39

Standards and Reporting Guidelines. Your reports of experience in applying these concepts in your programs, and your comments and criticism on this document, are invited and will be appreciated, for the preparation of future updates.

VII. Notes

1 'The National Policy on Recycling" was adopted by the National Recycling Coalition at its Fifth Annual Recycling Congress in Seattle Washington, in November of 1986. Copies of this brochure are available from the NRC.

2 At the 1989 Membership Meeting, and in workshops held during the 1989 Congress, consensus could not be reached on these terms because some members expressed the opinion that a definition for integrated waste management must also include a specified hierarchy of priorities for waste. management options, whereas others argued that this should be left unspecified. Furthermore, consensus could not be reached in defining the waste management hierarchy, because of lack of agreement regarding the ranking of incineration with energy recovery versus landfilling. comments were consistent with other comments previously received throughout several drafts of the Standards document. Unchallenged was this portion of the definition:

These

"The waste management hierarchy is the prioritization of waste management strategies as follows: 1. Decreasing the generation of waste through source reduction, and 2. Decreasing disposal by maximizing materials recovery. "

3 The Glossary of Recycling Terms and Acronyms, contains more than 300 terms and is available for $5 from Resource Recycling, P.O. Box 10540, Portland, Oregon 97210; 503-227-1319

4 This description is a direct paraphrase of comments provided by the Glass Packaging Institute.

5 This is a direct paraphrase of commentary provided by Resource Integration Systems/Resource Conservation Consultants.

6 A detailed methodology for deriving current recycling rates has been developed by Gilmore Research Group and The Matrix Management Group


40

for the Washington State Department of Ecology. This methodology includes administration of a survey to all recyclable materials handlers.

Sources used include:

"Guide for Preparing Commercial Solid Waste Reduction and Recycling Plans," by Ocean State Cleanup and Recycling Department of Environmental Management, 83 Park Street, Providence, R.I. 02903-1037,1988.

"Technical Manual to Assist the Municipalities of Hudson County in Planning and Implementing Comprehensive Recycling Programs," by the Hudson County Improvement Authority, January 1988.

"PIastics Recycling Action Plan for Massachusetts, July 1988" by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management and the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management.

"Yard Waste Composting, A Study of Eight Programs, by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, April, 1989."

8 Yard waste densities are especially variable between communities, and in different seasons within a community because of differences in types of foliage, moisture and humidity. The 1500 density factor for grass is based on program experience in Minnesota.

9 Random House Dictionary of the English Language. Second unabridged edition, New York, N.Y.: Random House, Inc., 1987.

~~


Documents

The National Recycling Coalition Measurement Standards and ...The National Recycling Coalition has produced this document as the first step in creating standardized definitions and