Program History

Initial Steps

Informal recycling programs led by a student environmental group and concerned individuals on campus have existed since the early 1970s. However, a formal, comprehensive, University-wide recycling policy and program was implemented in October 1989 in anticipation of requirements of Act 101, Pennsylvania's Municipal Waste Planning, Recycling, and Waste Reduction Act. Part of this act imposes minimal mandates (collection of high-grade paper, corrugated cardboard, aluminum cans, and leaf waste) on educational institutions.

The University had several options of how to conduct a recycling program: operate the program ourselves, contract with a private company, or join a cooperative program with the Centre County Solid Waste Authority (Authority/CCSWA). After much analysis, Penn State chose to work cooperatively with the CCSWA. We continue that association to this day and although this relationship has been contentious at times, we believe it is still our best alternative.

Our current program is still based primarily on the original implementation plan, though changes were made after an initial two year period. The following presents the original plan, followed by a description of our present program.

Organizational Structure

Penn State chose to contract with the Centre County Solid Waste Authority (CCSWA) because they had the most comprehensive program within a 100 mile radius, especially for paper, the largest percentage of our waste stream. Contracting with the local recycling authority also was appealing because of a sizable commitment of state funds to develop a Municipal Recycling Facility (MRF), and there was a possibility of receiving "pass-though" state funds. Further, the University wanted to cooperate with this local government effort.

Though PA Act 101 mandated a September 1990 start date for our recycling program, Penn State began a pilot program in the summer of 1989 and introduced its recycling program that fall. This advanced implementation allowed the University to piggyback on the Authority's educational programs, resolve the kinks, and accelerate the return on our investment. The pilot study tested some assumptions and time studies. The results of the pilot were encouraging both in the durability of the inside collection equipment and the time study. As a result of the latter, we did not feel that the additional work required to recycle would greatly impact on the ability of the janitorial employees to complete their assigned work in the allotted time. This proved true, although at times it has been a struggle.

Because we were entering into uncharted waters, the length of the agreement was less than one year. This allowed Penn State and the Authority to evaluate progress and future recycling options. The term of the first agreement has expired, and we had been operating under a letter of agreement which extended the contract to one month at a time until a new agreement could be reached. Since 1991, we have not had a contract with the CCSWA. Either party is free to request changes to the understanding we have reached or end the relationship at any time.

Program Costs and Revenues

We agreed to allow the Authority to keep all revenue associated with the processing and selling recyclables generated on campus. In return, the Authority agreed to provide all recycling services at no additional charge to the University, and to not consider sending our recyclables to the landfill as a disposal option for the term of the agreement. They also assumed all risks related to marketing the material.

Recycling services at the Authority were funded through a surcharge on the refuse tipping fee. Approximately $14 of the $68.50-per-ton refuse tipping fee was used by the Authority to fund recycling services. Later the refuse tipping fee rose to $86 per ton. In essence, for every ton of recyclables the Authority processed for the University at no cost, the University saved the $86 in refuse tipping fee. The avoided costs were the basis for the financial backing the University administration provided.

Approximately $300,000 was spent on equipment to bring the program on-line (one-third of this cost was for the front-loading paper recycling vehicle). For the first two program years, we achieved a 25-percent diversion rate of avoided refuse tipping fees and anticipated a payback in three to five years. In 1991, our agreement with CCSWA changed which led to programmatic alterations, as described in the Current Program section.

Interior Building Collection Methods and Locations

The Authority offered Penn State the ability to "commingle" our recyclables, meaning that we could collect many sorts of recyclable materials in only two containers: a plastic 32- or 20-gallon Husky barrel for paper collection and a cardboard Bag-n-Boxes one for container collection (plastic, aluminum and glass bottles). This container set was placed in common areas on each floor in approximately 350 PSU buildings and apartments and each location was tailored for each floor. Usually, we placed these receptacles in or near rest rooms and fountains, elevators or stairways and close to vending machines. In most cases, these two containers were located with a trash can to form a recycling station. This is an important consideration to alleviate contamination of the recycling receptacles. We also concentrated single use receptacles in high volume areas: paper collection barrels around copier machines, printers, copy centers and computer labs and container collection boxes in lunchrooms, break rooms and cafeterias. All recycling collection receptacles (inside and outside) were imprinted with a color-coded Penn State recycling logo.

For offices and labs, all faculty and staff were given a paper tray in which to collect all their discarded paper products. When the occupant's tray became full, he or she emptied it into nearby, centrally located receptacles. Occupants took their glass, aluminum, metal, and plastics to the central recycling repository in the building common areas. The paper tray was the only recycling collection device in each office.

In addition to the containers described above, Penn State placed paper and container collection receptacles in all classroom building's common areas. Individual classrooms only had a trash can. It was thought that students would dispose of their recyclables on their way in or out of the classroom. We lost some recyclables in the classroom trash cans and found that the central recycling receptacles in the classroom buildings were the most heavily contaminated. This was due to the transient nature of traffic in classroom buildings and that there are no building occupants in classroom facilities to claim ownership of the recycling program. Despite labeling on each recycling container, contamination has and continues to frustrate the program. If the entire recycling bin has inappropriate materials mixed in, the entire bag is discarded as refuse. If the contamination is minimal, the bag is recycled.

Physical Plant janitorial crews were not asked to do anything differently in the individual rooms. They only had the additional work required to take the bagged recyclables from the central receptacles to either the building loading dock or to a nearby dumpsite. No additional janitorial employees were needed to handle this aspect of the program.

The early Recycling Collection Program for the Residence Halls was similar to that for the classrooms. Centrally located recycling receptacles were placed in convenient locations within the residence hall's work rooms, laundry rooms, lounges, and if space permitted, janitorial closets. Students took their recyclables to these collection points. Due to the small size of residence hall rooms, we decided not to place collection devices in individual rooms. This decision caused us to make more of an effort to educate students about recycling in order to increase participation. We encouraged them to use bags from bookstores to collect recyclables in their rooms. Housing and Food Service janitorial employees emptied the recycling receptacles as part of the regular cleaning responsibilities.

For Penn State apartments and family housing areas, we offered two methods of recyclables collection: 1) students could use a bin as part of the county's curbside program, or 2) they could take their recyclables to OPP designated recycling dumpsters located in the apartment areas.

The dining rooms required few additional inside collection devices because most recyclable materials in this area was generated by the Housing and Food Service employees, not by the students. Cardboard and tin represented 45% of the recyclables in the dining halls. Dining hall employees rinsed all containers (except glass), put them back into the cardboard cartons, and placed them in designated dumpsters. If requested by Housing and Foods, paper collection receptacles were put in the dining areas for newspapers. To avoid having glass recyclables crushed in the packer trucks, it was separated from other collectables and collected by OPP crews.

Exterior Building Collection Methods and Locations

Outside of our Penn State buildings, we had two collection methods for recyclables. Dumpster cans, similar to what we used for refuse, were placed where cans were already located. These new Dumpster cans were for paper collection only, our largest recycling stream. Roll-off containers were placed on the outskirts of campus for glass, aluminum, metal and plastics.

Once the janitors collected the recyclables inside the building, they did one of two things: 1) took the bagged containers (glass, aluminum, metal or plastic) to the loading dock or other designated building location, or 2) took the bagged paper directly to the designated paper Dumpster can. A newly created crew, with two crew members, collected container recyclables from the loading dock and transported them to the nearest roll-off container. These roll-offs were collected by the Authority and hauled by truck to the processing facility.

Since paper accounts for the largest percentage of the total waste stream (44 percent paper, 16 % other recyclables and 40% non-recyclables), having separate paper receptacles located close to each building greatly reduced the labor costs of transporting all recyclables to the roll-off containers. OPP dedicated one front-end loader Dumpster truck (A Crane Carrier Corp. integrated unit) to paper collection only. Of the two other trucks we operated, one was used to collect non-recyclable refuse and the other was available for back-up.

Special Events

In the program's early years, OPP focused on collecting recyclables on the campus grounds, and at two special events: football games and the Arts Festival. Both of these events collections were extremely successful in terms of educating visitors and moderately successful for quantity of recyclables collected. As students became more accustomed to recycling, we extended the special events recycling effort to other events such as Dance Marathon and Spring Break activities (see Special Events Form).

Education

For any recycling program to succeed, a strong educational component is necessary. At Penn State, we felt that an effective educational campaign could be undertaken given the resources at our disposal and the well-defined and somewhat captive audience that was to be addressed. Plans for reaching the University community were varied and included letters and presentations to faculty, staff, and students; training sessions for selected building occupants; one-page recycling guides were available; and a list of recycling stations was placed on each building's website. Each trained person was asked to inform their coworkers about the recycling program.

General educational efforts included heavy use of the local papers and radios to announce the implementation schedule and to keep attention focused on recycling. Educational programs were developed for local radio and television shows.

Transition Period: 1991 to 1995

The Authority conducted an in-depth analysis of their operations and financial position in the spring of 1991. As a result of this study, two major elements of our previous arrangement changed. We could no longer commingle our recyclables and all recyclables must be source separated. Also, the CCSWA began charging the University a tipping fee for processing the recyclables. These changes caused the University to rethink our association with the Authority. Despite the increased effort and costs involved with collecting and processing our recyclables, we found no better alternative than to continue our arrangement with the Authority. Therefore, changes were made to comply with the new CCSWA regulations.

We eliminated some of the materials from our program because the costs associated with maintaining the eight separations for all our materials were prohibitive. We decided instead to concentrate our resources on those recyclables that were most abundant on campus, while still complying with the Act 101's mandates. These materials included high-grade white ledger paper, computer printout, corrugated cardboard, and aluminum cans. Clear glass was also collected from the dining commons, since this is where about 75 percent of the clear glass was generated. By targeting these materials, we were meeting our legal obligations, while continuing to collect those recyclables that were most abundantly generated on campus.

We also worked diligently with the Authority to convince them to obtain a market for mixed office paper. In March of 1992, the CCSWA reached agreement with Marcal Paper Company on a market for mixed office paper. Being able to collect mixed office paper, in place of high-grade white ledger paper and computer printout, has had a tremendously positive impact on our program. We could now mix almost all office paper together with only a few exceptions, one of which was newspaper.

Despite the fact that we stopped collecting newspaper, green, brown, and some clear glass, and all plastics, we anticipated that our recycling rate could increase with the addition of mixed office paper. In the fall of 1992, we resumed collecting newspaper in a limited fashion by placing only one barrel in each building for this purpose. This gave people an opportunity to recycle newsprint, but it certainly would not be as convenient as the rest of the recycling program.

Current Costs - Update

Though we narrowed the scope of our recycling program, our costs increased due to changes in our CCSWA agreement. Since commingling was no longer allowed, our janitors had to spend more time collecting materials in various parts of each building. Under the new agreement, CCSWA no longer transported our container recyclables, leaving that responsibility to us. Lastly, the Authority also began charging the University a tipping fee. Currently, (2006) we pay either $5.00 or $10.00 per ton to have the CCSWA process our recyclables, depending on whether the recyclables are delivered in bags ($10)or loose ($5). The tipping fee for refuse has just risen to $66 a ton. For each ton recycled rather than processed as refuse saves the University between $56 and $61 per ton. Despite the increased programmatic costs, the economics of our recycling program continue to benefit the University through cost avoidance. We will continue to look for ways to increase our recycling efforts if the nominal cost of expanding the program can be justified on an economic basis.

Current Program

The recycling collection program has remained basically the same since the late 1990s, though with an expanded list of recyclables and collection for additional special events. The concept of collection in each office or residence hall room and having faculty, staff, and students take receptacles to a central collection point has not changed. Presently, our program recycles the following materials: mixed office paper, newspaper, cardboard, glass and metal containers, #1 and #2 plastic beverage containers, wooden pallets, motor oil from our garage, batteries, fluorescent lamps, and some food wastes. In fiscal year 2005, Penn State recycled 44 percent of its waste stream, or 4,868 tons of materials. Mixed office paper and composted food waste represented the largest components of this material.

OPP's Recycling Program supports the F&B Environmental Initiative to practice environmental stewardship and work toward campus sustainability. See F&B Environmental Strategy

Revised August 2007