RECYCLING NEEDS SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT
Report to Congress
Requested in House Report 116-448 which accompanied the Department of the
Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2021
OFFICE OF LAND AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
OFFICE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY
August 2024
EPA-530-R-24-012
-------
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 1
Introduction 4
Survey Administration 5
Overview of Results 5
Overview of Results by Survey Question 5
Recommendations 10
Appendix A: Survey Results
Appendix B: Questionnaire
-------
Executive Summary
Approximately half of global greenhouse gas emissions are the result of natural resource
extraction and processing.1 Increasing recycling reduces climate, environmental, and social
impacts of materials use, and keeps valuable resources in use instead of in landfills. Municipal
solid waste management has long suffered from a lack of investment. Some communities that
lack waste management infrastructure do not have curbside waste collection services, recycling,
or composting programs, which increases the burden on our landfills, decreases their capacity,
and increases greenhouse gas emissions.
To reduce the impacts of materials use and strengthen the U.S. recycling system, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and others have undertaken significant efforts to
advance the circular economy in the United States. In 2015, the U.S. Department of Agriculture
and the EPA announced the United States 2030 Food Loss and Waste Reduction Goal,2 the first
ever domestic goal to reduce food loss and waste by 50 percent by the year 2030. In 2020, the
EPA announced the U.S. National Recycling Goal3 to increase the U.S. recycling rate to 50
percent by 2030 and to galvanize efforts to strengthen the U.S. recycling system. One year later,
the EPA released the National Recycling Strategy: Part One of a Series on Building a Circular
Economy for All.4
Funding was made available to support the National Recycling Strategy when the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law 117-58 (also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law or
"BIL") was signed into law providing the EPA with $275 million in funding to implement the
National Recycling Strategy through the Solid Waste Infrastructure for Recycling (SWIFR) Grant
Program authorized by section 302(a) of the Save Our Seas 2.0. Section 70402 of BIL also
authorized the Consumer Recycling Education and Outreach Grant Program, and EPA received
$75 million in funding for the program through BIL. Further, section 70401 of BIL provided $10
million to develop battery recycling best practices and $15 million to develop voluntary battery
labeling guidelines. The National Recycling Strategy proposes building a circular economy to
reduce materials use, redesign materials to be less resource intensive, and recapture "waste" as
a resource to manufacture new materials and products. This vision and strategy for a circular
economy aligns with the language and the goals identified in BIL regarding solid waste
infrastructure and management in the United States.
House Report 116-448 directs the EPA to "begin a comprehensive data collection effort to
strengthen residential recycling and accelerate the move towards a circular economy"5 (p.95)
1 Data from the 2019 Global Resources Outlook Report published by UN Environment.
Global Resources Outlook 2019: Natural Resources for the Future We Want - Summary for Policymakers
(unep.org)
2 Please see: https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/united-states-2030-food-loss-and-waste-
reduction-goal.
3 Please see: https://www.epa.gov/circulareconomv/us-national-recvcling-goal.
4 Please see: https://www.epa.gov/circulareconomv/national-recvcling-strategy.
5 Please see: https://www.congress.gov/116/crpt/hrpt448/CRPT-116hrpt448.pdf.
1
-------
and prepare "an updated strategy with recommendations." This report details the results of the
data collection efforts, while the Assessment of the U.S. Recycling System: Financial Estimates
to Modernize Material Recovery Infrastructure report provides the estimates to achieve
consistent collection across the nation and maximize the efficient delivery of materials to the
circular economy. The requested information from the language in the report is:
• Number of community curbside programs;
• Number of community drop-off programs;
• Total amount of residential packaging materials collected through deposit programs;
• Total amount of residential materials collected;
• Types of materials accepted by each program;
• Number of citizens with access to recycling services on par with access to disposal;
• Inbound contamination and capture rates of community recycling programs;
• Data on single use plastics;
• Types of single-use plastics currently in commerce;
• Recyclability of these plastic types;
• Rates at which these plastics are currently recycled by plastic type and by region;
• Data on aluminum;
• Rates at which aluminum cans are recycled;
• Investment required to modernize material recovery infrastructure; and
• Amounts of investment needed to provide all citizens with access to recycling services
on par with access to disposal.
This report serves as an opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of the current state of
recycling data as well as the recycling needs across the U.S. as we move towards a circular
economy. It begins with an introduction of the data collection efforts, explains the survey
administration process, and presents an overview of results as a whole and by specific survey
question. In addition, the Agency also prepared the recommendations to improve U.S. circular
economy measurement as part of the National Recycling Strategy: Part One of a Series to Build
a Circular Economy,6 which is focused on advancing the U.S. Recycling System by identifying a
series of deliberate objectives and stakeholder-led actions to create a stronger, more resilient,
less impactful, and more cost-effective recycling system. This report meets the direction in
House Report 116-448, which requests an updated strategy with recommendations.
The initial results of the needs survey indicate that, while at least half of the states and
territories collect data on some of these fundamental recycling measures, the consistency and
completeness of data is variable. For example, data may be collected through voluntary surveys,
or it may be collected infrequently and may only cover certain facility types or communities. Key
highlights of the results include:
• Approximately 50 percent of states and territories collect data on the number of
6 Please see: https://www.epa.gOv/circulareconomv/national-recvcling-strategy#NRS%20Part%201.
2
-------
community curbside recycling programs while just over 60 percent collect data on the
number of drop-off programs.
• 80 percent of states and territories do not have deposit programs. Of those that do have
deposit programs, two thirds collect data on the amount of residential packaging
materials collected through the programs.
• Only 15 percent of states and territories collect data on the capture rates of community
recycling programs.
• 88 percent of states and territories do not collect data on the type of single-use plastics
currently in commerce.
• About 50 percent of states and territories measure an overall recycling rate, with an
average recycling rate estimate of roughly 30 percent.
• The most common materials accepted by the majority of state and territory recycling
programs are paper products, HDPE plastics (plastic type 2), PET plastics (plastic type 1),
and aluminum.
Overall, the results of the Recycling Needs Survey and Assessment highlight the need to
enhance recycling data collection infrastructure nationally. Encouraging standardization of
metrics and promoting a regular data collection and reporting schedule for the states,
territories, and EPA is needed to facilitate tracking of progress with respect to access and
recovery rates. Specific examples of these data gaps include the fact that many states and
territories do not have the capacity to collect recycling details annually, do not have the ability
to properly collect inbound contamination rates, have inconsistent collection and reporting
protocols, and do not have granular data on single use plastics and types of materials in the
recycling stream.
To help address these gaps, the Agency is proposing two key activities that will support a
transition to a circular economy: utilizing the SWIFR grant funds for data collection activities
and continuing to collect data through the development of an Information Collection Request
(ICR).
3
-------
Introduction
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was directed by Congress (H.R. 116-448)7 to begin a
comprehensive data collection effort to strengthen residential recycling and accelerate the move
towards a circular economy. The Agency prepared an Emergency Information Collection Request
(E-ICR) package to send to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval to start the
data collection process. The specific language in the report directs the Agency to "begin a
comprehensive data collection effort to strengthen residential recycling and accelerate the move
towards a circular economy." The requested information from the House Report language is:
• Number of community curbside programs;
• Number of community drop-off programs;
• Total amount of residential packaging materials collected through deposit programs;
• Total amount of residential materials collected;
• Types of materials accepted by each program;
• Number of citizens with access to recycling services on par with access to disposal;
• Inbound contamination and capture rates of community recycling programs;
• Data on single use plastics;
• Types of single-use plastics currently in commerce;
• Recyclability of these plastic types;
• Rates at which these plastics are currently recycled by plastic type and by region;
• Data on aluminum;
• Rates at which aluminum cans are recycled;
• Investment required to modernize material recovery infrastructure; and
• Amounts of investment needed to provide all citizens with access to recycling services
on par with access to disposal.
In response to this request, the EPA developed a survey and coordinated with OMB to secure
approval to administer the survey under the E-ICR. The survey was designed to be administered at
the state and territory level. Before starting the survey, the EPA solicited input on the approach
and questionnaire from several stakeholder groups, including the Association of State and
Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO), the Northeast Waste Management
Officials Association (NEWMOA), the Environmental Research & Education Foundation (EREF),
and The Recycling Partnership (TRP).
We note that the EPA will address the final two information elements listed above ("investment
required to modernize...." and "amounts of investment needed to provide citizens with access
....") in a separate document entitled the Assessment of the U.S. Recycling System: Financial
Estimates to Modernize Material Recovery Infrastructure.
7 Please see: https://www.congress.gov/116/crpt/hrpt448/CRPT-116hrpt448.pdf.
4
-------
Survey Administration
The questionnaire was programmed for online administration. The EPA distributed requests to
complete the online survey by e-mail to relevant agencies in all 50 states, the District of Columbia
(D.C.), and 11 territories.8 The survey was active for approximately three weeks. The EPA
distributed follow-up reminders after the first week to encourage participation. Ultimately, all 50
states, D.C., and the majority of the territories submitted responses, a roughly 95 percent
response rate.9
Overview of Results
The primary purpose of this information collection effort was to determine the degree to which
U.S. states and territories collect and maintain data on recycling program coverage, volumes and
materials collected, and recycling rates. The initial results indicated that, while at least half collect
data on some of these fundamental recycling measures, the consistency and completeness of
data is variable. For example, data may be collected through voluntary surveys, or it may be
collected infrequently and may only cover certain facility types or communities. Key highlights of
the results include:
• Approximately 50 percent of states and territories collect data on the number of
community curbside recycling programs while just over 60 percent collect data on the
number of drop-off programs.
• 80 percent of states and territories do not have deposit programs. Of those that do have
deposit programs, two thirds collect data on the amount of residential packaging
materials collected through the programs.
• Only 15 percent of states and territories collect data on the capture rates of community
recycling programs.
• 88 percent of states and territories do not collect data on the type of single-use plastics
currently in commerce.
• About 50 percent of states and territories measure an overall recycling rate, with an
average recycling rate estimate of roughly 30 percent.
• The most common materials accepted by the majority of state and territory recycling
programs are paper products, HDPE plastics (plastic type 2), PET plastics (plastic type 1),
and aluminum.
Overview of Results by Survey Question
This section provides a brief summary of responses, including open-ended comments, organized
by survey question. Appendix A presents distributions of responses by location, as well as the
8 Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Marshall
Islands, Republic of Palau, and Pohnpei, Yap, Kosrae, and Chuuk of the Federated States of Micronesia.
9 Responses were not received from the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Pohnpei and Kosrae
of the Federated States of Micronesia.
5
-------
complete open-ended comments. A copy of the questionnaire as it appeared in online format is
attached as Appendix B.
Question 1: Does your state or territory collect data on the number of community curbside
recycling programs in the state or territory?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey; 48 percent (28) indicated that they do not collect these data, while 52
percent (31) of respondents do collect these data. Related comments described various data
collection mechanisms, such as voluntary surveys (Arizona), direct communication with local
governments/tracking collection systems (Washington), or collection by regional authorities
(Arkansas). See page A-2 for additional detail.
Question 2: Does your stgte or territory collect dgtg on the number of community drop-off
recycling progrgms in the stgte or territory?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey; 37 percent (22) indicated that they do not collect these data, while 63
percent (37) of respondents do collect these data. Related comments described various data
collection mechanisms, such as voluntary data submitted through municipal measurement
programs (Georgia), voluntary reporting by counties (Maryland), ortracking facilities (New
Mexico). See page A-6 for additional detail.
Question 3: If your stgte or territory hgs deposit progrgms,10 do you collect dgtg on the totgl
gmount of residentigl pgckgging mgterigls collected through those progrgms?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey; 80 percent (47) of respondents indicated that they do not have deposit
programs, seven percent (4) indicated that they do have deposit programs, but they do not
collect these data, and 13 percent (8) of respondents collect these data. Related comments
described various caveats to the responses, including data collection for certain materials only
(Iowa), while others provided details on the data collection methods (California). See page A-9 for
additional detail.
Question 4: Does your stgte or territory collect dgtg on the totgl gmount of residentigl mgterigls
collected through curbside progrgms gnnuglly?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey; 54 percent (32) of respondents indicated that they do not collect these
data, while 46 percent (27) of respondents do collect these data. Related comments described
various data collection mechanisms, including surveys, mandatory reporting, voluntary
submission, and other methods. See page A-ll for additional detail.
10 A deposit program refers to a community drop-off recycling program.
6
-------
Question 5: Does your state or territory collect data on the types of materials accepted by each
recycling program in the state or territory?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey; 36 percent (21) of respondents indicated that they do not collect these
data, while 64 percent (38) of respondents do collect these data. Related comments described
various data collection mechanisms, including surveys, mandatory reporting, voluntary
submission, and other methods. See page A-14 for additional detail.
Question 6: Does yourstgte or territory collect dgtg on the number of citizens with gccess to
recycling services on pgr with gccess to wgste disposgl?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey; 64 percent (38) of respondents indicated that they do not collect these
data, while 36 percent (21) of respondents do collect these data. Related comments described
various state laws that expand access to recycling services, as well as metrics used to track access.
See page A-17 for additional detail.
Question 7: Does yourstgte or territory collect dgtg on the inbound contgmingtion rgtes of
community recycling progrgms?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey; 85 percent (50) of respondents indicated that they do not collect these
data, while 15 percent (9) of respondents do collect these data. Related comments described
attempts to collect these data and, in many cases, associated obstacles (e.g., community recycling
programs do not know the inbound contamination rates). See page A-20 for additional detail.
Question 8: Does yourstgte or territory collect dgtg on the cgpture rgtes of community recycling
progrgms?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey; 85 percent (50) of respondents indicated that they do not collect these
data, while 15 percent (9) of respondents do collect these data. Related comments described
attempts to collect these data. However, it is not clear that all respondents follow a standard
definition of "capture rates." Ohio, for example, commented that it is unclear what the term
refers to. See page A-23 for additional detail.
Question 9: Does your stgte or territory collect dgtg on the types of single-use pigsties currently in
commerce in the stgte or territory?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey; 88 percent (52) of respondents indicated that they do not collect these
data, while 12 percent (7) of respondents do collect these data. Related comments described
future plans to collect these data (Oregon, California), or described current data collection
mechanisms (Minnesota, Tennessee). See page A-25 for additional detail.
7
-------
Question 10: Does your state or territory collect data on the rates at which single-use plastics are
recycled in the state or territory?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey; 80 percent (47) of respondents indicated that they do not collect these
data, while 20 percent (12) of respondents do collect these data. Related comments described
caveats to the responses, most commonly that data are only collected for certain types of single-
use plastics. See page A-27 for additional detail.
Question 11: Does your state or territory collect data on the rates at which single-use plastics are
recycled in the state or territory by plastic type?
Of the 12 states and territories that indicated they collect relevant data in Question 10, six
respondents indicated that they do not collect these data, while six do collect these data. Related
comments described the types of single-use plastics for which these data are collected. See page
A-30 for additional detail.
Question 12: Does yourstgte or territory collect dgtg on the rgtes gt which gluminum cgns gre
recycled in the stgte or territory?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey; 61 percent (36) of respondents indicated that they do not collect these
data, while 39 percent (23) of respondents do collect these data. Related comments described
the degree to which they do or do not collect data on the capture rates of aluminum cans (e.g.,
collecting data on the capture rate of aluminum as a category, but not breaking out aluminum
cans in reporting). See page A-32 for additional detail.
Question 13g: Does yourstgte or territory megsure g recycling rgte gt the stgte or territory-level?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey; 49 percent (29) of respondents indicated that they do not measure a rate
at that level, while 51 percent (30) of respondents do. Related comments described caveats to
the responses, such as measuring a "recovery rate" including limited materials burned for energy
(Washington, Oregon) or compiling "diversion rates" which include components of recycling
(Vermont, Ohio). See page A-35 for additional detail.
Question 13b: Stgte or territory-level recycling rgte:
Of the 30 states and territories that indicated they measure a rate in Question 13a, 29 provided a
response to this question. The minimum reported recycling rate was nine percent and the
maximum was 56 percent. Responses indicate a mean state or territory-level recycling rate of 32
percent. Related comments described how the state or territory-level recycling rate is calculated.
See page A-38 for additional detail.
Question 14: Plegse provide your best estimgte of the percentgge ofgll communities in yourstgte
or territory thgt hgve gccess to curbside recycling progrgms:
This question had an 88 percent (52) response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey. Reported estimates ranged from 0 to 100 percent. Responses indicate a
mean estimated level of community access to curbside recycling programs of 44 percent. See
8
-------
page A-42 for additional detail.
Question 15: Please provide your best estimate of the percentage of all communities in your state
or territory that have access to drop-off recycling:
This question had an 87 percent (51) response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey. Reported estimates ranged from 0 to 100 percent. Responses indicate a
mean estimated level of community access to drop-off recycling of 62 percent. See page A-43 for
additional detail.
Question 16: Plegse provide your best estimgte of the percentgge ofgll communities in yourstgte
or territory thgt do not hgve gccess to recycling services:
This question had an 83 percent (49) response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey. Reported estimates ranged from 0 to 100 percent. Responses indicate a
mean estimated level of 28 percent of communities without access to recycling services. See page
A-44 for additional detail.
Question 17: Plegse provide your best estimgte of the totgl recycling tonngge collected in your
stgte or territory:
This question had an 80 percent (47) response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey. The minimum estimate was five tons (American Samoa), and the
maximum estimate was 19.6 million tons (Florida). Responses indicate a mean estimated total
recycling tonnage of 2.8 million tons. See page A-45 for additional detail.
Question 18: Plegse provide your best estimgte of the percentgge of totgl recycling tonngge thgt is
collected through curbside recycling progrgms:
This question had a 59 percent (35) response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey. The minimum estimate was zero (Yap, American Samoa, Palau, Virgin
Islands) and the maximum estimate was 90 percent (Utah). Responses indicate a mean estimate
of 34 percent of total recycling tonnage that is collected through curbside recycling programs. See
page A-46 for additional detail.
Question 19: Plegse provide your best estimgte of the percentgge of totgl recycling tonngge thgt is
collected through your stgte's or territory's deposit progrgm:
Of the 12 states and territories that indicated they have a deposit program (Question 3), seven
provided a response to this question. The minimum estimate was five percent (Oregon) and the
maximum estimate was 85 percent (California). Responses indicate a mean estimate of 41
percent of total recycling tonnage that is collected through deposit programs. See page A-47 for
additional detail.
Question 20: Plegse provide your best estimgte of the overgll recycling rnte in yourstgte or
territory:
This question had a 75 percent (44) response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey. The minimum estimate was one percent (Virgin Islands), and the
maximum estimate was 80 percent (Palau). Responses indicate a mean estimated recycling rate
9
-------
of 29 percent. See page A-48 for additional detail.
Question 21: To the best of your knowledge, which of the following materials are accepted by the
majority of recycling programs in your state or territory?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that completed
the survey. The most commonly accepted materials are paper products, HDPE plastics (Type 2),
PET plastics (Type 1), and aluminum, with 49,52, 55, and 58 respondents selectingthese
materials, respectively. The least commonly accepted material is mattresses (four respondents).
See page A-49 for additional detail.
Question 22: To the best of your knowledge, which of the following types of single-use pigsties gre
gccepted by the mgjority of recycling progrgms in your stgte or territory?
This question had a 100 percent response rate among the 59 states and territories that
completed the survey. The most commonly accepted single-use plastics are plastic beverage
bottles (56 respondents). Stirrers, food wrappers, plastic utensils, straws, and sandwich/freezer
bags were all selected by four or fewer respondents. See page A-50 for additional detail.
Recommendations
Overall, the results of the Recycling Needs Survey and Assessment highlight the need to enhance
recycling data collection infrastructure nationally. Encouraging standardization of metrics and
promoting a regular data collection and reporting schedule for the states, territories, and EPA
will need to facilitate tracking of progress with respect to access and recovery rates. Specific
examples of these data gaps include the fact that many states and territories do not have the
capacity to collect recycling details annually, do not have the ability to properly collect inbound
contamination rates, have inconsistent collection and reporting protocols, and do not have
granular data on single use plastics and types of materials in the recycling stream.
To help address these gaps, the Agency is undertaking two activities that will support a transition
to a circular economy: utilizing the Solid Waste Infrastructure for Recycling (SWIFR) grant funds
for data collection activities and continuing to collect data through the development of an
Information Collection Request (ICR)
Each of the 56 eligible states and territories have received a SWIFR grant to help develop their
programs. The Agency determined that one of the eligible activities as part of the SWIFR grants
for states and territories is to develop, strengthen, and/or implement comprehensive data
collection efforts that demonstrate progress towards the EPA's National Recycling Goal and Food
Loss and Waste Reduction Goal. Data collection and measurement efforts should be designed to
improve the state's ability to track progress towards national and state recycling and/or circular
economy goals. Data collection efforts could include state-wide or other targeted waste
characterization studies.
In addition, the EPA is in the process of obtaining an ICR to continue collecting data from states
and territories. As part of this process, and in coordination with our grants for states and
10
-------
territories, the Agency anticipates that it will conduct consultations with states and territories to
solicit input on barriers to consistent and timely data collection. With this activity the Agency will
be able to show progress on a national level in the transition to a circular economy.
Performing the Recycling Needs Survey and Assessment provided incredibly useful information
about the state of recycling nationwide. The Agency continues to work in partnership with states
and territories to understand existing challenges, evaluate roadblocks, and identify and facilitate
the sharing of best practices. The Agency will continue to make progress on these activities as we
further our goal on building a circular economy for all.
11
-------
APPENDIX A: SURVEY RESULTS
The following surveys reflect direct answers from states; as such, EPA has not made any
grammatical or editorial changes so as not to affect the integrity of the original responses.
However, we have updated some of the website links where appropriate.
-------
Q.1. Does your state collect data on the
number of community curbside recycling
programs?
~ Yes ~ No
Response rate: 100%
Yes: 52%
No: 48%
Note: Surveys were not submitted from representatives for Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands, Federated States of Micronesia - Kosrae,
Federated States of Micronesia - Pohnpei. These territories are not included in
the results described in this report.
American Samoa No
District of Columbia Yes
Federated States of Micronesia - Chuuk No
Federated States of Micronesia - Yap No
Guam Yes
Marshall Islands No
Puerto Rico Yes
Republic of Palau No
Virgin Islands (US) No
-------
Florida
Yap, Federated States of
Micronesia
Maine
Arizona
Hawaii
Nevada
South Dakota
Washington
Georgia
Minnesota
Oregon
Maryland
Delaware
We do collect information on Single Family, Multi-Family and
Commercial participation.
The Yap State Recycling Program does collect recyclables
through a curbside recycling program. There is one Materials
Recovery Facility in the State, located on the main island,
where residents directly bring and turn in their recyclables.
Biennial Municipal Recycling report asks how recyclables are
collected; poor compliance rate with reporting means
incomplete data.
Our recycling data is collected through a voluntary survey sent
to municipalities, counties and Tribes. Data is not
representative of all recycling taking place in Arizona.
Currently there is only one curbside recycling program in the
State (City & County of Honolulu)
Although we don't collect data, we have a pretty good idea as
there are not that many municipalities that have curbside
recycling.
While our state does not collect this data, we do try to keep
track of communities that have some type of recycling
opportunities for their residents
We have been tracking this data for years through various
methods. We currently have an Excel document we are
updating by emailing local governments, tracking collection
system types, materials collected, frequency, bin color, organics,
haulers, MRFs, etc.
We rely on voluntary reporting submitted through the Georgia
Municipal Measurement Program. This is limited to the
enrolled participating MMP members. GA does not require
recycling data to be submitted to the state.
This is collected on a 5-year period by County and is
self-reported by the local units of government. Our most recent
survey was 2019.
We compile information on what cities and some
unincorporated areas are doing,
some counties may report voluntarily.
In 2010 Delaware enacted the Universal Recycling Law which
requires that any customer that is provided (municipally or
contracted) curbside trash service is provided a cart for
recycling and a minimum of every other week recycling pickup.
At this point approximately 80% of the State (approx. 220,000
households) participates in curbside service.
-------
South Carolina
Indiana
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Colorado
California
West Virginia
Arkansas
Connecticut
Montana
Chuuk, Federated States of
Micronesia
Wyoming
Mississippi
Missouri
District of Columbia
We have 68 programs across the state.
Survey results in 2020 showed 197 curbside recycling programs
and 313 drop-off recycling locations for the residential sector.
This was conducted as part of the Indiana Recycling
Infrastructure and Economic Impact Study (
Rhode Island Resource Recovery (RIRRC), RI's quasi-public
agency collects this information
We do not require annual "recertification" of program numbers
if their plan has not changed and may be assumed to be
carried forward in most cases until changed.
We try to survey the cities and counties every few years.
CA collects data on the number of curbside recycling programs
per jurisdiction, and can differentiate between single stream,
dual, mixed waste, and source separated.
information is gathered every 2 years for publication in the
West Virginia Solid Waste Management Plan.
This data is collected from the State's nineteen (19) Regional
Solid Waste Management Districts (RSWMDs)
CT DEEP has data on this, but not sure of most recent year
we have data. Residents in every CT community have access to
curbside recycling programs. In some communities, that service
is provided by the municipality. In others, residents can choose
to subscribe with a private hauler for curbside service. We
gather this data from our Part 6 survey that goes out to
municipalities annually. Not all towns respond every year.
We try to keep track of who is doing curbside. We do not
require reporting.
We collect general waste data
The State of WY does not require recycling data of any kind to
be submitted as part of a landfill or recycling center permit.
Our collection of data at present is voluntary and is conducted
through Re-Trac Connect's MMP survey program. Because the
current program response is voluntary we do not receive
complete data or information.
We use assessment inventory reporting through ReTrac
Residential Only with 3 or less units.
-------
Michigan periodically however not comprehensively
Nebraska NDEE does not collect this data.
-------
Q.2. Does your state collect data
on the number of community
dropoff recycling programs?
~ Yes ~ No
Response rate: 100%
Yes: 63%
No: 37%
American Samoa
Yes
District of Columbia
Yes
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Chuuk
No
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
Yes
Guam
Yes
Marshall Islands
Yes
Puerto Rico
Yes
Republic of Patau
Yes
Virgin Islands (US)
Yes
-------
Marshall Islands
Yap, Federated States of
Micronesia
Maine
Hawaii
Nevada
South Dakota
Washington
Georgia
Minnesota
Oregon
Maryland
Delaware
South Carolina
PET bottles, Glass bottles and aluminum cans up to 32oz
Yes, please see explanation to previous question as well. Data
collection for Yap State is compiled by Yap State EPA for the
Recycling Program, which operates one MRF for drop off or
turning in of recyclables.
Biennial Municipal Recycling report asks how recyclables are
collected; poor compliance rate with reporting means
incomplete data.
The State administers the Deposit Beverage Container,
Electronic Waste, and Glass Advance Disposal Fee Programs
and collects data on these three recycling programs that
implement drop-offs.
Although we don't collect data, we have a pretty good idea as
there are not that many municipalities that have recycling
drop-off.
Drop-off recycling programs are entered in our recycling
database which is connected to our GIS recycling facility map.
This map shows locations of recycling facilities and/or
businesses that accepts materials for recycling
Drop boxes and MRFs collecting from the public are required
to submit annual reports to our agency for recyclables and
disposed materials collected.
As with the first question, we rely on voluntary data submitted
through the Georgia Municipal Measurement program for
drop-off data; this is limited to enrolled members.
This is collected on a 5-year period by County and is
self-reported by the local units of government. Our most recent
survey was 2019.
We know where a lot of drop-offs are, and require some by
state law,
counties may report voluntarily
The Delaware Solid Waste Authority operates thirteen (13)
drop-off centers throughout Delaware that receive residential
recycling. Via their scale system and punch cards they can
determine a number of users. DNREC would need to request
this information, but it is available.
All counties are required to have at least one drop-off site.
-------
Indiana
Rhode Island
Tennessee
California
American Samoa
Republic of Palau
Arkansas
Virgin Islands (US)
Connecticut
Montana
Mississippi
Missouri
New Mexico
District of Columbia
Michigan
Nebraska
Survey results in 2020 showed 197 curbside recycling programs
and 313 drop-off recycling locations for the residential sector.
This was conducted as part of the Indiana Recycling
Infrastructure and Economic Impact Study
Rhode Island Resource Recovery, RI's quasi-public agency
collects this information
We gather local drop-off convenience center counts and
appropriate qualitative information for the sites.
CA collects data on the number of drop-off recycling programs
via tracking certification. This can be differentiated between
buyback recycling centers, residential curbside programs, and
drop-off, collection, and community service programs (CP/SP).
We collect the data but our territory does not have a drop-off
recycling program as of now.
We drop off recyclables at redemption centers
This data is collected from the State's 19 RSWMDs.
VIWMA created a waste diversion guide that lists these
Programs
CT DEEP has data on this. Not all transfer stations collect
recyclables but many do.
We only track recyclers who are licensed and report tonnage of
recycling
This is the same response. We promote reporting through on
all curbside and drop off programs through Re-Trac connect's
MMP program,
but it has varying accuracy
No, but we do track collection centers in the state, which
typically include recycling drop-off
DPW run only.
We are in the process of gathering this data. It will be
available in Fall of 2022
NDEE does not collect this data.
-------
Q.3. If your state has deposit programs, do
you collect data on the total amount of
residential packaging materials collected
through those programs?
Yes No (no deposit programs) No (we do not collect those data)
~ ~
Response rate: 100%
Yes, we have deposit programs and we collect those data: 13%
Yes, we have deposit programs but we do not collect those data: 7%
No, we do not have deposit programs: 80%
American Samoa No, we do not have deposit programs
District of Columbia No, we do not have deposit programs
Federated States of Micronesia - Chuuk No, we do not have deposit programs
Federated States of Micronesia - Yap Yes, we have deposit programs and we collect those data
Guam No, we do not have deposit programs
Marshall Islands Yes, we have deposit programs and we collect those data
Puerto Rico No, we do not have deposit programs
Republic of Palau No, we do not have deposit programs
Virgin Islands (US) No, we do not have deposit programs
-------
State/Territory Comment
Yap, Federated States of
Micronesia
Iowa
Delaware
New York
California
Massachusetts
Connecticut
Chuuk, Federated States of
Micronesia
Michigan
Yes, the Yap State Recycling Program is a Container Deposit
Legislation (CDL) type model of recycling program with the
Yap State EPA compiling information of recyclable
materials/categories turned into the Program. Yap State EPA
also compiles information regarding importation of these
recyclable categories into Yap State through the State Division
of Tax and Revenue, a division of the State Office of
Administrative Services.
Deposit program for certain beverage containers only.
Universal Recycling in Delaware supplanted our deposit
program which sunset in 2014.
NYS has a Returnable Container Act.
CA uses the deposit system for California Refund Value (CRV)
beverage containers to track the proportion of beverage
containers returned for recycling that are handled through
different programs, including buyback recycling centers.
The MA Department of Revenue collects data pursuant to the
MA bottle deposit law. MassDEP regularly receives this data
from DOR.
CT has a deposit program for deposit containers, but does not
collect data on the materials redeemed (e.g., glass, plastic,
aluminum). The only data that CT DEEP gets is the total #
of containers sold and redeemed on a quarterly basis.
Container deposit (S0.05) goes directly to general account
which tax and revenue collects such data,
we estimate the amount of glass, metal and plastic collected
through the beverage container deposit law.
-------
Q.4. Does your state collect data on the total amount
of residential materials collected through curbside
programs annually?
~ Yes ~ No
Response rate: 100%
Yes: 46%
No: 54%
American Samoa
Yes
District of Columbia
Yes
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Chuuk
Yes
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
No
Guam
Yes
Marshall Islands
Yes
Puerto Rico
No
Republic of Palau
No
Virgin Islands (US)
No
-------
Florida
Maine
Nevada
Washington
Georgia
Minnesota
Vermont
Alabama
Delaware
South Carolina
Indiana
We do collect data on the total amount of municipal solid
wasted collected (or generated) for the entire state.
We get the summary of the entire tonnage for any given facility,
however this data is not broken down by curbside vs. drop off.
Other caveats apply as well.
The data we collect includes residential and commercial.
Our sector data is available through 2018 on our website.
Landfill data is required to be submitted to the state.
Recycling is not required, and we utilize the MMP for
voluntary submission of this data, which is limited to the
enrolled members.
Per Minn. S. 115A.93, "A collector of mixed municipal solid
waste or recyclable materials shall separately report to the
agency on an annual basis information including, but not
limited to, the quantity of mixed municipal solid waste and the
quantity of recyclable materials collected: (1) from commercial
customers; (2) from residential customers; (3) by county of
origin; and (4) by destination of the material."
Our data is collected through our solid waste facility reporting.
Therefore we do incidentally collect the curbside data, but we
are unable to separate it from other collected waste (direct
drop-off, industrial/commercial etc.)
Alabama tracks recycled materials reported by all registered
recycling facilities, inclusive of residential collection programs.
Currently, this data is no easily extrapolated.
We require all solid waste transporters to report residential and
commercial collection by material and the disposal facility
utilized to manage the collected wastes annually.
Predominately single stream
Indiana has seven MRFs that supply nearly all the in-state
sorting of single stream recyclables. Total shipments of
recyclables sorted by these MRFs were 207,384 tons in 2020,
down from 218,796 tons in 2019. For more information, see the
IDEM 2020 Recycling Index Report (IDEM: Recycle Indiana:
Recycling Activity Reporting)
Ohio
Rhode Island
the data collected is not comprehensive of all programs
Rhode Island Resource Recovery, RI's quasi-public agency
collects this information
-------
Tennessee
Colorado
New York
California
Massachusetts
Wisconsin
Kentucky
Arkansas
Connecticut
Chuuk, Federated States of
Micronesia
Wyoming
Mississippi
Missouri
New Jersey
District of Columbia
Nebraska
Yes, we collect local government (region/county/municipality),
households, and materials serviced. We also ask about
franchise/open market/managed competition contracting,
types of collection receptacle and frequency.
Residential is not separated from commercial in our reporting
Our data is provided by our recyclables handling and recovery
facilities and is a total of all residential, commercial and
institutional materials collected.
CA does track the source sector of solid waste as a whole
through the Recycling and Disposal Reporting System, but not
source sector of materials for recycling specifically.
MassDEP collects curbside data from municipalities through
the Sustainable Materials Recovery Program (SMRP). In order
to be eligible for SMRP grants, communities must submit this
data.
Total residential recycling includes curbside only, drop-off only
and those with both. Total recycling tonnage includes
residential and some commercial processed at MRFs which also
receive residential material.
This data is not always clearly separated from commercial
totals.
This data is collected from the State's 19 RSWMDs.
CT DEEP collects data on the total amount of recyclable
materials collected in the state, but granularity is lacking to
accurately determine the amount of materials collected on the
residential level or on a curbside basis.
Through a waste generation survey
The State of WY does not require recycling data of any kind to
be submitted as part of a landfill or recycling center permit.
Only voluntary and so it is incomplete.
We collect data for solid disposal, but we do not require
reporting of recycling, unless it collected with grant funding..
Our collection data does not specify curbside vs. drop-off
Residential collected by DPW only with 3 or less units.
NDEE does not collect this data.
-------
Q.5. Does your state collect data on the types
of materials accepted by each recycling
program?
~ Yes ~ No
Response rate: 100%
Yes: 64%
No: 36%
American Samoa
Yes
District of Columbia
Yes
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Chuuk
Yes
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
Yes
Guam
Yes
Marshall Islands
Yes
Puerto Rico
Yes
Republic of Palau
Yes
Virgin Islands (US)
No
-------
Yap, Federated States of
Micronesia
Maine
South Dakota
Washington
Georgia
Minnesota
Alabama
Delaware
Indiana
Ohio
Rhode Island
Yes, for Yap State
Granularity of this data is variable.
South Dakota has performed voluntary surveys in the past to
determine the amount materials that were recycled during a
particular year. Surveys are not done on an annual basis.
If you mean which local government programs are collecting
what materials, then yes. It is in the dataset of curbside
programs, also this data is collected for each drop box and
MRF.
We have some data collected through voluntary submission in
the MMP and data is limited to enrolled members.
We receive annual reports by County recycling program,
individual city or township programs would be rolled up in the
larger county reporting which is submitted annually on April
1st. The types of materials accepted vary greatly by hauler and
program.
This number is directly reported by all registered recycling
facilities on a semiannual basis.
Under Delaware's Universal Recycling Law, we have a single
statewide recycling program which is single stream. The only
deviation is where commercial sector entities might do source
separated material collection, however, if they produce other
single stream materials, they should have single stream in
addition to any other individual commodity programs.
Indiana has a 50% recycling goal for municipal waste and
requires mandatory reporting of solid waste and recycling data
to track progress. Shipments of recyclables by material type
from the MRFshed are reported through the Re-TRAC, IDEM
Solid Waste and Recycling Data Reporting Program. For more
information, see the IDEM 2020 Recycling Index Report
IDEM: Recycle Indiana: Recycling Activity Reporting
for most programs
we collect data from RIRRC, which is the main recycling
facility in RI that is qusai-puclic agency. Most of RIs
recyclables go here, however if there are recycling facilities that
do not bring their waste here, we dont collect that information
since they are not regulated facilities
-------
Tennessee
California
Massachusetts
Arkansas
Connecticut
Montana
Mississippi
Missouri
District of Columbia
Nebraska
Yes, we collect data on recycling, diversion, and disposal by
region/county/or municipality program. Materials collected
service type. We also ask about franchise/open
market/managed competition contracting, types of collection
receptacle and frequency.
CA tracks the material types accepted by each recycling
program using entity reporting in the Local Government
Information Center (LoGIC) system. Reporting entity users
represent CA local jurisdictions.
This information is also collected through SMRP reporting.
This data is collected from both the State's RSWMDs and the
State's Permitted Transfer Stations.
CT encourages all municipalities in the state to follow a
universal list of acceptable materials for residential programs.
This list can be found at www.recyclect.com.
We have a survey and it is broken out by types of commodities
Again because our current reporting efforts are voluntary we
do not collect them from each program in the state.
We do track it if Solid Waste district grant funds are used.
DPW only and limited data.
NDEE does not collect this data.
-------
Q.6. Does your state collect data on
the number of citizens with access
to recycling services on par with
access to waste disposal?
~ Yes | | No
Response rate: 100%
Yes: 36%
No: 64%
American Samoa
No
District of Columbia
Yes
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Chuuk
Yes
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
No
Guam
No
Marshall Islands
Yes
Puerto Rico
No
Republic of Palau
No
Virgin Islands (US)
No
-------
Florida
Maine
Washington
Minnesota
Oregon
Vermont
Delaware
South Carolina
Ohio
Tennessee
North Carolina
California
Kentucky
Connecticut
Chuuk, Federated States of
Micronesia
Pennsylvania
We collect data on the number of single family homes,
multi-family homes and commercial establishments have access
to recycling and how many participate.
Theoretically, we could calculate this if we had full reporting
compliance.
The last time we updated this dataset was 2016
This is collected on a 5-year period by County and is
self-reported by the local units of government. Our most recent
survey was 2019.
approximate
All waste haulers, drop-off centers and transfer stations that
offer trash collection services are required to offer recycling, the
only exception to this is for haulers in a small portion of rural
Vermont.
Under the Universal Recycling Law, whether delivered via
curbside service or using a drop-off service, 100% of Delaware
residents have access to both waste and recycling services.
We report on population
there is not any tracking of # with access to waste services
We ask for households serviced by program (county or
municipality). Some calculation or interpretation may occur as
access data needs are derived on an as needed basis.
We collect data on the # of households in the jurisdiction and
the # of HH served by recycling programs.
CA collects information on recycling and disposal services by
jurisdiction through the Electronic Annual Report (EAR) and
the Local Government Information Center (LoGIC). While we
do not track population data directly, we can associate these
programs with census or other population data by jurisdiction.
We count number of households, not number of citizens.
We do not directly collect this data, but by law, CT residents
are supposed to have parallel collection of trash & recyclables
(e.g., if a municipality provides curbside collection of trash for
its residents, it should also provide curbside collection of
recyclables).
Number of households involved in collection services
Recycling services yes. Those with waste service but not
recycling services do not have to report.
-------
Mississippi We develop data but we do not "collect" the data. Meaning we
know who offers recycling in the state and we measure the
access that the citizens have in that program area and record
this access ourselves. We do not collect this data from other
sources.
District of Columbia For DPW Residential Only with 3 or less units.
Michigan we are using a benchmark recycling standard to define access
Nebraska NDEE does not collect this data.
-------
Q.7. Does your state collect data
on the inbound contamination
rates of community recycling
programs?
~ Yes ~ No
Response rate: 100%
Yes: 15%
No: 85%
American Samoa
No
District of Columbia
No
Federated States of Micronesia -
Chuuk
No
Federated States of Micronesia
- Yap
No
Guam
No
Marshall Islands
No
Puerto Rico
No
Republic of Palau
No
Virgin Islands (US)
No
-------
Maine
Nevada
Washington
Georgia
Minnesota
Delaware
Ohio
Rhode Island
Tennessee
North Carolina
Texas
New York
California
Connecticut
Some individual facilities do track contamination as they are
attempting to create marketable product.
I can get the data from the haulers, but we don't collect the
data ourselves.
We have collected this data from some jurisdictions that have
done sampling studies, and we use it for estimating statewide
contamination rates. We released an RFP to do a statewide
study that will sample at MRFs around the state and estimate
regional and statewide contamination rates.
There is some information to support this in the MMP based
on voluntary submitted data from enrolled members. We do
not have a state-wide picture.
We collect contamination rates for commingled recyclables that
are reported by permitted solid waste facilities and that is
required as part of the annual report.
DSWA has recently implemented a new inspection procedure
that is focused on inbound contamination. Prior to this process
it was not tracked. MRFs were required to report outthrow
percentages and stay within 15% annually. We anticipate that
starting in July 2022 and beyond, we'll have good inbound
contamination numbers to report.
we have some data on contamination rates, but it is not part of
reporting requirements
Rhode Island Resource Recovery, RI's quasi-public agency
collects this information
We previously captured this information anecdotally when we
solicited certain process and collection grants but did not
capture data for long term use only grant rating.
We ask community recycling programs to report this
information, but many do not know this. To assist in
estimating contamination rates statewide, we survey MRFs in
our state for their average facility's contamination rate.
Texas does not collect annual data on recycling. However, the
2019 Recycling Market Development Plan Study reported a
22.4 percent contamination rate for single stream MRFs. See
www.TXRecyclingStudy.org for more information.
NYS recyclables handling and recovery facilities report the
amount of residue after recyclable material has been processed.
CalRecycle does not have authority to track this.
Our recycling facilities report to DEEP the amount of residuals
collected at their facilities.
-------
Mississippi Only what Re-Trac connect survey provides.
Michigan individually, not comprehensively
Nebraska NDEE does not collect this data.
-------
Q.8. Does your state collect data
on the capture rates of
community recycling programs?
~ Yes ~ No
Response rate: 100%
Yes: 15%
No: 85%
American Samoa
No
District of Columbia
Yes
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Chuuk
No
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
No
Guam
Yes
Marshall Islands
No
Puerto Rico
No
Republic of Palau
No
Virgin Islands (US)
No
-------
State/Territory Comment
Arizona
Georgia
Minnesota
Oregon
Vermont
Maryland
Delaware
Ohio
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Kentucky
Arkansas
Connecticut
Montana
Mississippi
Missouri
District of Columbia
Nebraska
Some municipalities will provide diversion rates which they
have chosen the method to calculate.
There is some information to support this in the MMP based
on voluntary submitted data from enrolled members. We do
not have a state-wide picture.
We calculate capture rates using the data reported to us by our
county partners using our 2013 MSW Statewide Waste
Composition study but we do not actively request capture
rates from our community recycling programs.
We have data for tonnage recycled by county, but we only have
waste disposal composition data for a few of the larger
jurisdictions - Portland Metro area, Lane County, Marion
County.
During our recurring five year waste composition study,
capture rate is assessed.
recycling rates are reported by county, all programs operated
by counties
We do not get data from the haulers that outlines the
participation rate by customers. Even though they are required
to provide 100% of customers with access to recycling, we do
not know what percentage actively participates.
Not included in our required reporting, unclear what capture
rates refer to
Rhode Island Resource Recovery, RI's quasi-public agency
collects this information
We captured this information anecdotally previously when we
solicited grants but did not capture data for long term use.
We collect data on tonnage disposed and tonnage recycled and
calculate recycling rate from that.
We require RSWMDs to complete annual recycling surveys.
We do not collect this data from municipalities due to
inconsistencies in calculating capture rates.
only collect numbers from licensed facilities.
This again is subject to what the MMP program in Re-Trac
Connect collects.
Only if solid waste district grant funds are used.
DPW service areas only during a pilot program.
NDEE does not collect this data.
-------
Q.9. Does your state collect data
on the types of single use plastics
currently in commerce?
~ Yes ~ No
Response rate: 100%
Yes: 12%
No: 88%
American Samoa
No
District of Columbia
No
Federated States of Micronesia -
¦ Chuuk
Yes
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
No
Guam
No
Marshall Islands
No
Puerto Rico
No
Republic of Palau
No
Virgin Islands (US)
No
-------
State/Territory Comment
Marshall Islands
Minnesota
Oregon
Vermont
Delaware
Tennessee
California
Massachusetts
Connecticut
Chuuk, Federated States of
Micronesia
Michigan
Nebraska
single use plastics were banned in 2018
As part of the required annual report for facilities that manage
recyclable materials, they are required to provide the type and
weight of materials handled at the facility; and the distribution
of materials by weight, i.e., what weight of recyclable material
received went to an end market, a broker/processor, or was
managed as mixed municipal solid waste.
We will likely be getting these data later, as we implement
Oregon's Recycling Modernization Act (SB 582 - 2021)
Vermont does have a single-use products law banning plastic
bags at retail check-out, straws, stirrers and expanded
polystyrene
We do not collect this kind of data currently.
Yes, we collect both broadly (at the convenience center location
level with yes/no question) and detailed by program, and
quantitatively within our County Recycling Reports (CRR) by
program reporting. These materials are not split out
specifically.
Pending passage of new legislation, this may be tracked in CA
in the future.
MassDEP hosts a "Recyclopedia" in an attempt to educate
residents on what to do with certain materials - putting it
together required a great deal of research on what is out there.
We do not collect specific data regarding the types of single use
plastics in commerce in the state but do collect information as
available on such plastics.
Recently enacted "clean environment act" banning single-use
plastics and others
limited
NDEE does not collect this data.
-------
Q.10. Does your state collect data
on the rates at which single use
plastics are recycled?
~ Yes ~ No
Response rate: 100%
Yes: 20%
No: 80%
American Samoa
No
District of Columbia
No
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Chuuk
No
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
Yes
Guam
Yes
Marshall Islands
No
Puerto Rico
Yes
Republic of Palau
No
Virgin Islands (US)
No
-------
Florida
Yap, Federated States of
Micronesia
Hawaii
South Dakota
Washington
Georgia
Minnesota
Oregon
Maryland
Delaware
South Carolina
To an extent, we have generated, recycled, combusted and
landfilled data on plastics bottles (l's & 2's) and all other
plastics not included in plastic bottles. We only count
municipal solid waste.
Yes, however for only two specific single use plastics categories
ie PET beverage container and PET cooking oil containers
which are included in the State Recycling Program.
Specifically as it relates to single-use plastic beverage containers
(i.e., bottled water), not for other types of single-use plastics.
Past voluntary survey separated total tonnages of materials
into categories including plastics into PET, HDPE, or mixed
plastics
We calculate the rates at which these types of plastics are
recycled, however the data does not specify single use: PET,
HDPE, LDPE, and All Plastics.
There is some data in the MMP based on the accepted plastic
materials per community, but again this is limited to the
enrolled members that voluntarily submit this data. We do not
have a statewide picture.
We calculate capture rates using the data reported to us by our
county partners using our 2013 MSW Statewide Waste
Composition study but we do not actively request recycling
rates from our permittees or local partners.
We collect annual data on recycling tons for 3 classes of plastic:
rigid plastic containers (almost all single-use), other rigid
plastic (other packaging and product, some of which might be
more durable), and film plastic. We collect disposal data on
many subcategories of the above, but only every 6 years. We
are about to launch a statewide recycling and disposal
composition study that will give us much more data, especially
on the make-up of those 3 groups of plastic,
we do estimate the recycling rates of plastic containers based
upon national averages
As part of our Annual Recycling Reporting we pull out the
following plastics categories: Plastic Film/Wrap, Retail Bags,
Plastic Containers and Polystyrene Packaging. Unfortunately
in all cases except Retail Bags, this is a mix of various resins
and/or objects that are in each of these categories.
We collect data on the types of plastics (#1 -#7)
-------
Indiana
Tonnage amounts of "plastics" as shipped from the MRFshed
are tracked (supply side). The reporting does not cover
manufacturers/end users that use recyclables as a feedstock for
production of basic products such as plastic processors for flake
and pellet resins.
Ohio
but we do get some data from big box stores
North Carolina
We don't have data on all single-use plastics recycling in the
state. We do have data on single-use plastic drink and other
bottles recycled by communities.
California
CA estimates recycling percentage for single-use plastic
beverage bottles in the Beverage Container Recycling Program
(BCRP).
Arkansas
There is no distinction between the types of plastics collected
and/or recycled.
Pennsylvania
We don't collect or utilize any types of recycling rates.
Michigan
limited
Nebraska
NDEE does not collect this data.
-------
Q.11. Does your state collect data
on the rates at which single use
plastics are recycled by plastic
type?
~ Yes ~ No Q N/A
Of the 12 states and territories that indicated they collect relevant data for
single-use plastics recycling rate,
Yes: 50% (N =6)
No: 50% (N =6)
American Samoa
N/A
District of Columbia
N/A
Federated States of Micronesia -
¦ Chuuk
N/A
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
No
Guam
No
Marshall Islands
N/A
Puerto Rico
Yes
Republic of Patau
N/A
Virgin Islands (US)
N/A
-------
State/Territory Comment
Florida
Hawaii
Minnesota
Oregon
California
Michigan
Nebraska
To an extent, we have generated, recycled, combusted and
landfilled data on plastics bottles (l's & 2's) and all other
plastics not included in plastic bottles. We only count
municipal solid waste.
Deposit beverage containers made of plastic #1 (PET) or
plastic #2 (HDPE) are eligible for redemption recycling in the
State, however the plastic container redemption rate is not
broken out by plastic type.
Recycling in Minnesota I Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (state.mn.us)
Except when we occasionally do a recycling composition study,
we do not know the resin make-up of the 3 groups of plastics
mentioned earlier.
CA estimates recycling percentage for single-use plastic
beverage bottles in the Beverage Container Recycling Program
(BCRP). These are tracked individually for plastic resin #1 -#7.
somewhat
NDEE does not collect this data.
-------
Q.12. Does your state collect data
on the rates at which aluminum
cans are recycled?
~ Yes ~ No
Response rate: 100%
Yes: 39%
No: 61%
American Samoa
Yes
District of Columbia
No
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Chuuk
Yes
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
Yes
Guam
No
Marshall Islands
Yes
Puerto Rico
Yes
Republic of Patau
Yes
Virgin Islands (US)
No
-------
Yap, Federated States of Yes, for aluminum beverage containers/cans as one of the
Micronesia categories under the State Recycling Program.
South Dakota Past voluntary survey separated total tonnages of materials
into categories including aluminum cans
The aluminum can recycling rate will include a small amount
of aluminum foil.
See answer for plastic recycling.
We calculate capture rates using the data reported to us by our
county partners using our 2013 MSW Statewide Waste
Composition study but we do not actively request recycling
rates from our permittees or local partners.
Comprehensive data for containers recycled through the bottle
bill, but for containers recycled through curbside recycling, we
do not break out aluminum cans from other types of aluminun.
Our material recovery facilities report on the tonnage and end
management of all materials, including aluminum. Aluminum
cans collected through our bottle bill program has historically
been estimated, though some data is increasingly becoming
available.
we collect recyclables of aluminum, we estimate based upon
national generation averages
Aluminum is tracked in Alabama as a single material inclusive
of aluminum cans. This data is not easily separated.
We do collect Aluminum Cans as a separate annual reporting
data point annually.
Same as previous question.
we receive residential/commercial aluminum tonnages, not
specifically cans
Rhode Island We can determine the tonnage of recycled cans, but can't
calculate how many cans are bought in RI - we would have to
rely on national data
Tennessee We collect some aggregated data on materials reported and
could likely extrapolate some data.
North Carolina Again, we don't have overall statewide recycling rates for
aluminum cans (or any commodity) but we do have recovery
data estimated by material type from community recycling
programs.
New York Limited data is available for material that is captured under
the NYS returnable container act.
Washington
Georgia
Minnesota
Oregon
Vermont
Maryland
Alabama
Delaware
Indiana
Ohio
-------
California
Kentucky
Arkansas
Connecticut
Chuuk, Federated States of
Micronesia
Pennsylvania
Michigan
Nebraska
Puerto Rico
CA tracks recycling rates for aluminum cans in the Biannual
Report of Beverage Container Sales, Returns, Redemption, and
Recycling Rates.
We collect data on tonnage recycled, but not tonnage
generated.
There is no distinction between the types of metals collected.
We do have aluminum come through the state's deposit
program but that program does not track collection by
material; we also receive tonnage data from recycling facilities
for aluminum but do not collect data on recycling rates.
Data is collected to assist us in re-establishing a recycling
program in the State of Chuuk
We don't collect or utilize any types of recycling rates,
estimated
NDEE does not collect this data.
2018- 4127.71 tons
-------
Q.13a. Does your state measure a
recycling rate at the state-level?
~ Yes ~
No
Response rate: 100%
Yes: 51%
No: 49%
American Samoa
No
District of Columbia
No
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Chuuk
No
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
Yes
Guam
Yes
Marshall Islands
No
Puerto Rico
Yes
Republic of Palau
No
Virgin Islands (US)
No
-------
Marshall Islands
Yap, Federated States of
Micronesia
Nevada
South Dakota
Washington
Georgia
Minnesota
Oregon
Vermont
Alabama
Delaware
South Carolina
Indiana
Ohio
Rhode Island
these data are mostly collected in the capital city of Majuro
Yes, for the four specific recyclable material categories covered
under the State Recycling Program, recyclable rates for these
are periodically measured with assistance from Govt of Japan
J-PRISM waste management project.
We calculate the recycling rate by county and state
As stated previously, South Dakota has performed a voluntary
survey in the past to determine this rate although it is not
performed at an annual basis or regular basis. Last survey was
in 2011.
The rate we measure is a "recovery rate", which includes
recycling and other beneficially used materials, for example
materials anaerobically digested and burned for energy. Up
until 2016, we had been measuring an MSW recycling rate,
however our methods changed with the 2017 data to focus
more on waste generation and recovery.
We do not have a statewide picture of recycling.
Minn. S. 115A.551 lays out the materials included and the
goals set for our counties to achieve by 2030.
We call it a "recovery rate" as it includes limited materials
burned for energy recovery
We annually compile a diversion rates, which includes
components of our recycling, organics management and waste
disposal systems. The recurring five year waste composition
work also estimates a recycling recovery rate.
Alabama currently measures a Solid Waste Reduction Rate.
State of Alabama code established a reduction goal or 25%.
We measure recycling at the State level.
Calculated for each county and state-wide
Indiana has a 50% recycling goal for municipal waste and
requires mandatory reporting of solid waste and recycling data
to track progress. Tonnages for MSW generation are reported
through the Re-TRAC, IDEM Solid Waste and Recycling Data
Reporting Program. For more information, see the IDEM 2020
Recycling Index Report (https://www.in.gov/idem/recycle)
However, Ohio measures diversion rates which include yard
waste and reduction activities
Rhode Island Resource Recovery, RI's quasi-public agency
collects this information
-------
Tennessee
Texas
New York
California
Massachusetts
Connecticut
Montana
Pennsylvania
Mississippi
Missouri
New Mexico
District of Columbia
Nebraska
We collect aluminum beverage container recycling data.
Capture rates would have to be derived from characterization
study calculations.
Texas does not collect annual data on recycling. However, the
2019 Recycling Market Development Plan Study reported a
27.5 percent recycling rate. See www.TXRecyclingStudy.org for
more information.
We have moved towards using a disposal rate metric (lbs of
MSW disposed/person/day)
CA tracks the recycling rate annually in the State of Recycling
Report. The latest report year is 2020.
MassDEP did years ago. We are now focused on overall waste
reduction, while some sectors (for instance, food waste) are
asked to report diversion.
Connecticut is trying to move away from using recycling rates
and instead using per capita numbers for waste disposal to
measure diversion. In the past we have measured recycling
rates.
We use a diversion rate
We don't collect or utilize any types of recycling rates.
We are unable to measure the recycling rate because our
current collection of data is incomplete due to the
voluntary nature of collection.
We are working on revising our diversion rate calculator.
Historically, yes, but due to several years of staff shortages, we
are still working to compile state-wide recycling rates from
2018 to present
The District of Columbia can estimate a City wide Waste
Diversion.
NDEE does not collect this data.
-------
Q.13b. What is your state's
recycling rate?
0-9%
20-29%
40
10-19%
30-39%
50
a
N/A
Of the 30 states and territories that indicated they measure a recycling rate,
Minimum: 9%
Maximum: 56%
Mean: 32%
American Samoa N/A
District of Columbia N/A
Federated States of Micronesia - Chuuk N/A
Federated States of Micronesia - Yap No response
Guam 25%
Marshall Islands N/A
Puerto Rico 15%
Republic of Patau N/A
Virgin Islands (US) N/A
-------
Florida
Yap, Federated States of
Micronesia
Maine
Hawaii
Nevada
Louisiana
Washington
Minnesota
Virginia
Oregon
Total MSW tons recycled/Total MSW tons collected. Note
that Florida counts renewable energy as recycling; however, the
recycling rate without renewable energy for 2020 is 42%.
Redemption rates are calculated per recyclable category
(Percentage is average 2018 & 2019). We collect data from a
variety of sources (landfills, waste-to-energy facilities, recycling
establishments, processing facilities,, composting facilities, both
in & out of state) then use that data to calculate estimated
recycling rate. Our statutory diversion goal is based on
recycling and composting 50% of our MSW.
Waste generation amounts (in tons) is reported to the State by
the four counties. Permitted solid waste management facilities
provide data to the State to quantify diversion and disposal
tonnage and an overall diversion rate. Incineration tonnage is
reported to the State by the City and County of Honolulu,
which operates the State's only waste-to-energy plant. If
incineration is included in recycling rate calculations, the
percentage increases to 53%.
We collect diversion data by County where the waste material
originated from those that collect and/or process recyclable
material by material type. The data is then cross checked to
make sure it isn't double counted. Then we calculate the rate
by dividing diverted material by the total waste generated,
we collect surveys from municipalities that have recycling
programs and average the gathered info for the state %
The recovery rate calculation includes materials collected for
recycling and other forms of recovery in the nominator, and the
recoverable portion of solid wastes generated, including
municipal solid waste and other waste types disposed in the
denominator. Excludes materials collected for reuse.
The recycling rate is the percent by weight of total solid waste
generation of material collected for recycling. Please see Minn.
S. 115A.551 for more details.
Link to calculation; Recycling Reports I Virginia DEO
Above number is for 2020 and is recovery rather than recycling.
We do an annual material recovery survey of all recyclers in the
state (including private recyclers) and collect data quarterly
from Oregon landfills on disposal
-------
Vermont
Maryland
Alabama
Delaware
South Carolina
Indiana
Ohio
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Colorado
Guam
The diversion rate is calculated primarily through certified
solid waste facility reporting on end management and tonnage.
Additional components outside of this facility reporting are
estimated (e.g. economic recycling) based on Vermont studies,
updated at varying frequencies. The methodology is described
in our annual Diversion and Disposal report,
we estimate an epa recycling rate of 33%
recycled tons/(recycled tons+landfilled tons) x 100
We use the EPA's MSW Recycling Rate Methodology for
calculating our recycling rate.
amount reported recycled divided by the amount calculated
generated multiplied by 100
The recycling rate is calculated by dividing the tons of
recyclable materials by the tons of MSW generation. It uses
standardized material streams and definitions for MSW and
recycling such as set up by U.S. EPA. Materials not part of the
MSW definition are not counted in the recycling rate
measurement. They include concrete, asphalt, metals from
C&D debris, autobodies, coal ash, foundry sand, and alternate
daily cover (ADC).
residential/commercial - 28.94%. Industrial - 51.78%
estimated diversion rates for municipal,
institutional/commercial/industrial, C&D and total solid waste
generated in RI in 2016. Calculated by (diverted materials /
diverted materials + SW disposal)
We collect significant amounts of data from our solid waste
regions and can calculate across four sectors Public,
institutional, commercial, or/and industrial in any and all
combinations. However, our primary measure is diversion
where recycling is just a subset which can be calculated =
Recycle Data/Total Generated or for part of whole recycling=
Sector data/Total Recycling Fraction
MSW diversion (compost, recycling, beneficial use)/MSW
Diversion +MSW Disposal
total recycling/total recycling +disposal xlOO
-------
California
Kentucky
Arkansas
Montana
Missouri
New Jersey
Michigan
Puerto Rico
To calculate the statewide recycling rate to track progress
towards the 75 percent recycling rate goal as defined by AB 341
(Chesbro), CalRecycle subtracts the amount of material
disposed in landfills and six disposal-related activities from
estimated total generation. According to CalRecycle
calculations and comparison with reported disposal, the
department estimates that 32.5 million tons of material were
recycled (through source reduction, recycling, and composting)
in 2020. California's statewide recycling rate was 42 percent
(see Figure 8 in the 2020 State of Recycling Report).
Counties report total recycling and total waste disposal
annually.
Total tonnage recycled divided by total tonnage disposed
multiplied by 100
we use the epa calculator
We are working on revising our diversion rate calculator. At
this time we have an outdated calculation.
We use recycling data collected annually from every
Municipality and compare it to the SW tonnage we receive
monthly from SW facilities.
epa standard method
we consider census, recovered material, disposal and generation.
All components are sent in quarterly reports (private industry,
comercial and municipalities. This number is directly for 2018.
-------
Q.14. Percentage of all
communities that have access to
curbside recycling programs.
0-19%
20-39%
40-59%
60-79%
B
80-100%
No response
Response rate: 88%
Minimum: 0%
Maximum: 100%
Mean: 44%
American Samoa
0%
District of Columbia
100%
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Chuuk
0%
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
0%
Guam
45%
Marshall Islands
50%
Puerto Rico
18%
Republic of Palau
0%
Virgin Islands (US)
0%
-------
Q.15. Percentage of all
communities that have access to
drop-off recycling.
0-19%
40-59%
80-100%
20-39%
60-79%
No response
Response rate: 87%
Minimum: 0%
Maximum: 100%
Mean: 62%
American Samoa 0%
District of Columbia 100%
Federated States of Micronesia - Chuuk 0%
Federated States of Micronesia - Yap 64%
Guam 100%
Marshall Islands 50%
Puerto Rico 66%
Republic of Palau 75%
Virgin Islands (US) 1%
-------
Q.16. Percentage of all
communities that do not have
access to recycling services.
I | 0-19%| I 20-39% 40-59% 60-80% No response
~ ~ ~
Response rate: 83%
Minimum: 0%
Maximum: 100%
Mean: 28%
American Samoa
100%
District of Columbia
0%
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Chuuk
100%
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
36%
Guam
0%
Marshall Islands
No response
Puerto Rico
15%
Republic of Palau
25%
Virgin Islands (US)
99%
-------
Q.17, Total recycling
tonnage collected in your
state or territory.
10-14.9 million tons ~ Wo response
15-20 million tons
0-4.9 million tons
5-9.9 million tons
Response rate: 80%
Minimum: 5 tons
Maximum: 19.6 million tons
Mean: 2.8 million tons
American Samoa
5 tons
District of Columbia
35,697 tons
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Chuuk
8 tons
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
28 tons
Guam
32,000 tons
Marshall Islands
26 tons
Puerto Rico
515,604 tons
Republic of Palau
60 tons
Virgin Islands (US)
18 tons
-------
Q.18. Percentage of total recycling
tonnage that is collected through
curbside programs.
0-19%
40-59%
~
80-100%
20-39%
60-79%
_
No response
Response rate: 59%
Minimum: 0%
Maximum: 90%
Mean: 34%
American Samoa
0%
District of Columbia
74%
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Chuuk
20%
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
0%
Guam
5%
Marshall Islands
20%
Puerto Rico
No response
Republic of Palau
0%
Virgin Islands (US)
0%
-------
Q.19. Percentage of total recycling
tonnage that is collected through
deposit programs.
~ 0-19% ~ 60-79% ~ 80-100%| I resPonse | | N/A
Of the 12 states and territories that indicated they have a deposit program,
Response Rate: 58% (N =7)
Minimum: 5%
Maximum: 85%
Mean: 41%
American Samoa
N/A
District of Columbia
N/A
Federated States of Micronesia -
¦ Chuuk
N/A
Federated States of Micronesia -
- Yap
28%
Guam
N/A
Marshall Islands
64%
Puerto Rico
N/A
Republic of Patau
N/A
Virgin Islands (US)
N/A
-------
Q.20. Overall recycling rate.
Response rate: 75%
Minimum: 1%
Maximum: 80%
Mean: 29%
0-9%
10-19%
20-29%
30-39%
40-49% No response
50-60% r I
American Samoa 5%
District of Columbia 16%
Federated States of Micronesia - Chuuk 20%
Federated States of Micronesia - Yap No response
Guam 25%
Marshall Islands 30%
Puerto Rico 15%
Republic of Palau 80%
Virgin Islands (US) 1%
-------
Q.21. Which of the following materials are accepted by
the majority of recycling programs in your state or territory?
Mattresses
Fiber from textiles
Lead -
Other plastics (Type 7)-
Food scraps
PVC plastics (Type 3)
PS plastics (Type 6)
Wood
Rubber from tires ¦
LDPE plastics (Type 4)
Household hazardous waste
Brass
Copper
Other
Other metals
Batteries
PP plastics (Type 5)
Electronic waste
Yard trimmings
Steel -
Glass -
Paper products
HDPE plastics (Type 2)
PET plastics (Type 1)
Aluminum
Response rate: 100%
58
# of States/Territories Where Material Is Accepted
-------
Q.22. Which of the following types of single-use plastics are accepted
by the majority of recycling programs in your state or territory?
Sandwich/freezer'
Straws
Plastic utensils'
Food wrappers
Stirrers"
Plastic grocery bags
Other
Polystyrene and
plastic containers
(i.e. clamshells,
take out containers)
Plastic lids
Plastic beverage
cups
Plastic bottle caps
Plastic beverage
bottles
bags
Response Rate: 100%
56
# of States/Territories Where Material Is Accepted
-------
APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE
-------
oEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
This collection of information is approved by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C 3501 et seq, (OMB Control No. 2050-0225). Responses to this collection
of information are voluntary (40 CFR 152.132). An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is nest required to, respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The annual public reporting and record keeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to be 30 minutes per
response. You may send comments regarding the EPA's need for this inf< ** "le accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection , to Jason Walker, Program Analyst, Office of Resource Conservation arid Recovery, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (2822T). 1200 Pennsylvania Ave,, Nw, vvasnington, D.C, 20460. Please include the OMB Control No. in any correspondence. Send only
comments to this address.
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
CO
Select your state or territory: j
Alabama
~
Respondent Contact Information:
Name
First Name
Email
_ast Name
Phone
Save and Resume Later
1
Next
| Progress
First, we ask whether your state or territory collects data on different aspects of
recycling programs and activities. Additional space is provided below each
question for any related comments you might have.
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Progress
-------
Does your state or territory collect data on the number of community curbside
recycling programs in the state or territory?
Yes
Comments:
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Next
Progress
Does your state or territory collect data on the number of community drop-off
recycling programs in the state or territory?
Yes
Comments:
Save and Resume Later
Progress
-------
It your state or territory has deposit programs, do you collect data on the total
amount of residential packaging materials collected through those programs?
Yes, we have deposit programs and we collect those data
Comments:
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Next
Progress
Does your state or territory collect data on the total amount of residential materials
collected through curbside programs annually?
Yes i
Comments:
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Next
Progress
-------
Does your state or territory collect data on the types of materials accepted by each
recycling program in the state or territory?
Yes
Comments:
Save arid Resume Later
Previous
Next
Progress
Does your state or territory collect data on the number of citizens with access to
recycling services on par with access to waste disposal?
Yes
Comments:
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Progress
-------
Does your state or territory collect data on the inbound contamination rates of
community recycling programs?
Yes
Comments:
Save and Resume Later
Does your state or territory collect data on the capture rates of community recycling
programs?
Yes $
Comments:
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Progress
-------
Does your state or territory collect data on the types of single use plastics currently
in commerce in the state or territory?
Yes S
Comments:
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Next
Progress j
Does your state or territory collect data on the rates at which single use plastics are
recycled in the state or territory?
Yes ;
Comments:
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Next
Progress
-------
Does your state or territory collect data on the rates at which single use plastics are
recycled in the state or territory by plastic type?
Yes C
Comments:
Save arid Resume Later
Previous
Next
Progress
Does your state or territory collect data on the rates at which aluminum cans are
recycled in the state or territory?
Yes
Comments:
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Next
Progress
-------
Does your state or territory measure a recycling rate at the state or territory-level?
Yes J
Comments:
Save arid Resume Later
Previous
Progress
State or territory-level recycling rate:
%
Briefly, how is the state or territory-level recycling rate calculated?
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Progress
-------
Next, we ask for your best estimates of several of the items described in the first
section
Save and Resume Later
Progress
Please provide your best estimate of the percentage of all communities in your state
or territory that have access to curbside recycling programs:
%
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Progress
-------
Progress
Please provide your best estimate of the percentage of all communities in your state
or territory that do not have access to recycling services:
%
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Progress
-------
Please provide your best estimate of the total recycling tonnage collected in your
state or territory:
Tons
Save arid Resume Later
Please provide your best estimate of the percentage ot total recycling tonnage that
is collected through curbside recycling programs:
%
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Progress
-------
Please provide your best estimate of the percentage ot total recycling tonnage that
is collected through yourstate's orterritory's deposit program:
%
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Progress
Please provide your best estimate of the overall recycling rate in your state or
territory:
%
Save and Resume Later
Previous
Next
Progress
-------
lo the best of your knowledge, which of the following materials are accepted by the
majority of recycling programs in your state or territory?
PET plastics (Type 1) HDPE plastics (Type 2) PVC plastics (Type 3)
LDPE plastics (Type 4) PP plastics (Type 5) PS plastics (Type 6)
Other plastics (Type 7) Aluminum Brass Copper Lead Steel
Other metals Glass Electronic waste Paper products Batteries
Food scraps Yard trimmings Household hazardous waste Fiber from textiles
Rubber from tires Wood Mattresses
Other:
(Select all that apply)
Save and Resume Later
lo the best of your knowledge, which of the following types of single-use plastics are
accepted by the majority of recycling programs in your state or territory?
Plastic beverage bottles Plastic bottle caps Food wrappers Plastic grocery bags
Plastic lids Plastic beverage cups Straws Stirrers Plastic utensils
Polystyrene and plastic containers (i.e. clamshells, take out containers) Sandwich/freezer bags
None
Other:
(Select all that apply)
Save and Resume Later
------- |