REVIEW OF
INTERNATIONAL PAINT
STEWARDSHIP SCHEMES
Report prepared for the National Paint Stewardship Scheme
Implementation Working Group
Report prepared by
Narender
Jambunathan
Table of Contents
Executive Summary......................................................................................................................... 1
Table 1: The eight international paint product stewardship schemes reviewed ............................................................... 1
Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 2
Context ............................................................................................................................................ 2
Methodology................................................................................................................................... 2
Existing International Paint Product Stewardship Schemes ........................................................... 3
1. British Columbia (BC) Paint and HHW Program ....................................................................................................3
Table 2: Summary of BC Paint and HHW Program ............................................................................................................. 3
Amount Collected ..................................................................................................................................................4
Figure 1: A comparison of yearly sales and the percentage of sold paint recovered ......................................................... 5
Amount Diverted ...................................................................................................................................................5
Collection Systems.................................................................................................................................................5
Figure 2: Change in the number of collection systems with time ...................................................................................... 6
Cost .......................................................................................................................................................................6
Table 3: Fees collected by BC Paint and HHW Program [7]. ............................................................................................... 6
Table 4: Breakdown of BC paint expenses. ........................................................................................................................ 7
Methods used to raise public awareness ..............................................................................................................7
KPIs........................................................................................................................................................................7
2. Manitoba (MB) HHW Program ..............................................................................................................................8
Table 5: Summary of MB HHW Program. ........................................................................................................................... 8
Amount Collected ..................................................................................................................................................9
Amount Diverted ...................................................................................................................................................9
Collection Systems.................................................................................................................................................9
Table 6: Fees collected by the MB HHW Program [8]. ....................................................................................................... 9
Table 7: Summary of revenues and expenses. ................................................................................................................... 9
Methods used to raise public awareness ..............................................................................................................9
KPIs......................................................................................................................................................................10
3. New Brunswick (NB) Paint Stewardship Program ...............................................................................................10
Table 8: Summary of NB Paint Stewardship Program. ..................................................................................................... 10
Amount Collected ................................................................................................................................................11
Table 9: Volume of paint sold and recovered between April – December in 2009 and 2010 [9]. .................................... 11
Amount Diverted .................................................................................................................................................11
Table 10: Progress of the NB Paint Stewardship Program from 2009 to 2010 [............................................................... 11
Collection Systems...............................................................................................................................................11
Table 11: Estimate of the yearly amount of paint products sold in NB [10]. .................................................................... 11
Table 12: Number of collection sites and one day events held in 2009 and 2010 [10]. ................................................... 12
Cost .....................................................................................................................................................................12
Table 13: Charges applied to paint sold in NB. ................................................................................................................. 12
Methods used to raise public awareness ............................................................................................................12
KPIs......................................................................................................................................................................12
i
4. Saskatchewan (SK) Paint Stewardship Program..................................................................................................13
Table 14: Summary of SK Paint Stewardship Program. .................................................................................................... 13
Amount Collected ................................................................................................................................................14
Table 15: Comparative Data from the SK program since its inception in 2006 [11] [12]. ................................................ 14
Amount Diverted .................................................................................................................................................14
Table 17: Comparison of product management activities [11]. ....................................................................................... 15
Figure 4: Proportion of paint managed by the four different product management options. ......................................... 15
Cost .....................................................................................................................................................................15
Table 18: Charges applied to paint sold in SK [13]. .......................................................................................................... 15
Table 19: Comparative data of operating costs and revenues for the SK Paint Stewardship Program [11]. .................... 16
Figure 5: Comparison of operating cost to the amount of paint collected. ..................................................................... 16
Collection Systems...............................................................................................................................................16
Methods used to raise public awareness ............................................................................................................16
5. Oregon (OR) Paint Stewardship Program ............................................................................................................17
Table 20: Summary of OR Paint Stewardship Program. ................................................................................................... 17
Amount Collected ................................................................................................................................................18
Table 21: Data obtained between January-December 2008, used in September 2010 to set baseline values for the
PaintCare program. .......................................................................................................................................................... 18
Table 22: Progress made by the OR Paint Stewardship Program [15].............................................................................. 18
Figure 6: Proportion of solvent- and water-based paint comprising the total paint collected. ....................................... 19
Amount Diverted .................................................................................................................................................19
Table 23: Quantity of paint diverted by the various disposal methods used in the program [15]. .................................. 19
Collection Systems...............................................................................................................................................19
Table 24: Growth in number of collection sites over time. .............................................................................................. 19
Table 25: Percentage of population located conveniently (within 24 km) to a collection site [....................................... 20
Cost .....................................................................................................................................................................20
Table 26: Assessment fees for the OR Paint Stewardship Program. ................................................................................ 20
Table 27: Summary of revenue and expenses for the OR Paint Stewardship Program [15]. ........................................... 20
Table 28: Program budget from January 2014 through to December 2017 [14]. ............................................................ 20
Methods used to raise public awareness ............................................................................................................21
KPIs......................................................................................................................................................................21
Geographic reach/accessibility ...........................................................................................................................21
Public support .....................................................................................................................................................21
Retailer support ..................................................................................................................................................22
6. California (CA) Architectural Paint Stewardship Program ...................................................................................22
Table 29: Summary of CA Architectural Paint Stewardship Program. .............................................................................. 22
Amount Collected ................................................................................................................................................23
Amount Diverted .................................................................................................................................................23
Table 30: Fate of collected water-based paint. ................................................................................................................ 23
Table 31: Fate of collected solvent-based paint. .............................................................................................................. 23
Collection Systems...............................................................................................................................................23
Cost .....................................................................................................................................................................24
Table 32: California’s assessment fees. ............................................................................................................................ 24
Table 33: Expenses involved in operating the CA Architectural Paint Stewardship Program between October 2012 and
June 2013. ........................................................................................................................................................................ 24
Methods used to raise public awareness ............................................................................................................24
KPIs......................................................................................................................................................................25
Retailer support ..................................................................................................................................................25
ii
7. Connecticut (CT) Architectural Paint Stewardship Program ................................................................................25
Table 34: Summary of CT Architectural Paint Stewardship Program. .............................................................................. 25
Amount Collected ................................................................................................................................................26
Amount Diverted .................................................................................................................................................26
Collection Systems...............................................................................................................................................27
Cost .....................................................................................................................................................................27
Table 35: Budget for the CT Architectural Paint Stewardship Program [18]. ................................................................... 27
Methods used to raise public awareness ............................................................................................................28
KPIs......................................................................................................................................................................28
Retailer support ..................................................................................................................................................28
8. 3R New Zealand (NZ), Resene Paintwise Program ..............................................................................................29
Table 36: Summary of Resene Paintwise Program [2, 19]. ............................................................................................... 29
As PaintWise is not a legislated product stewardship arrangement, rather a program run
voluntarily by specific companies, those companies involved in the scheme are not obliged to
publically disclose all program information. Therefore gaining access to program data similar to
other existing paint stewardship schemes was not obtainable for this report. .......................... 30
Other existing paint schemes ....................................................................................................... 30
United Kingdom – Community RePaint Schemes ....................................................................................................30
Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 30
References .................................................................................................................................... 30
iii
Acronyms
A&D: Architectural and Decorative
APMF: Australian Paint Manufacturers’ Federation
AUD: Australian Dollar
BC: British Columbia
CA: California
CESQG: Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator
CT: Connecticut
GIS: Geographic Information Systems
GPSC: Global Product Stewardship Council
HDPE: High Density Polyethylene
HHW: Household Hazardous Waste
HMBP: Hazardous Materials Business Plan
KPI: Key Performance Indicator
IWM: Integrated Waste Management
MB: Manitoba
NB: New Brunswick
OR: Oregon
PP: Polypropylene
PSI: Product Stewardship Initiative
SK: Saskatchewan
VOC: Volatile Organic Compound
Glossary of Terms
Recovery Rate is defined as the volume of paint recovered divided by volume of paint sold.
Reuse Rate is the mount of paint reused divided by the amount of paint collected that is
reusable.
iv
Note to Reader
For the purposes of readability and consistency, the terms water-based paint has been used in
this report that refers to any paint where water is used as the solvent. In other area of the
globe, water-based paint may be also known as latex paint. Similarly, the term solvent-based
paint refers to all paint where oil is used as a solvent. In other jurisdictions this type of paint
may also be referred to as alkyd or oil-based paint.
All currencies have been converted into Australian dollar equivalents as of exchange rates on 10
May 2014. Lastly, all volume, weight and distance have been converted into metric terms for
comparability of measurements.
v
Executive Summary
The end-of-life management of potentially hazardous products such as architectural and
decorative paint can pose concerns to human health and the environment if not completed in
an appropriate manner. In Australia, it has been the traditionally the responsibility of local
councils and state governments to fund and manage the handling of problematic waste
streams, including waste paint. With architectural and decorative paint having been identified
by Australia’s Environment Ministers as a priority product that may require product
stewardship, council and state governments may no longer be solely responsible for the
management of waste paint and this may be shared by the entire paint product supply chain.
This report is a desktop literature review of eight international paint product stewardship
schemes where the responsibility of waste paint management has been extended to the
manufacturer and other members of the paint product supply chain. This extended
responsibility of the product has encouraged the paint industry to take ownership of the endof-life management of their product and encourage them to find alternative options to
landfilling paint and ultimately reduce the environmental impacts of its disposal.
A summary of the findings is presented in Table 1 on page 1.
Table 1: The eight international paint product stewardship schemes reviewed
a
British Columbia
Saskatchewan
New Brunswick
Manitoba
California
Connecticut
Oregon
New Zealand
Population
(million)a
4.40
1.03
0.75
1.21
38.3
3.59
3.89
4.43
Population per
collection site
Area (km2)
24,581
14,507
12,931
20,862
62,241
448,750
38,137
76,379
944,734
651,900
72,908
647,797
423,970
14,357
255,026
268,021
Area (km2) per
collection site
5278
9182
1257
11,169
860
1795
2500
4621
Number of
collection depots
179
71
58
58
493
8
102
58
Annual number of
mobile events
22
0
55
23
0
56
63
0
Annual paint sales
(L)
Annual volume
recovered (L)
Annual collected
volume (L) per
capita (2012)
Disposal methods
28,465,954
6,970,000
5,545,684
6,880,614b
207,500,000
22,700,000
N/A
N/A
2,893,284
367,478
361,2122
234,816
3,376,1332
1,300,000c
2,303,800
N/A
0.66L
0.36L
0.48L
0.19L
0.088L
0.36L
0.59L
N/A
Recycling and
energy recovery
Recycling, energy
recover, and landfill
Reuse and reprocessing
Reprocessing,
energy recovery,
and landfill
Recycling and
energy recovery
N/A
Recycling,
reuse, energy
recovery
Reuse,
recycling,
and landfill
Annual recovery
rate
Annual operating
costs (AUD$)
10.2%
5.3%
6.5%
3.4%
1.6%
5.7%
N/A
N/A
$5,078,965 (2012)
$804,580 (2012)
N/A
$389,380 (2012)
$14,070,066b
(2012-2013)
N/A
$4,090,141
(2012)
N/A
Cost (AUD$) per
litre Collected
Fees (AUD)
$1.76 (2012)
$2.19 (2012)
N/A
$1.66 (2012)
$4.17 (20122013)
N/A
$1.78 (2012)
N/A
$0.20 (0.1-0.250 L)
$0.25 (0.251-1 L)
$0.59 (1.01-5 L)
$1.47 (5.01-23 L)
$0.10 (0.1-0.250 L)
$0.24 (0.251-1 L)
$0.59 (1.01-5 L)
$1.47 (5.01-23 L)
$0.20 (0.1-0.250 L)
$0.34 (0.251-1 L)
$0.69 (1.01-5 L)
$1.47 (5.01-23 L)
$0.20 (0.1-0.250 L)
$0.25 (0.251-1 L)
$0.59 (1.01-5 L)
$1.47 (5.01-23 L)
Estimates from 2011 or 2012
Data extrapolated to 1 year
c Anticipated
b
$0.00 (<0.237 L)
$0.37 (0.237-0.946 L)
$0.80 (0.946-3.78 L)
$1.71 (3.78-18.93 L)
$0.14/L (for
Resene
products
only)
Introduction
Annually in Australia, approximately 152.7 million litres of architectural and decorative (A&D),
water and solvent based paints are purchased for consumption from both local and overseas
manufacturers [1]. It is estimated that between 3-15% of all paint that is purchased remains
unused, stockpiled for future waste or become unwanted waste paint [2-4]. Although having
significantly reduced in hazardousness in recent decades, paint products can contain a
spectrum of hazardous substances including organic solvents, heavy metals, and biocides that if
not properly disposed at end-of-life may harm the environment and human health [5].
Collection and processing of waste paint is frequently financed and managed by local
household hazardous waste (HHW) management programs at state or council levels. The Global
Product Stewardship Council (GPSC), in 2013, reported that the yearly cost of responsibly
managing waste paint in the Australian states of Victoria and New South Wales are $800,000
and $1 million respectively [6]. Extrapolating these costs for all of Australia, on population
alone, estimates a cost of approximately $3.2 million. However, frequently there are are no
HHW services available for Australians, leaving many communities no choice but to landfill the
waste product or leave the local natural environment susceptible to illegal dumping.
Aside from presenting a significant cost to Australian local and state governments, potentially
hazardous materials in paint and the underutilisation of a waste resource prompted Australia’s
Environment Ministers to put A&D paint on the 2013-14 Priority Product List on June 2013,
indicating that A&D paint waste is being considered as a product potentially requiring
stewardship under the Product Stewardship Act 2011 (the Act). Product stewardship is an
approach to managing the impacts of different products and materials. It recognises that those
involved in the manufacture, sale, use, and disposal of products all share a responsibility
towards ensuring that the product, throughout its life, is managed in a manner that mitigates
its impact on the environment and on human health and safety.
Context
The Review of International Paint Product Stewardship Schemes was commissioned by
Sustainability Victoria with support from the Australian Government and the Australian Paint
Manufacturers’ Federation (APMF). This report forms part of the work underway in Australia to
develop a national scheme to collect and process waste paint in an environmentally sound
manner. This review will serve as a guide to assist the development of a national paint
stewardship scheme.
Methodology
A desktop literature review of eight international paint stewardship schemes was completed for
this study. Much of the information contained herein has been sourced from annual reports
and program plans published by organisations operating these product stewardship schemes.
The KPIs of each scheme were standardised for the convenience of the reader. All program
2
costs were converted into the Australian dollar equivalent as of currency exchange rates on the
10th of May 2014d.
Existing International Paint Product Stewardship Schemes
1. British Columbia (BC) Paint and HHW Program
Table 2: Summary of BC Paint and HHW Program
Year operations
commenced
1994 (20 years)
Fees (AUD)
Ranges from $0.20-$1.47 depending on volume of container (2014)
Fee change over time
(AUD)
Between 1994-2008 fees had ranged from $0.10-$0.98. Product Care experienced an
operating loss in 2008, and in 2009, fees were increased to $0.20-$1.23. They were
increased again in 2011 to $0.20-$1.47.
179 collection sites (2012)
22 mobile collection events took place (2012)
112 Paint Depots (2012)
67 Paint Pluse Depots (2012)
These collection depots comprised recycling centres, transfer stations, landfills, bottle
depots, and hardware retailers.
24,600f (2012)
Collection System and
Facilities
Collection sites
Population per
permanent collection
location
Total Paint Collected
Paint per Capita
Collected
Disposition of Paint
Target Accessibility
Public Education
Materials
Other KPIs
2,893,284 L (2012)
0.66 L per capita (2012)
1.8% of all paint collected was reused through the Paint Exchange Program.
100% of water-based paint was recycled.
100% of solvent-based paint was sent to energy recovery.
100% of metal cans and plastic pails were recycled.
Unrecyclable plastics sent for energy recovery.
No paint or paint containers were sent to landfill.
There is at least one paint depot in each regional district of BC. Aside from this, there is
no mention of target accessibility.
47 Yellow Pages advertisements placed along with advertisements in 16 municipal
calendars.
14,900 point-of-sale brochures, 90 posters, and 7,000 paint can stickers replenished in
2012.
 Targeted 176 collection depots by 2012, and achieved 179.
 Targeted 4% annual increase in total collected volume for paint. A 1.9% increase
over 2011 baseline in volume of paint collected was achieved in 2012.
 Increase volume of paint managed through reuse (i.e. returned to public to be
used for its original purpose) to 3% by 2016. In 2012, this was 1.8%.
 Maintain 100% recycling of water-based paint. This was achieved in 2012.
 Maintain 100% recycling of metal and HDPE plastic paint containers. This was
d
USD $1 = AUD $1.07; CAD $1 = AUD $0.98; NZD $1 = AUD $0.92
Depots that accept flammables, pesticides, and gasoline
f
2011 population estimate for BC was 4,400,057
e
3
achieved in 2012.
Maintain 95% of PP plastic paint containers for energy recovery. 100% of PP paint
containers were managed for energy recovery in 2012.
Annual reports accessible on the Product Care website
Annual financial audits performed by Rolfe, Benson LLP accessible on the Product Care
website

Reporting
Audits
Product Care is an industry-sponsored not-for-profit organisation that manages product
stewardship programs for HHW on behalf of its members in Canada. Since 1994, the BC Paint
and HHW Program has been operated and managed by Product Care. Funding for Product
Care’s operations are sourced from membership fees which are collected from its members
who are charged according to the volume they sell. Reports are produced annually, outlining
the work completed through the program, key achievements, summary of revenues and
expenses and the steps that need to be taken to further improve the performance of the
program [7].
Amount Collected
In 2012 Product Care collected 2,893,284 L of paint and estimated that 28,465,954 L of paint
was sold in that year, producing a recovery rateg of 10.2%. Of the packaging collected, a total of
828,000 kg of metal containers from paint, flammable liquids, pesticide, and gasolineh were
sent for metal recycling. This is in addition to approximately 134,000 kg of 5 gallon size plastic
paint pails being collected.
g
Percentage (by volume) of paint sold that is collected
Flammable liquids, pesticides, and gasoline are also materials covered under the same program that manages waste paint.
The report did not specify the amount of metal that came from paint alone.
h
4
Figure 1: A comparison of yearly sales and the percentage of sold paint recovered
Amount Diverted
Members of the public and non-profit organisations are able to collect reusable paint at no
charge through the Paint Exchange program. Of the 179 collection depots in 2012, 96 (over
50%) of them offered paint exchange. A total of 1.8% (by volume) of paint collected by Product
Care was reused through the Paint Exchange program in 2012 i.
All of the water-based paint collected was recycled either through reprocessing into paint and
coatings products, or incorporated as raw material in the manufacture of recycled concrete and
Portland cement. Of all paint collected, 66.4% (by volume) was recycled, resulting in a
combined total of 68.2% of paint being either reused or recycled. As for solvent-based paint,
recycling continues to be a problem due to hazardous waste transportation regulations;
however, given their high solvent content, 100% of the solvent-based paint collected was able
to be used as an alternative energy source through fuel blending and subsequent incineration.
All of the plastic (polypropylene) 1 US gallon size paint cans collected (approx. 91,000 kg) were
sent for energy recovery.
Collection Systems
As of December 31, 2012, 179 permanent collection depots in BC have been contracted by
Product Care to allow consumers to drop off for proper disposal unwanted waste paint. In
i
It is unknown whether businesses are permitted to acquire paint through the Paint Exchange Program and whether charges
apply if they are
5
addition to collecting paint, 67 of the 179 locations also collected other toxic/hazardous
products including flammable liquids, gasoline, and pesticides. These collection depots
comprised recycling centres, transfer stations, landfills, bottle depots, and hardware retailers.
The permanent collection system was assisted with 22 one-day mobile collection events, often
performed in collaboration with municipalities and regional districts across BC.
Figure 2: Change in the number of collection systems with time
Cost
Table 3: Fees collected by BC Paint and HHW Program [7].
BC Paint Fees
100 mL to 250 mL
251 mL to 1 L
1.01 L to 5 L
5.01 L to 23 L
Cost (AUD$)
$0.20
$0.25
$0.59
$1.47
The costs of Product Care are paid to Product Care by its industry members. The amount each
member pays is based on the unit sales in the provinces where Product Care has its programs.
While Product Care does not explicitly mention where the fee is applied, based on the
information available on their website, it is likely to be added when sold to retailers in BC, who
in turn, recover these fees from customers. Retailers are given the choice of either building the
fee into the product’s price or displaying it as a separate charge on the receipt at checkout.
6
In 2012, an independent audit revealed that revenue collected from the sales of paint and
other hazardous products totaled $5,078,965.
Table 4: Breakdown of BC paint expenses.
2012
Collection & Transportation
Processing
Third Party Disposal
Other Expenses
General Administrative Expenses
Total Expenses
Cost (AUD$
$2,084,755
$1,409,015
$1,306,875
$278,318
$310,186
$5,078,965
% of Expenditure
39
26
24
5
6
100
Methods used to raise public awareness
The program website provides information on the type of products accepted by the program,
location and operating hours of depots, instructions on proper storage of paint, and annual
reports. Website activity has been monitored by the number of hits, which was 79,124 in 2012;
however, Product Care did not report on the number of individual hits.
The number of point of sale material distributed has been another metric that Product Care has
used to assess their outreach. In 2012, 14,900 program brochures, 90 program posters, and
7,000 paint can stickers were distributed. Advertising under the “recycling services” section of
47 Yellow Pages publications across BC was also done. This is in addition to operating a hotline
under Recycling Council of British Columbia (RCBC) who provides consumers with information
about the Product Care program. This hotline operates from Monday to Friday between 9 am to
4 pm and is accessible by a toll free phone number. RCBC also operates an online database for
disposal options for all residential products. Product Care’s collection sites were listed in this
database. Aside from RCBC, Product Care also works with regional districts and municipalities to
promote the Product Care program through advertising in municipal garbage calendars, as well
as providing municipalities with point of purchase consumer information.
KPIs





Number of paint depots
Paint Care aimed to have 176 paint depots in place by the end of 2012. They exceeded
this target and highlighted that they wished to continue adding depots where gaps
exited.
Volume of waste paint collected
Paint Care targeted a 4% annual increase in the volume of paint collected relative to the
baseline obtained in 2011. A 1.9% increase in collection was achieved.
Volume of waste paint reused
Paint Care targeted a quantity of 3% for 2012; however, they only achieved 1.8% which
was through their Paint Exchange Program.
100% recycling of water-based paint collected
This was achieved in 2012. Paint Care highlighted the difficulty of recycling solventbased paint, but did not set specific targets for reusing such paints.
100% recycling of metal and high density polyethylene (HDPE) plastic containers
7

This target was achieved.
95% of polypropylene (PP) containers for energy recovery
This target was exceeded by Paint Care in 2012.
2. Manitoba (MB) HHW Program
Table 5: Summary of MB HHW Program.
Year operations
commenced
Fees (AUD)
Fee change over
time (AUD)
Collection System
and Facilities
Collection sites
Population per
permanent
collection location
Total Paint
Collected
Paint per Capita
Collected
Disposition of Paint
Target Accessibility
Public Education
Materials
Other KPIs
Reporting
Audits
2012 (2 years)
Ranges from $0.20-$1.47 depending on volume of container (2014)
None to report
58 collection sites (2012)
23 collection events (2012)
Of the 58 collection sites, 51 were retail sites, 7 were private/municipal sites, which
included one full HHW site.
20,800j
156,544 L between May 2012 – Dec 2012 (234,816 L if extrapolated to Jan 2012)
0.19 L per capita
Water-based paint reprocessed into paint and coating products. Unrecyclable paint
solidified and sent to landfill. Solvent-based paint sent for energy recovery (no mention
on reuse and redistribution).
None stated in the 2012 Annual Report. Network coverage will be reviewed after May
2014.
Advertising program launch reached in excess of 250,000 households. Radio, print,
television, and public service announcements all formed the advertising campaign.
13,700 brochures on paint recycling, and 1000 posters were sent to retailers and
collection sites. MB Program website received 25,000 unique hits in 2012. Toll-free
number also provided.
 3% recovery rate which is the volume collected divided by the volume sold. A 3.4%
recovery rate was achieved in 2012.
 Experience gained after the first few years of the program will allow for more
meaningful KPIs and targets to be set.
 Every 2 years, surveys will be conducted to gauge consumer awareness of the
program and product handling.
Annual reports accessible on the Product Care website
Unknown whether audits have been performed
As in BC, Product Care operates the MB HHW program [8]. The first phase of the program was
launched in May 2012 where only paint and fluorescent lights were collected. The program
later expanded to include several other hazardous materials such as pesticides and flammable
liquids. For free of charge, consumers are able to drop off unwanted paint (and other program
products) at sites and collection events across the province. Program costs are provided
j
2011 population estimate for MB was 1,208,268.
8
through membership fees, sometimes referred to as ‘environmental handling fees’, paid to
Product Care by its members. The fee is based on the volume of sales.
Amount Collected
A total of 156,544 L of paint was collected between May 2012 – December 2012. The amount of
paint sold during this time is estimated to have been 4,587,076 L.
Amount Diverted
Water-based paint is diverted to a recycling facility that reprocesses the waste into paint and
coating products. Any water-based paint deemed unfit for recycling is solidified and sent to
landfill. As in BC, the reprocessing of solvent-based paint is stymied by regulatory prohibitions,
making recycling unviable. As a result of this, solvent-based paint is disposed of through fuel
blending and subsequent energy recovery.
Collection Systems
Existing collection sites are utilised by Product Care. As of December 2012, there were 58
collection sites offering year-round collection operated by Product Care. This included 51 retail
sites, 6 private/municipal sites (which included one full HHW site, a transfer station, and
organisations that specialised in recycling and IWM). To supplement the collection system
Product Care worked with contractor, Miller Environmental, to run 23 collection events in 2012.
Table 6: Fees collected by the MB HHW Program [8].
MB Paint Fees
100 mL to 250 mL
251 mL to 1 L
1.01 L to 5 L
5.01 L to 23 L
Cost (AUD)
$0.20
$0.25
$0.59
$1.47
As in BC, retailers are given the choice of either building the fee into the product’s price or
displaying it as a separate charge on the receipt at checkout.
Table 7: Summary of revenues and expenses.
2012
Revenue Collected from Paint
Revenue Collected from other
hazardous waste products
Program Expenses
Administrative Expenses
Cost (AUD)
$575,487
$294,191
$330,348
$59,032
Methods used to raise public awareness
The following methods were used to raise public awareness:





Advertised launch event
Radio coverage
Print and online coverage
Television
Point of sale promotional materials
9



Program website which received 25,000 unique hits in 2012 and provided descriptions
of products accepted by the program, location of collection sites, environmental
handling fees, and downloadable promotional material
Website linkages and a toll-free number
Government partnerships
KPIs

3% recovery rate
This target was met and exceeded during the first year of the program where a rate of
3.4% was achieved
3. New Brunswick (NB) Paint Stewardship Program
Table 8: Summary of NB Paint Stewardship Program.
Year operations
commenced
Fees (AUD)
Fee change over
time (AUD)
Collection System
and Facilities
Collection sites
Population per
permanent
collection location
Total Paint
Collected
Paint per Capita
Collected
Disposition of Paint
Target Accessibility
Public Education
Materials
Other KPIs
Reporting
Audits
2009 (5 years)
Ranges from $0.20-$1.47 depending on volume of container (2014)
None to report
58 permanent paint depots (2010)
55 collection events (2010)
Details not provided
13,000k
271,588 L between April-December 2010. It is estimated that 4,169,687 L of paint was
sold between this same 9 month period, yielding a recovery rate of 6.5%.
0.48 L per capita
In 2010, 1157 L of paint was given away through the paint exchange program. 260,917
L was reprocessed.
None stated
Point of sale materials, website, toll-free number, local government partnerships,
depot advertising, radio, and Yellow Pages advertisements.
 Annual reusel rate of 70%. This target was exceeded in 2009 and 2010 (for which
data is available).
 Maintain 100% recycling of metal, HDPE and PP paint containers
 Recovery rates will be measured and compared each year
 Benchmarking against other paint stewardship programs run by Product Care
 Consumer awareness level of 47.5% by 2015
 Increase the number of collection depots to 64 by 2015
Only the 2009 Annual Report is accessible on the Product Care website
Unknown whether audits have been performed
In April 2008, the NB Department of Environment issued the ‘Designated Materials Regulation –
Clean Environment Act’, where A&D paint was added as a designated material. This section
k
l
2011 population for NB was 751,171
Measured as the percentage of collected paint that is either reprocessed or reused through paint exchange
10
reviews Product Care’s ‘NB Paint Stewardship Program’ whose goal it is to reduce the impact of
leftover paint through the application of the pollution prevention hierarchy [9, 10]. As with the
paint stewardship programs reviewed so far, the cost of operating the NB Paint Stewardship
Program is recovered through membership fees which are based on the volume of paint sold.
Amount Collected
Table 9: Volume of paint sold and recovered between April – December in 2009 and 2010 [9].
Paint sold (L)
4,168,287
4,169,687
2009
2010
Paint recovered (L)
209,060
271,588
Recovery Rate
5.0%
6.5%
Amount Diverted
Product Care has implemented a ‘paint exchange’ program which gives away higher quality
returned paint (both water- and solvent-based) to the public at participating collection depots.
Water-based paint that cannot be reused will be sent to landfill. While technology exists for
recycling solvent-based paints, due to a limited (and declining) market as well as stringent VOC
regulations, unusable solvent-based paint will blended with other hydrocarbons and utilised as
alternative fuel in facilities such as cement kilns.
As of August 2012, recycling solutions exist for all paint container types, i.e. steel, HDPE, and PP
[9].
The Designated Materials Regulation states that an annual reuse rate of 70% must be achieved
by the program, and it is this performance target that is used by the program.
Table 10: Progress of the NB Paint Stewardship Program from 2009 to 2010 [9].
Paint Exchange (L)
2009
2010
873
1,157
Paint Reprocessed as
Paint (L)
114,831
260,917
Total Paint Volume
Processed (L)
130,251
298,279
Reuse Rate
88.8%
87.9%
Collection Systems
Table 11: Estimate of the yearly amount of paint products sold in NB [10].
Container size range
<0.25 L
0.25 – 1 L
1–5L
5 – 20 L
Totals
Units
68,543
273,747
934,539
65,213
1,342,042
Volume (L)
17,136
258,965
3,532,557
1,232,533
5,041,191
The collection infrastructure utilises the following:
 Participating solid waste commission sites
 Bottle depots
 Other municipal sites
 Participating retailers
11

One-day events
Table 12: Number of collection sites and one day events held in 2009 and 2010 [10].
Paint Depots
One Day Events
2009
56
35
2010
58
55
Cost
Funding is provided through membership fees which are paid to Product Care by its members
based on the volume of paint sold in NB. Revenues are applied to program operation, which
includes education, the collection system, transport, administration, and recycling and disposal
of collected residual products.
Membership fees may be adjusted when expenses exceed revenue, or if the reserve fund
exceeds one year’s operating expenses. NB regulations prohibit visible fees.
Table 13: Charges applied to paint sold in NB.
NB Paint Fees
100 mL to 250 mL
251 mL to 1 L
1.01 L to 5 L
5.01 L to 23 L
Cost (AUD)
$0.20
$0.34
$0.69
$1.47
Methods used to raise public awareness
The communication plan includes the following methods to raise awareness about the
program:









Point of purchase materials
Website containing details on depot locations, products accepted by the program,
membership fees, and information for consumers on buying the right quantity of paint
800 number
Media awareness which will include social media
Local government partnerships
Depot advertising
Dedicated mailings to trade painters
Radio
Yellow Pages
In addition to the above, an awareness survey will be conducted within the first two years to
set the program awareness baseline. Surveys will be repeated every two years to measure the
success of the communications strategy.
A survey completed in September 2011 revealed that 42% of NB residents were aware of the
existence of a program that recycles paint, 43% purchase paint at least once a year, and 77%
had leftover paint in storage at home.
KPIs

Annual reuse rate of 70%
12



This target was met and exceeded during the first two years of operationm
Increase in recovery rate by 0.5% annually [9]
Increase number of collection sites to 64 by 2015
Benchmarking against other programs run by Product Care
In the publication of the ‘NB Paint Program Plan’ in 2009, Product Care expected to achieve an
initial recovery rate of 2%, which would steadily rise and follow a similar trend to the BC
program. After 14 years of operation (in 2007), the BC program achieved a recovery rate of
roughly 6.5% which was the highest recovery rate the program had achieved at the time. The
NB program exceeded expectations by achieving a 6.5% recovery rate in its second year of
operation.
Consumer awareness may be positively correlated to higher recovery rates and increased
consumer participation. Product Care intends to conduct surveys to gauge consumer
awareness. Based on the results obtained from surveys in 2011, the program targets to have an
awareness level of 47.5% by 2015.
4. Saskatchewan (SK) Paint Stewardship Program
Table 14: Summary of SK Paint Stewardship Program.
Year operations
commenced
Fees (AUD)
Fee change over
time (AUD)
Collection System
and Facilities
Collection sites
Population per
permanent
collection location
Total Paint
Collected
Paint per Capita
Collected
Disposition of Paint
Target Accessibility
Public Education
Materials
Other KPIs
Reporting
Audits
2006 (8 years)
Ranges from $0.10-$1.47 depending on volume of container (2014)
n/a
71 (2012)
71 collection depots run by SARCAN Recycling
14,500n
367,478 L (2012)
0.36 L per capita
20% reused via paint exchange program
42.6% recycled
37.2% sent for energy recovery
0.2% landfilled
n/a
Toll-free hotline, point-of-sale communication, tradeshows, website, and the recycling
ambassador project
n/a
Annual reports accessible on the Product Care website
Unknown whether audits have been performed
m
At the time of writing this report, only data for the first two years of the program, i.e. 2009 and 2010 was
available
n 2011 population estimate for SK was 1,033,381
13
This section outlines the performance of Product Care’s ‘SK Paint Stewardship Program’ in 2011
and 2012 [11].
Amount Collected
Table 15: Comparative Data from the SK program since its inception in 2006 [11] [12].
2006o
91,845
70,175
162,560
Product Collected (L)
Water-based paint
Solvent-based paint
Total
2007
110,930
89,818
200,748
2008
154,015
118,371
272,386
2009
158,608
123,200
281,808
2010
204,019
128,707
332,726
2011
211,542
138,118
349,660
2012
220,382
147,096
367,478
Figure 3: Trends in the total paint collection and proportion of collected paint that is waterbased
Amount Diverted
Table 16: Recovery rate achieved in 2011 and 2012 [11].
Recovery Rate
Sales (million L)
Recovery Rate
o
2011
6.80
5.14%
2012
6.97
5.27%
Data extrapolated to 12 months
14
Table 17: Comparison of product management activities [11].
Product management
Re-use (via paint exchange program) (L)
Recycling (into Portland cement or paint)
(L)
Energy recovery of solvent-based paint
(L)
Incinerated/Landfilled/Treated (L)
Container Recycling
Metal (t)
Plastic (t)
2006p
21,812
70,033
2007
33,060
81,507
70,175
85,182
N/A
58.4
1.6
1,000
2008
52,792
110,57
8
108,63
6
200
2009
63,405
114,22
5
102,97
8
1,200
2010
82,230
135,96
1
114,53
5
0
2011
70,377
153,16
2
123,04
6
3,075
2012
73,421
156,56
0
136,67
7
820
72.5
3.1
81.9
3.3
96.9
5.6
92.7
8.5
102.1
5.0
122.7
4.2
Figure 4: Proportion of paint managed by the four different product management options.
Cost
Table 18: Charges applied to paint sold in SK [13].
NB Paint Fees
100 mL to 250 mL
251 mL to 1 L
1.01 L to 5 L
5.01 L to 23 L
p
Cost (AUD)
$0.10
$0.24
$0.59
$1.47
Data extrapolated to 12 months
15
Retailers are given the choice of either building the fee into the product’s price or displaying it
as a separate charge on the receipt at checkout.
Table 19: Comparative data of operating costs and revenues for the SK Paint Stewardship
Program [11].
Total Paint Revenue
Program Operation Cost
Administration Cost
Communication Cost
Total Operating Cost
2006
(AUD)q
$673,175
$294,591
$55,063
$60,309
$409,693
2007
(AUD)
$720,004
$353,361
$76,052
$18,883
$448,295
2008
(AUD)
$752,725
$527,822
$81,939
$47,459
$657,221
2009
(AUD)
$713,346
$560,724
$79,120
$40,765
$680,610
2010
(AUD)
$752,468
$615,233
$72,458
$69,943
$757,635
2011
(AUD)
$956,480
$728,157
$54,790
$59,306
$842,252
2012
(AUD)
$972,160
$719,320
$56,840
$27,440
$804,580
Figure 5: Comparison of operating cost to the amount of paint collected.
Collection Systems
As of May 2012 there are 71 collection depots run by SARCAN Recycling (www.sarcan.ca).
Methods used to raise public awareness





q
Toll-free hotline
Radio advertisements
Retailer point-of-sale communication
Municipal communications
Tradeshows
Data extrapolated to 12 months
16


Recycling ambassador project where students were hired for 17 weeks to travel
throughout SK, visiting retailers, depots, and municipalities to encourage participation in
the stewardship programs.
Website
5. Oregon (OR) Paint Stewardship Program
Table 20: Summary of OR Paint Stewardship Program.
Year operations
commenced
Fees (AUD)
Fee change over
time (AUD)
Collection System
and Facilities
Collection sites
Population per
permanent
collection location
Total Paint
Collected
Paint per Capita
Collected
Disposition of Paint
Target Accessibility
Public Education
Materials
Other KPIs
Reporting
Audits
2010 (2 years)
Ranges from $0.00-$1.71 depending on volume of container (2014)
None to report
102 collection facilities (2012)
63 mobile paint collection events (2012)
Large volume pick-up services were offered to those who had more than 1134 L of
paint to offload
Of the 102 collection facilities, 19 were HHW & solid waste sites, 72 were retailers, and
11 were ReStoresr
38,100s
2,303,800 L in year 2 of the program (spanning September 2011 – August 2012)
0.59 L per capita
3.4% of recovered paint was reused, 49% of it was sent to paint-to-paint recycling,
4.1% used to produce a biomass fuel product, 2.8% sent to energy recovery, 10.3%
sent to biodegradation, and 30.4% used for fuel blending.
95% of residents should be within 24 km of a collection site. This has been achieved.
Website, radio advertisements, television advertising, press releases, direct mailings to
contractors and retailers, and participation in trade shows.
None stated
Annual reports and program plans available on PaintCare website
Independent financial audits performed by Mayer Hoffman McCann
In 2009, the OR Legislature passed the nation’s first paint stewardship law. This law required a
four-year pilot of a paint product stewardship program. During this time, paint manufacturers
were required to partake in an approved statewide paint stewardship program if they were to
sell their products in OR.
In July 2010, the industry-run non-profit organization, PaintCare, launched the OR Paint
Stewardship Program. The goal of this program was to reduce the amount of waste paint
generated by consumers, identify cost-effective alternatives for using post-consumer paint
r
s
Stores that collect and redistribute paint (along with furniture and building material) for free or at a reduced price
2012 population estimate for OR was 3,889,353
17
products, and to create a statewide post-consumer paint management system that is
environmentally beneficial, convenient, and economical.
The pilot program was hugely successful, and legislation was subsequently passed in July 2013
to make the program permanent [14].
This section provides a summary of an evaluation carried out by the Product Stewardship
Institute (PSI), two years after the program commenced [15].
Amount Collected
Approximately 2.6 million litres of waste A&D paint is generated each year in OR. Since the
implementation of the Paint Stewardship Program, OR has been able to achieve a 34% increase
in the quantity of waste A&D paint collected and processed by PaintCare.
Table 21: Data obtained between January-December 2008, used in September 2010 to set
baseline values for the PaintCare program.
HHW & Solid Waste
Sites
Retailers
ReStores
Water – based Paint
Collected (L)
1,142,970
Solvent-based Paint
Collected (L)
576,264
Total Volume of
Paint Collected (L)
1,719,239
Percentage of Total
Paint Collected (L)
Unknown
0
Unknown
0
Unknown
0
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Table 22: Progress made by the OR Paint Stewardship Program [15].
Water-based Paint
Collected (L)
Solvent-based Paint
Collected (L)
Total paint (L)
Baseline
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
1,142,970
1,331,074
1,588,458
1,582,251
576,265
444,260
715,342
612,768
1,719,239
1,775,334
2,303,800
2,195,020
18
Figure 6: Proportion of solvent- and water-based paint comprising the total paint collected.
Amount Diverted
There was a steady increase in the proportion of collected water-based paint that was recycled.
In Year 1, 57% of the collection water-based paint was successfully used to make recycledcontent paint. This figure rose to 72% in Year 2 of the program.
Despite collaborating with 12 ReStores and Metro (Regional Government of OR) to redistribute
leftover paint for reuse by the public at no charge or at a discount, less than 5% of the total
volume of paint collected by the program is reused.
In the 2014 report by PaintCare, it was mentioned 64% of the collected water-based paint was
used to make recycled-content paint. This reduction over the Year 2 achievement of 72% was
attributed to market conditions that made it difficult to sell darker coloured paints. The report
also notes that while it is possible to recycle solvent-based paint, no processors in OR offered
this option at the time the report was authored (January 2014) [14].
Table 23: Quantity of paint diverted by the various disposal methods used in the program [15].
Method of disposal
Reuse
Paint to paint
recycling
Other recycled
product
Biomass
Energy recovery
Fuel blending
Biodegradationt
Year 1 (L)
Water-based
Year 2 (L)
Water-based
Solvent-based
63,538
1,127,805
14,307
-
39,932
758,714
Solventbased
13,328
-
106,486
-
-
-
53,241
372,700
430,931
-
95,309
63,538
238,269
701,035
-
Collection Systems
Table 24: Growth in number of collection sites over time.
Collection Sites
HHW & Solid Waste Sites
Retailers
ReStores
Total
Baseline
15
4
1
20
Year 1
15
69
9
93
Year 2
19
72
11
102
In addition to this, PaintCare held mobile collection events in several rural communities and
offered large volume pick-up services to those who had more than 1134 L of paint to dispose
of.
t
Water-based paint processed through MetroPaint which cannot be recycled is mixed with process water from
Metro’s paint facility. It is then injected into the Columbia Ridge Landfill in Arlington, Oregon which has permits for
research and development to investigate whether this approach will increase the degradation of landfill waste and
ultimately improve the recovery of landfill gas. This process is referred to as ‘biodegradation’.
19
Table 25: Percentage of population located conveniently (within 24 km) to a collection site
[15].
Population Group
OR residents who live in
an incorporated city,
town, or Census
Designated Placeu
All OR Residents
Baseline
69.9%
Goal
97.21%
End of Year 1
95.5%
End of Year 2
96.4%
64.7%
71.88%
93.1%
94.4%
Cost
To fund the program, an assessment fee (sometimes called PaintCare Recovery Fee) is added to
the purchase price of paints sold in OR. This fee is paid to PaintCare by paint manufacturers,
who pass down the cost to retailers, and ultimately to the consumers. Customers are likely to
see the assessment fee as a separate item on their invoice for each container of paint they
purchase.
Table 26: Assessment fees for the OR Paint Stewardship Program.
Volume
<237 mL
237 mL to 946 mL
946 mL to 3.78 L
3.78 L to 18.93 L
Cost (AUD)
$0.00
$0.37
$0.80
$1.71
Table 27: Summary of revenue and expenses for the OR Paint Stewardship Program [15].
Revenue from assessment fees
PaintCare Program Expenses
Net Assets
Average cost per L
Year 1 (AUD)
$4,303,075
$3,533,115
$769,959
$1.99
Year 2 (AUD)
$4,544,366
$4,090,141
$454,225
$1.78
Table 28: Program budget from January 2014 through to December 2017 [14].
Revenue
Expenses
Operations
Communications
Administrative
Fees
Total Expenses
Unallocated
Reserve Funds
2014 (AUD)
$4,328,150
$3,726,373
$321,000
2015 (AUD)
$4,328,150
$3,733,886
$321,000
2016 (AUD)
$4,328,150
$3,788,304
$321,000
2017 (AUD)
$4,328,150
$3,843,635
$321,000
$326,245
$286,876
$311,689
$293,880
$4,373,619
$4,341,975
$4,420,993
$4,458,515
$45,469
$13,611
$92,843
$130,365
u
Census Designated Place (CDP) is used by the US Census Bureau to identify a concentration of population for
statistical purposes. People living in a CDP cannot be easily classified as living in a town or city as they lack a
municipal government.
20
Methods used to raise public awareness
“Buy Right, Use It Up, Recycle the Rest” message used along with additional messages to raise
awareness of what PaintCare is, why the PaintCare Program exists, why the law was passed, the
recovery fee, and products accepted in the program.
Education and outreach material included [16]:






Website with a site locator tool allowing for the easy location of nearby drop-off sites
o 531,038 website hits between March 4 2010 and August 26 2011
Radio advertisements on 17 radio stations in 2010 and 24 in 2011
Television advertising
Press releases in 33 newspapers
Direct mailings to contractors and retailers
Participation in trade shows
PSI noted retailers reporting that consumers were not completely informed about the types of
material collected by the program and about its operations. Some consumers, for example,
expected a rebate when returning leftover paint. Another challenge noted by PSI was that of
changing consumer habits, particularly when it came to estimating the appropriate amount of
paint required for a particular project. Only 7% of OR residents who purchased paint under the
program indicated that the program had an effect on the quantity of paint they would
purchase. Many were unaware of PaintCare’s “paint calculator”, and only a small fraction of
those who had heard about it actually used the “paint calculator”.
KPIs
Distance and population will be used as criteria for determining convenient and available
statewide collection. The Program Plan aims to cover 97.21% of residents who live in an
incorporated city, town, or Census Designated Place, or in other words roughly 72% of all OR
residents will be located within a 24 km radius of a paint collection site. In June 2013, this
requirement was revised by PaintCare, requiring that 95% of all residents are within 24 km of a
permanent site.
Geographic reach/accessibility
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis in December 2013 showed that 95.5% of
residents lived within 24 km of a drop-off site.
Public support
The OR Paint Stewardship Program received a high approval rating from its four key stakeholder
groups: HHW and recycling program coordinators; A&D paint manufacturers selling paint in OR;
painting contractors; and retailers who serve as drop-off sites.
The majority of municipalities surveyed said that they saved on paint collection, attributing
those savings to participation in the PaintCare program. A cost saving in excess of $1 million
was achieved by Metro, the largest urban area in OR. The cost savings to local government
budgets has also contributed to a high approval rating for the program.
21
Retailer support
There is also evidence of high approval rating by retailers as there was a large increase in
retailer participation from 4 as a baseline in 2010, to 69 after the first year of the program.
The following is a summary of outcomes from surveys conducted by PSI reviewing the first two
years of the OR Paint Stewardship Program:




Of the retailers surveyed, 72% believed that the pilot program ought to be made
permanent
Most retailers reported that very little staff time was involved in participating in the
program
Most retailers reported an increase in annual store sales since the implementation of
the program
Majority of customers expressed concerns about paying a fee for paint recycling;
however, PaintCare highlights in their more recent report that after the first year of the
program, there were not may complaints about fees.
6. California (CA) Architectural Paint Stewardship Program
Table 29: Summary of CA Architectural Paint Stewardship Program.
Year operations
commenced
Fees (AUD)
Fee change over
time (AUD)
Collection System
and Facilities
Collection sites
Population per
permanent
collection location
Total Paint
Collected
Paint per Capita
Collected
Disposition of Paint
Target Accessibility
Public Education
Materials
Other KPIs
Reporting
v
2012 (2 years)
Ranges from $0.00-$1.71 depending on volume of container (2014)
None to report
493 collection facilities (2013)
PaintCare also provided 135 large volume pickups (2013)
Of the 493 collection facilities, there were 427 paint retailers, 58 HHW facilities, 5 solid
waste transfer stations, and 3 paint recycling facilities.
62,241
2,391,428 L in the first 8.5 months of the program (extrapolating this to a 12-month
value, this becomes 3,376,133 L
0.09 L per capitav
96% of the collected and processed paint was recycled back into paint, another
product, or used for a beneficial purpose.
The statewide goal of PaintCare is to have one site within 24 km of 90% of the state’s
population. This has been achieved.
‘Buy Right, Use It Up, Recycle The Rest’ messaging. Window posters and signage to
identify collection sites, distribution of flyers and fact sheets, Paint Care website, press
releases, newspaper ads, billboards, online-advertising, and radio ads.
A second collection depot will be placed where there are more than 30,000 residents
in a population center
Provide approximately 740 permanent collection sites
Annual report and program plans available on PaintCare website
2013 population estimate for CA was 38,332,521
22
Audits
Independent financial audit performed by Rogers & Company Certified Public
Accountants
The CA Architectural Paint Stewardship Program was created in September 2010, following the
signing of Assembly Bill 1343. This statute requires the manufacturers of architectural paint to
develop and implement a program that will improve the management of post-consumer
architectural paint in CA [17]. Aside from providing substantial cost savings to municipalities,
this program will increase the number of recycling opportunities for post-consumer
architectural paint. The details for this section were obtained from the ‘California Architectural
Paint Stewardship Program Year 1 Annual Report’ which provides a comprehensive summary of
what the program has achieved since its implementation on October 19 th 2012, and up until
June 30th 2013.
Amount Collected
It is estimated that CA is responsible for 9% of the annual nationwide architectural paint sales in
the US. This equates to 223 million L of paint sold annually [17].
Approximately 147 million L of paint was sold in CA in the first 8.5 months of program
implementation. In these first 8.5 months, the CA Architectural Paint Stewardship Program had
collected 2.4 million L of waste A&D paint. Of this paint, 88% was water-based with 32% of
paint originating from HHW collection sites and events (the remainder originated from retail
and non-municipal sites). This translates to a recovery rate of 1.6%.
Amount Diverted
Table 30: Fate of collected water-based paint.
Water-based
Reuse
Recycled-Content Paint
Alternative Product Disposal
Appropriate Disposal
Total Water-based
Volume (L)
33,801
1,672,983
300,192
92,871
2,099,847
% of Total
2
80
14
4
100
Table 31: Fate of collected solvent-based paint.
Solvent-Based
Volume (L)
% of Total
Reuse
Energy Recovery
Total Solvent-Based
4,389
287,193
291,582
2
98
100
Collection Systems
In the first year of the CA Architectural Paint Stewardship Program, collection infrastructure
included drop-off sites at paint retailers, reuse centers, solid waste transfer stations, and
landfills. In addition to this, PaintCare also collaborated with existing HHW programs to collect
paint at their permanent facilities. Direct pickup was offered to those who had greater than
1134 L of paint to offload.
23
Drop-off sites were provided with on-site training and necessary supplies to properly manage
and handle postconsumer architectural paint. For all drop-off sites, PaintCare pays for the
collection bins, training materials, transportation of waste paint, and paint processing. If the
drop-off site offers services such as reprocessing, bulking, or internal transportation, PaintCare
will negotiate a payment for these services.
Cost
Funding for the CA Architectural Paint Stewardship Program is obtained through an ‘assessment
fee’ which is applied to paint sold in CA. The retailers and distributors in CA pass this fee onto
customers who will see this fee on their invoice. Retailers are distributors are then reimbursed
for the ‘assessment fee’ which they paid to the manufacturer, who in turn, pays PaintCare for
the cans of A&D paint sold in CA.
The ‘California Architectural Paint Stewardship Program Plan’ anticipated revenue of $24.6
million in its first year, and $34.2 million in its second. Total program costs are expected to
reach $22.5 million in the first year and $28.4 million in the second.
Table 32: California’s assessment fees.
Volume
<237 mL
237 mL – 946 mL
946 mL to 3.78 L
3.78 L – 18.93 L
Cost (AUD)
$0.00
$0.37
$0.80
$1.71
In its first 8.5 months of operation, it costs approximately AUD$10 million to run the program
[17]. This equates to a cost of AUD$0.26 per capita, or AUD$4.17 per litre of paint collected.
Approximately AUD$21.5 million was collected in recovery fees.
Table 33: Expenses involved in operating the CA Architectural Paint Stewardship Program
between October 2012 and June 2013.
Expense
Education
Transportation
Processing
Administration
Payments to CalRecycle
Legal Fees
Collection Support
Other program expenses
Total
Cost (AUD)
$2,540,909
$750,661
$3,679,405
$1,235,469
$398,074
$357,222
$549,288
$455,270
$9,966,297
% of Total Cost
25.5
7.5
36.9
12.4
4.0
3.6
5.5
4.6
100
Methods used to raise public awareness
PaintCare will utilise the message “Buy Right, Use It Up, Recycle The Rest”, rather than the
traditional ‘reduce, reuse, recycle’.
24
Window posters will be used to identify collection locations, signage designed to raise general
awareness of the program, and flyers/fact sheets will be made accessible through the PaintCare
website and at municipalities. Retailers and collection sites will be supplied with printed
materials which they will be able to distribute to the public.
Prior to and during the reporting period, a total of 5 press releases were distributed by
Bradshaw Advertising. The press releases highlighted the approval of the program plan, launch
of the program, information about drop-off sites, the connection between paint stewardship
and Earth Day, and information about new drop off-sites.
Along with 328 statewide newspaper ads, billboards, and online advertising, two radio ads were
aired throughout the state for a period of 5 weeks on commercial radio.
On average, the paintcare.org website has received 440,000 hits monthly with a large increase
in activity being observed due to the start of the CA Architectural Paint Stewardship Program
and the advertising that went with it.
KPIs
At the time of the latest annual report, California has 493 permanent locations [17]. Using GIS
modelling, it was determined that approximately 750 permanent collection locations would be
necessary to fulfil the coverage goals of having: (1) one site within 24 km for the majority (i.e.
90%) of residents; and (2) additional collection sites for every 30,000 residents of a population
centre.
A density analysis conducted in June 2013 reported that on average, there was one site for
every 62,241 residents in a population centre and that the state had surpassed once of its
coverage goals, with 97.3% of the state’s population living within 24 km of a collection site [17].
Retailer support
During the first 8.5 months of operation, 68% of all waste paint collected came through retail
drop-off sites. With 427 retail drop-off points throughout the state, retailer support appears to
be strong.
Two barriers two retailer participation were identified by PaintCare [17]:


Requirement of a Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP) when retailers stored
more than 208 L of paint. Annual fees for HMBPs range from AUD$85-$1070
Storage space, which many Californian retailers had a limited amount of. Once storage
bins had been filled, customers looking to deposit there waste paint had to be turned
away
7. Connecticut (CT) Architectural Paint Stewardship Program
Table 34: Summary of CT Architectural Paint Stewardship Program.
Year operations
commenced
2013 (1 year)
25
Fees (AUD)w
Ranges from $0.00-$1.71 depending on volume of container (2014)
Fee change over
time (AUD)
Collection System
and Facilities
None to report
Collection sites
4 permanent HHW collection facilities and 4 transfer stations (2013)
Population per
permanent
collection location
Total Paint
Collected
Paint per Capita
Collected
Disposition of Paint
Report outlining performance of the first year of the program yet to be published
Target Accessibility
One site within 24 km of 95% of CT residents. One additional site will be added for
every 50,000 residents in a population center.
‘Buy Right, Use It Up, Recycle The Rest’ messaging. Window posters and signage to
identify collection sites, fact sheets, and the Paint Care website.
None stated
Annual report yet to be published
N/A
Public Education
Materials
Other KPIs
Reporting
Audits
8 collection facilities (2013)
56 HHW collection events are offered (2013)
Report outlining performance of the first year of the program yet to be published.
Report outlining performance of the first year of the program yet to be published.
Report outlining performance of the first year of the program yet to be published.
The CT Architectural Paint Stewardship Program was created in June 2011 [18]. As with the CA
Architectural Paint Stewardship Program created roughly six months prior, new laws were
created in CT that required producers of A&D paint to establish a program that would reduce
the generation of waste paint, and minimise the involvement of the public sector in their
management and disposal.
The goal of this program is to increase the convenience for CT consumers to properly manage
and recycle unwanted/waste paint, increase the volume of post-consumer A&D paint collected
from residents, businesses and other entities, and to promote environmentally-sound waste
management practices.
Amount Collected
It is estimated that 22.7 million L of A&D paint was sold in CT in 2013. Assuming that 10% of this
paint becomes waste, there is opportunity to collect 2.27 million L of waste paint. In the first
two years after its implementation, PaintCare anticipates capturing 60% of the waster paint, i.e.
6% of the sales, equating to 1.3 million L or approximately 1 L per household.
As CT has not previously had a large-scale, state-wide, water-based paint collection program,
PaintCare anticipates a high initial return of unused older water-based paint.
Amount Diverted
As of writing this report, a review outlining the performance of the first year of the CT
Architectural Paint Stewardship Program is yet to be published.
w
Exchange rate used: $1.00 USD = $1.07 AUD (exchange rate on 10th of May, 2014)
26
In order of priority, water-based paint will be: reused, reprocessed into paint or into another
product, sent to beneficial use (e.g. road base additive, or alternative daily cover) or solidified
and disposed appropriately. PaintCare will attempt to reuse solvent-based paints; if this is not
possible, energy recovery will be performed. Paint containers will either be recycled or
disposed of appropriately.
Collection Systems
PaintCare intends to use the following collection infrastructure and services:






Existing municipal HHW collection programs. Previously, residents of CT had been
instructed to dry then dispose of their unwanted water-based paint in the trash. As a
result of this, there are few programs that presently accept water-based paint for
recycling. HHW collection programs have always accepted solvent-based paints.
Existing municipal transfer station paint drop-off programs
New retail paint drop-off sites
New transfer station paint drop-off sites
One-day paint drop-off events
Direct pick-up service for large volumes of paint
The program will accept any amount of water or solvent-based paints from residential
generators. Regulatory limits will be set for trade painters, contractors, small business and
other small to medium-sized organisations that will limit the amount of solvent-based (but not
water-based) paint they can dispose. This group is classified as Conditionally Exempt Small
Quantity Generators (CESQGs). The program will not accept paint from small quantity
generators and large quantity generators.
As of April 2013, CT offers 56 Temporary HHW Collection Events, 4 Permanent HHW Collection
Facilities, and 4 Transfer Stations.
Cost
The funding mechanism is identical to that applied to the CA Architectural Paint Stewardship
Program. The PaintCare recovery fees are the same also.
Table 35: Budget for the CT Architectural Paint Stewardship Program [18].
Recovery fee revenue
Expenses:
Paint Processing
Paint Transportation
Collection containers and support
One-day event set-up fees
Communications
Personnel, professional fees & other
State administrative / permit fees
Total direct expenses
Allocation of corporate activity
Total expenses
Pre-program (AUD)
$160,500
$32,100
$128,400
$21,400
$342,400
$267,500
$609,900
Year 1 (AUD)
$3,438,481
$ 1,750,133
$708,899
$58,208
$32,100
$226,785
$42,800
$3,107,825
$190,995
$3,298,855
Year 2 (AUD)
$3,507,250
$ 1,774,436
$723,076
$58,208
$32,100
$182,435
$21,400
$3,080,555
$187,250
$3,267,805
27
Change in net assets
Net assets
$609,900
$609,900
$139,626
$469,204
$239,446
$230,828
Recovery fees are identical to that of the CA Architectural Paint Stewardship Program and OR
Paint Stewardship Program.
Methods used to raise public awareness
As with the equivalent program in CA, PaintCare will use the “Buy Right, Use It Up, Recycle the
Rest” message when promoting the Paint Stewardship Program in Connecticut.
PaintCare will supply drop-off sites with posters and signage. Brochures will be used to inform
the public about PaintCare’s Program and drop-off sites, and an assortment of printable fact
sheets containing information ranging from drop-off sites, large volume pick-up services, and
how to become a paint drop-off site, will be available from the PaintCare website.
One important lesson learnt from the CA Architectural Paint Stewardship Program is balancing
the need to inform the public about the program (i.e. about new fees introduced to paint and
the presence of new drop off sites) with the need to allow drop-off sites to become familiar
with how the program functioned. In other states, large masses of people would often rush to
new drop-off sites. They had assumed that their paint collection services would be infrequent,
as local municipal collection events had been infrequent in the past. This resulted in retail dropoff sites often being overwhelmed by public demand. Often the public would be turned away
once their bins were filled, creating frustration for both parties and increasing the likelihood of
illegal dumping by those unable to offload their paint. To overcome this issue, PaintCare will
emphasise that drop-off sites are permanent, open during regular business hours and open
year round.
KPIs
The distribution goal of PaintCare is to establish at least one site within 24 km of 95% of
Connecticut residents. One additional site will be added for every 50,000 residents in a
population centre.
Retailer support
Retailer participation into the scheme is entirely voluntary. PaintCare has identified
approximately 450 retailers (of which seven are “reuse” stores that accept and redistribute
excess or reusable building material) in CT, who they notified about the program and provided
an expression of interest option to form a partnership. The retailers would act as a paint dropoff site for their community. As of April 2013, despite retailers not being compensated
financially, more than 55 retailers had expressed interest in becoming drop-off sites. Reuse
stores who partner with PaintCare have the benefit of being able to accept more paint, provide
higher quality paints for resale, and have unsellable paint collected for free by PaintCare rather
than be left with the disposal problem as they previously had.
28
8. 3R New Zealand (NZ), Resene Paintwise Program
Table 36: Summary of Resene Paintwise Program [2, 19].
Year operations
commenced
Fees (AUD)
2005 (9 years)
Fee change over
time (AUD)
Collection System
and Facilities
Population per
permanent
collection location
Total Paint
Collected
Paint per Capita
Collected
Disposal of paint
collected
Information unavailable
Target Accessibility
Public Education
Materials
Other KPIs
Reporting
Audits
Not available
Not available
x
$0.14/L for Resene-branded paint. Shown on sales receipt.
$2.50 per tin over 10 L
$1.00 per tin 4 L and under
To the best of the author’s knowledge, Resene does not produce volumes of paint
between 4-10 L. Perhaps this is why a fee for volumes of paint between 4-10 L is not
listed on Resene’s website.
58 designated ColorShops across New Zealand that serve as drop-off locations (2014)
76,431x
No data available
No data available
13.5% paint collected donated to community groups
6% (plastic collected) landfilled
25% (steel collected) recycled
31.5% is water-based paint that is used for graffiti abatement and research towards
finding alternative uses
18% is solvent-based paint collected sent for solvent recovery
6% residual waste stream is landfilled
Not available
Not available
Not available
2012 population estimate for New Zealand was 4.433 million
29
As PaintWise is not a legislated product stewardship arrangement, rather a program run
voluntarily by specific companies, those companies involved in the scheme are not obliged to
publically disclose all program information. Therefore gaining access to program data similar to
other existing paint stewardship schemes was not obtainable for this report.
Other existing paint schemes
United Kingdom – Community RePaint Schemes
Sponsored by AkzoNobel Decorative Paints since 1993, Community RePaint schemes are able to
collect reusable paint and distribute it to individuals, families, and communities in need. In
2013, the scheme redistributed over 245,000 litres of paint. Rather than having a central
organisation managing, overseeing, and reporting on the performance of the program as in
Canada and USA, Community RePaint is run by a host of non-profit organisations, local
authorities, and waste management companies. As a result, it was more difficult to gather
detailed information on its operations and KPIs.
Summary
This report reviewed and compared eight paint stewardship schemes for a variety of performance
indicators including cost of program, levy costs, reprocessing techniques, accessibility, number of
collection sites, and volume of waste paint collected. Some of the schemes compared have existed for
over 20 years such as British Columbia, while some such as the California and Oregon Schemes are
relatively new schemes having operated for two years or less. The information collected in this report
will provide a benchmark for future and existing schemes to be able to compare their processes and
performance, and ultimately measure the success of these schemes. The summary of all schemes
reviewed can be found in Table one of page 1 in this report.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Nolan, J., The Nolan Consulting Report 2014 - Stocks and Flows Report, 2014.
Product Stewardship Study, Unused/Unwanted Paint and Paint Packaging in New
Zealand, 2006, 3R.
Australian Paint Approval Scheme: Minimising paint waste and safe paint disposal.
Available from: http://www.apas.gov.au/ss3.htm
Houshamand, A., et al., End-of-Life OPtions for Waste Paint in Australia, 2013,
Swinburne University of Technology.
Paint Product Stewardship: A Background Report for the National Dialogue on Paint
Product Stewardship, 2004, Product Stewardship Institute.
The Case for Voluntary Paint Stewardship 2013, Global Product Stewardship Council.
Product Care Association Annual Report to the Director 2012, 2013, Product Care
Association.
30
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
Kurschner, M., Product Care Manitoba HHW 2012 Annual Report, 2012, Product Care
Association.
New Brunswick Paint Product Stewardship Plan 2012-2015, 2012, Product Care
Association.
New Brunswick Paint Stewardship Program Plan, 2009, Product Care Association.
Saskatchewan Paint Stewardship Program 2012 Annual Report, 2012, Product Care
Association.
Saskatchewan Paint Stewardship Program 2011 Annual Report to Saskatchewan
Ministry of Environment 2011, Product Care Association.
Saskatchewan Paint Fees. 2014; Available from:
http://www.productcare.org/Saskatchewan-Eco-Fees.
Bernardo, V., et al., Oregon Architectural Paint Stewardship Program Plan 2014-2017,
2014, PaintCare.
Oregon Paint Stewardship Program Evaluation, 2013, Product Stewardship Institute
2011 Evaluation of the Oregon Paint Stewardship Program, 2011, US EPA.
Bernardo, V., et al., California Paint Stewardship Program Year 1 Annual Report, 2013,
PaintCare.
Connecticut Architectural Paint Stewardship Program, 2013, PaintCare.
Resene PaintWise service questions and answers. Available from:
http://www.resene.com.au/comn/envissue/paintwise_information.htm.
31