CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

2015 STATEWIDE
WASTE CHARACTERIZATION STUDY

FINAL REPORT
March 15, 2016

 11875 High Tech Avenue, Suite 150, Orlando, FL

(800) 679-9220

www.mswconsultants.com

This report was delivered electronically. If it is necessary to print hard copies,
please do so on post-consumer recycled paper and recycle.

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study would not have been successful without the cooperation and assistance of multiple disposal
facilities, recycling facilities, and hauling companies across the State of Connecticut. The MSW
Consultants project team would like to thank the following facilities for hosting the field data collection
during this project:









Bristol Resource Recovery Facility (RRF),
Materials Innovation and Recycling Authority (MIRA) Hartford RRF,
Covanta-Preston RRF,
New Haven Municipal Transfer Station,
Wheelabrator-Bridgeport RRF,
MIRA Hartford Regional Recycling Center, and
Willimantic Waste Reduction and Processing Facility.

We would also like to thank the following organizations and individuals for their assistance in collecting
wastes from targeted commercial generator sectors:

 Tom DeVivo and Tim DeVivo, Willimantic Waste,
 Ryan Bingham, Winters Bros. Waste Systems of Connecticut, and
 Mike Paine and Ernie Tarca, Paine’s Recycling & Disposal Services.

CT - DEEP

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

 

This page intentionally left blank.

CT - DEEP

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………………………………..ES-1
ES 1.
ES 2.
ES 3.
ES 4.

Introduction ........................................................................................................................... ES-1
Results – Waste Characterization ....................................................................................... ES-1
Results – Single Stream Recycling Composition .............................................................. ES-5
Results – Waste Composition by ICI Generator Sector ................................................. ES-7

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1-1
1.1
1.2
1.3

1.4

Background ............................................................................................................................... 1-1
Project Team ............................................................................................................................. 1-1
Comparison to 2010 Study ..................................................................................................... 1-2
1.3.1 Similarities Between Studies .............................................................................................. 1-2
1.3.2 Differences Between the Studies ...................................................................................... 1-3
Report Organization ................................................................................................................ 1-4

2. METHODOLOGY............................................................................................... 2-1
2.1
2.2

2.3
2.4

2.5
2.6
2.7

2.8

CT - DEEP

Host Facilities and Schedule ................................................................................................... 2-1
Waste Types and Generator Sectors ..................................................................................... 2-2
2.2.1 Disposed Waste................................................................................................................... 2-2
2.2.2 ICI Generator Sampling .................................................................................................... 2-2
2.2.3 Single Stream Recyclables .................................................................................................. 2-2
Field Data Collection Schedule .............................................................................................. 2-2
Statewide Disposed Waste and REcycled Material Quantities .......................................... 2-3
2.4.1 Overall .................................................................................................................................. 2-3
2.4.2 Residential vs ICI Breakdown........................................................................................... 2-3
2.4.3 Disposal Quantities by Demographic Region ................................................................ 2-5
Sampling Targets ...................................................................................................................... 2-6
Material Categories and Groups ............................................................................................ 2-7
Sampling Methods ................................................................................................................... 2-9
2.7.1 Random Sampling............................................................................................................... 2-9
2.7.2 Grab Samples from Tipped Loads ................................................................................. 2-10
2.7.3 Special Generator Samples .............................................................................................. 2-12
2.7.4 Single Stream Recycling Samples.................................................................................... 2-12
Manual Sorting ....................................................................................................................... 2-12
2.8.1 Sorting Procedure ............................................................................................................. 2-12
2.8.2 Weighing Sorted Samples ................................................................................................ 2-13
2.8.3 Sorting Wet and Organics Contaminated Waste ......................................................... 2-13
2.8.4 Sorting Packaged Foods................................................................................................... 2-13
2.8.5 Site Maintenance and Cleanup ........................................................................................ 2-14

i

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

2.9

2.8.5 Site Maintenance and Cleanup ........................................................................................ 2-14
Data Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 2-14
2.9.1 QA/QC Procedure ........................................................................................................... 2-14
2.9.2 Statistical Analysis ............................................................................................................. 2-15

3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS................................ 3-1
3.1

3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5

3.6

Statewide Aggregate MSW Composition.............................................................................. 3-1
3.1.1 Food Waste in Packaging .................................................................................................. 3-7
3.1.2 Flexible Film Packaging ..................................................................................................... 3-8
Statewide Residential Waste Composition ........................................................................... 3-9
Statewide ICI Waste Composition ...................................................................................... 3-15
Comparison By Generator Sector ....................................................................................... 3-20
Results by Demographic Region.......................................................................................... 3-24
3.5.1 Urban Waste Composition .............................................................................................. 3-25
3.5.2 Suburban Waste Composition ........................................................................................ 3-27
3.5.3 Rural Waste Composition................................................................................................ 3-29
Results by Host Facility ......................................................................................................... 3-31
3.6.1 MIRA Connecticut Solid Waste System (Hartford) RRF ........................................... 3-31
3.6.2 Covanta-Bristol RRF ........................................................................................................ 3-32
3.6.3 Covanta-Preston RRF ...................................................................................................... 3-33
3.6.4 Wheelabrator-Bridgeport RRF ....................................................................................... 3-34
3.6.5 New Haven Municipal Transfer Station........................................................................ 3-35

4. SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING RESULTS ..................................................... 4-1
4.1

4.2
4.3

Aggregate Single Stream Recycling Composition................................................................ 4-1
4.1.1 Composition with Bagged Waste Considered a Contaminant ..................................... 4-1
4.1.2 Bagged Waste Composition .............................................................................................. 4-4
4.1.3 Composition with Bagged Waste Sorted to Proper Category...................................... 4-6
Single Stream Composition by MRF ..................................................................................... 4-8
Analysis of Deposit Containers............................................................................................ 4-10

5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS ............................................................................. 5-1
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7

Overview ................................................................................................................................... 5-1
ICI Generator Results: Grocery Stores ............................................................................... 5-1
ICI Generator Results: Restaurants...................................................................................... 5-4
ICI Generator Results: Hotels .............................................................................................. 5-6
ICI Generator Results: Retail Big Box Stores ..................................................................... 5-8
ICI Generator Results: Small Retail Stores ....................................................................... 5-10
ICI Generator Results: Offices ........................................................................................... 5-12

6. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................... 6-1
6.1
6.2

Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 6-1
Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 6-1

ii

CT - DEEP

 TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A – Demographic Classification of Connecticut Municipalities
Appendix B – Field Data Collection Forms
Appendix C – Field Forms
Appendix D – Disposed Waste Composition by Host Facility
Appendix E – Single Stream Recycling Composition Detail by MRF
List of Figures
Figure ES 2-1 Municipal Solid Waste Composition and Quantities Disposed (tons) ..................... ES-1
Figure ES 2-2 Comparison of 2010 and 2015 MSW Composition .................................................... ES-2
Figure ES 2-3 Recoverability of Disposed Wastes in Existing Curbside/On-site Collection
Programs .............................................................................................................................................. ES-2
Figure ES 2-4 Comparison of Waste Composition by Generator Sector ......................................... ES-4
Figure ES 2-5 Comparison of Waste Tonnage by Generator Sector ................................................ ES-4
Figure ES 2-6 Comparison of 2015 and 2010 Top 10 Materials ........................................................ ES-5
Figure ES 3-1 Single-Stream Recycling Composition (Bagged Waste as Contaminant) ................. ES-6
Figure ES 3-2 Composition of Bagged Waste Arriving in Single Stream Loads.............................. ES-6
Figure ES 3-3 Single-Stream Recycling Composition (Bagged Waste is Sorted) ............................. ES-7
Figure ES 4-1 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Grocery Store Waste .................... ES-8
Figure ES 4-2 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Restaurant Waste .......................... ES-8
Figure ES 4-3 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Hotel Waste ................................... ES-9
Figure ES 4-4 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Retail Big Box Waste .................... ES-9
Figure ES 4-5 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Small Retail Waste ...................... ES-10
Figure ES 4-6 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Office Waste ................................ ES-10
Figure 2-1 Location of Host Facilities ....................................................................................................... 2-1
Figure 2-2 Photograph of Tipped Load .................................................................................................. 2-10
Figure 2-3 Systematic Sampling Guide for Tipped Loads .................................................................... 2-10
Figure 2-4 Sample in a Loader Bucket..................................................................................................... 2-11
Figure 2-5 Sample Queued for Sorting .................................................................................................... 2-11
Figure 2-6 Manual Sorting .......................................................................................................................... 2-12
Figure 2-7 Weigh-out .................................................................................................................................. 2-13
Figure 2-8 Classification of Food Waste .................................................................................................. 2-14
Figure 3-1 Municipal Solid Waste Composition and Quantities Disposed (tons) .............................. 3-1
Figure 3-2 Comparison of 2010 and 2015 MSW Composition ............................................................. 3-2
Figure 3-3 Recoverability of Disposed Wastes in Existing Curbside/On-site Collection Programs3-2
Figure 3-4 Comparison of 2015 and 2010 Top 10 Materials ................................................................. 3-4
Figure 3-5 2015 Residential Waste Composition and Disposed Quantities (tons) ............................. 3-9
Figure 3-6 Comparison of 2015 and 2010 Residential Waste Composition ........................................ 3-9
Figure 3-7 Recoverability of Residential Wastes in Existing Curbside Programs ............................. 3-10

CT - DEEP

iii

 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Figure 3-8 Comparison of 2015 and 2010 Top 10 Materials – Residential Sector ........................... 3-10
Figure 3-9 ICI Waste Composition .......................................................................................................... 3-15
Figure 3-10 Comparison of 2015 and 2010 ICI Composition ............................................................. 3-15
Figure 3-11 Recoverability of ICI Wastes in Existing Single Stream Programs ................................ 3-16
Figure 3-12 Comparison of 2015 and 2010 Top 10 Materials – ICI Sector ...................................... 3-16
Figure 3-13 Comparison of Waste Composition by Generator Sector .............................................. 3-20
Figure 3-14 Comparison of Waste Tonnage by Generator Sector ...................................................... 3-20
Figure 3-15 Comparison of Residential and ICI Top 10 Materials ..................................................... 3-21
Figure 4-1 Single-Stream Recycling Composition (Bagged Waste as Contaminant) .......................... 4-1
Figure 4-2 Single-Stream Recycling Results (Top 10 Materials) ............................................................ 4-2
Figure 4-3 Composition of Bagged Waste ................................................................................................ 4-4
Figure 4-4 Single-Stream Recycling Composition (Bagged Waste is Sorted) ...................................... 4-6
Figure 4-5 Comparison of Single Stream Recycling Composition by MRF (Bagged Waste as
Contaminant).......................................................................................................................................... 4-8
Figure 4-6 Comparison of Single Stream Recycling Composition by MRF (Bagged Waste is Sorted)
.................................................................................................................................................................. 4-9
Figure 5-1 Top 5 Most Prevalent Constituents in Grocery Store Waste ............................................. 5-1
Figure 5-2 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Grocery Store Waste.............................. 5-2
Figure 5-3 Top 5 Most Prevalent Constituents in Restaurant Waste.................................................... 5-4
Figure 5-4 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Restaurant Waste .................................... 5-4
Figure 5-5 Top 5 Most Prevalent Constituents in Hotel Waste ............................................................ 5-6
Figure 5-6 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Hotel Waste ............................................ 5-6
Figure 5-7 Top 5 Most Prevalent Constituents in Retail Big Box Waste ............................................. 5-8
Figure 5-8 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Retail Big Box Waste ............................. 5-8
Figure 5-9 Top 5 Most Prevalent Constituents in Small Retail Waste ................................................ 5-10
Figure 5-10 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Small Retail Waste.............................. 5-10
Figure 5-11 Top 5 Most Prevalent Constituents in Office Waste ....................................................... 5-12
Figure 5-12 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Office Waste ....................................... 5-12
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Host Facilities ............................................................................................................................... 2-1
Table 2-2 Sorting Schedule ........................................................................................................................... 2-3
Table 2-3 Disposed Wastes, 2015 and 2010 Studies ............................................................................... 2-3
Table 2-4 Hauler Survey Results .................................................................................................................. 2-5
Table 2-5 Disposal Quantities by Demographic Region ........................................................................ 2-6
Table 2-6 Sampling Targets by Host Facility ............................................................................................ 2-6
Table 2-7 Material Categories for Disposed Waste ................................................................................. 2-8
Table 2-8 Material Categories for Single Stream Recycling .................................................................... 2-9
Table 3-1 Detailed MSW Composition ..................................................................................................... 3-5
Table 3-2 Comparison of Detailed MSW Composition ......................................................................... 3-6

iv

CT - DEEP

 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table 3-3 Analysis of Loose and Packaged Food in Connecticut Waste Stream ................................ 3-8
Table 3-4 Analysis of Flexible Film Packaging in Connecticut Waste Stream .................................... 3-8
Table 3-5 Detailed Residential Waste Composition .............................................................................. 3-11
Table 3-6 Comparison of 2010 and 2015 Residential Waste Composition ....................................... 3-13
Table 3-7 Detailed ICI Waste Composition ........................................................................................... 3-17
Table 3-8 Comparison of 2010 and 2015 ICI Waste Composition .................................................... 3-18
Table 3-9 Comparison of Waste Composition by Generator Sector .................................................. 3-22
Table 3-10 Urban, Suburban and Rural Waste Sample Counts ........................................................... 3-24
Table 3-11 Urban/Residential Waste Composition .............................................................................. 3-25
Table 3-12 Urban/ICI Waste Composition ........................................................................................... 3-26
Table 3-13 Suburban/Residential Waste Composition ......................................................................... 3-27
Table 3-14 Suburban/ICI Waste Composition ...................................................................................... 3-28
Table 3-15 Rural/Residential Waste Composition ................................................................................ 3-29
Table 3-16 Rural/ICI Waste Composition ............................................................................................. 3-30
Table 3-17 Comparison of Aggregate Waste Composition (MIRA Hartford RRF) ........................ 3-31
Table 3-18 Comparison of Aggregate Waste Composition (Bristol RRF) ......................................... 3-32
Table 3-19 Comparison of Aggregate Waste Composition (Covanta-Preston RRF) ....................... 3-33
Table 3-20 Comparison of Aggregate Waste Composition (Wheelabrator-Bridgeport RRF) ........ 3-34
Table 3-21 Comparison of Aggregate Waste Composition (New Haven Municipal Transfer Station)
................................................................................................................................................................ 3-35
Table 4-1 Single-Stream Recycling Composition (Bagged Waste as Contaminant) ........................... 4-3
Table 4-2 Bagged Waste Composition ...................................................................................................... 4-5
Table 4-3 Single-Stream Recycling Composition (Bagged Waste is Sorted) ......................................... 4-7
Table 4-4 Comparison of Single Stream Recyclables MIRA Hartford and Willimantic MRFs ...... 4-10
Table 4-5 Analysis of Deposit Containers in Connecticut Waste Stream .......................................... 4-10
Table 5-1 Detailed Grocery Waste Composition ..................................................................................... 5-3
Table 5-2 Detailed Restaurant Waste Composition ................................................................................ 5-5
Table 5-3 Detailed Hotel Waste Composition ......................................................................................... 5-7
Table 5-4 Detailed Retail Big Box Waste Composition .......................................................................... 5-9
Table 5-5 Detailed Retail Small Generator Waste Composition ......................................................... 5-11
Table 5-6 Detailed Office Generator Waste Composition ................................................................... 5-13

CT - DEEP

v

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

This page intentionally left blank.

v1 CT - DEEP

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES 1. INTRODUCTION
In 2009, the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) sponsored an
inaugural statewide waste characterization study, the results of which were published in 2010 (2010 Study).
This report contains the results of the 2015 Statewide Waste Characterization Study (2015 Study).
The 2015 Study sought to duplicate the methodology of the 2010 Study so that changes in the disposed
waste stream could be measured and so that results could inform DEEP’s imminent update of the State
Solid Waste Management Plan. Accordingly, the 2015 Study captured random samples of wastes from
Residential and Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) generators delivered to five solid waste facilities
across the State, including the same four Energy-from-Waste facilities and one transfer station as were
captured in the 2010 Study. Additionally, DEEP expanded the 2015 Study scope to include additional
sampling and sorting of single stream recyclables at two Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs), as well as
targeted sampling of wastes from six specific ICI generator types.

ES 2. RESULTS – WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
ES 2.1.

STATEWIDE WASTE COMPOSITION

Figure ES 2-1 shows the composition and tonnage of disposed wastes in 2015, aggregating the Residential
and ICI generator sectors. As shown, Paper and Food Waste are the most common material groups.
Figure ES 2-1 Municipal Solid Waste Composition and Quantities Disposed (tons)
Electronics Other Wastes
291,940
11,906
12.5%
0.5%
Household
Hazardous
Waste
16,943
0.7%
C&D Debris
276,995
11.9%

Paper
539,493
23.1%

Plastic
275,613
11.8%

Other Organics
258,922
11.1%

Metal
82,443
3.5%
Food Waste
519,832
22.3%

Glass
58,512
2.5%

Figure ES 2-2 compares the composition in 2015 with the same result from the 2010 Study. The most
noteworthy change in the waste stream since 2010 is the heightened fraction of Food Waste remaining in
disposed wastes, along with relatively lower incidence of most other materials. It should be noted that
when data are presented in percentages, a significant change in the percent of one fraction of the waste
stream automatically results in a change in the percentages of all other materials. For example, the large
increase in food waste drives down the percentage composition of other materials.

CT DEEP

ES-1

 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Figure ES 2-2 Comparison of 2010 and 2015 MSW Composition
30.0%
25.9%

25.0%

23.1%

22.3%

20.0%
14.7%

15.0%

13.5%

11.8%

13.2%
11.1%

14.1%
11.9%

12.5%
9.3%

10.0%
4.5%

5.0%

3.5%

2.1% 2.5%

0.5% 0.7%

2.1%

0.5%

2010

Other Wastes

Electronics

HHW

C&D Debris

Other Organics

Food Waste

Glass

Metal

Plastic

Paper

0.0%

2015

Figure ES 2-3 shows the breakdown of recoverable materials within the disposed MSW stream. This
figure categorizes materials as they would be separated in a residential curbside program with separate
recycling, organics, and trash collection.1
Figure ES 2-3 Recoverability of Disposed Wastes in Existing Curbside/On-site Collection
Programs
Recyclable Fiber,
11.2%
Recyclable
Containers, 4.7%
Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Curbside
Collection
Program, 41.3%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 1.3%

Compostable
Organics, 41.4%

In practice, there are many materials included in the red pie piece in Figure ES 2-3 that, were they source separated and
delivered to a recycler or processor, are readily recyclable or otherwise recoverable. This figure intends only to show the
limitations of recycling and organics diversion through curbside collection.
1

ES-2

CT DEEP

 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The above figure highlights a number of important findings about Connecticut’s disposed wastes:

 The fraction of targeted curbside recyclables – dry fiber and plastic, metal and glass containers –
remaining in the waste stream is a relatively small piece of the pie at a combined 15.9 percent.
 Compostable organics – which include food wastes, green wastes, and some compostable papers – are
quite significant at 41.4 percent. However, it is important to note that these materials may not be
easily source-separated prior to disposal, nor separated from disposed wastes such that they could be
recovered for feedstock in a plant designed to manage organic wastes.
 Even with significantly enhanced capture of targeted fiber, recyclable containers, and organics, over
41 percent of the disposed waste stream is not readily recyclable in existing curbside (or on-site
commercial) recycling programs without:
 Adding materials to the existing programs
 Making better use of other outlets for diverting materials (home composting, scrap metal recyclers,
reuse stores, etc.)
 Adding new recycling programs possibly in conjunction with development of local markets to
accept such materials
It is also critical to note that the above figure represents the rosiest possible definition of what is
“recoverable” in existing programs. To perform this study, manual sorters were trained to separate all
items for placement in the correct category, and did not make any adjustments for contamination of sorted
materials, nor the ability of a mechanical processing system to accurately separate such materials for
recovery. The results of this exercise can be considered an “academic” characterization of the waste
stream. Many of the recyclable and compostable organic items would never be recovered or diverted
because of contamination, or because they are so intermingled with non-recoverable items prior to
placement in the waste receptacle (or as a result of the collection process) that no processing line could
economically separate and recover the item.
ES 2.2.

WASTE COMPOSITION BY GENERATOR SECTOR

Figure ES 2-4 compares the percentage composition of material groups for Residential and ICI waste. On
a percentage basis, it is shown that ICI waste contains a higher incidence of Paper and Food Waste, while
the Residential sector disposes a higher percentage of Other Organics (which include yard debris and
diapers) and Other Wastes.

CT DEEP

ES-3

 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Figure ES 2-4 Comparison of Waste Composition by Generator Sector
30.0%

27.5%

25.5%

25.0%
20.0%

20.0%

20.0%

15.0%

15.5%

14.5%

13.3%
10.7%

12.3%

11.3%
8.3%

10.0%

6.3%

5.0%

2.9%

4.4%

2.8% 2.1%

0.8% 0.7% 0.4% 0.7%

Residential

Other Wastes

Electronics

HHW

C&D Debris

Other Organics

Food Waste

Glass

Metal

Plastic

Paper

0.0%

Commercial

Figure ES 2-5 shows the same results, instead displaying the tonnage of materials disposed. Because of
the estimated split between Residential and Commercial tons, the absolute quantity of both Paper and
Food Waste is comparable in both generator sectors.
Figure ES 2-5 Comparison of Waste Tonnage by Generator Sector
300,000

Tons Disposed

250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0

Residential

ES-4

ICI

CT DEEP

 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Figure ES 2-6 shows the top 10 most prevalent materials in the MSW stream in both the 2010 and 2015
Studies. As shown, the most prevalent material in both studies was Food Waste and Compostable Paper,
although the incidence of both has increased in 2015.
Figure ES 2-6 Comparison of 2015 and 2010 Top 10 Materials
25%

22.3%

20%

8.6%

10%

10.7%
5.8%
4.7%
4.7% 5.7% 4.1% 5.7%

5%

7.2%
4.3% 3.5% 3.7%

3.5%

3.6% 3.1%

2010

Other Recyclable Paper

Other Film

Leaves and Grass

Corrugated
Cardboard/Kraft Paper

Textiles

Wood – Treated

Compostable Paper

Food Waste

0%

Diapers & Sanitary
Products

0.0%

1.4%

3.0%

Bottom Fines and Dirt

15% 13.5%

2015

The 2015 Study also provides composition data from samples generated in Urban, Suburban and Rural
areas of Connecticut. Ultimately, 192 out of 235 total samples originated in Urban areas, so the results of
the 2015 Study should be considered to be more heavily weighted towards these areas. Future studies may
seek to capture more samples from Suburban and Rural areas of the state.
Finally, the body of this report contains results individually for the five disposal facilities that hosted field
data collection.

ES 3. RESULTS – SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING COMPOSITION
Single stream recyclables were sampled at two Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs). In the initial sort, any
material contained in plastic bags was considered to be a contaminant. However, the bagged wastes were
set aside and sorted, and the composition of single stream recyclables was re-calculated as if Bagged Wastes
were allowable as targeted recyclables.
Figure ES 3-1 illustrates the breakdown of recyclable paper (blue), recyclable containers and plastics (green)
and contamination (red) in single stream recycling, with Bagged Waste considered to be a contaminant.
Recyclable containers comprise just over 27 percent of the total, with glass bottles (including broken glass)
the most prevalent container type by weight.

CT DEEP

ES-5

 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Figure ES 3-1 Single-Stream Recycling Composition (Bagged Waste as Contaminant)
Contaminants
18.2%
Steel Cans
1.7%

Aluminum Cans
0.6%
Recyclable Paper
54.6%

Glass Bottles
17.2%
Other Recyclable
Plastic
2.3%
Plastic Bottles
4.9%

Aseptic/Cartons
0.4%

The Bagged Wastes were subsequently analyzed to determine what materials are arriving at single stream
MRFs still contained in bags. Figure ES 3-2 shows the incidence of both targeted recyclables and
contaminants in Bagged Wastes. As shown, Bagged Wastes were found to be roughly split between trash
and recyclables. In practice, some bags contained mostly or entirely recyclables, while other contained
mostly or entirely trash. Other bags contained a mix.
Figure ES 3-2 Composition of Bagged Waste Arriving in Single Stream Loads
Steel Cans
0.8%

Contaminants
45.7%

Aluminum Cans
0.3%
Glass Bottles
9.1%
Other Recyclable
Plastic
1.2%
Plastic Bottles
3.0%
Aseptic/Cartons
2.2%

Recyclable Paper
37.7%

If Bagged Wastes are treated as targeted recyclables, the contamination rate is reduced marginally (because
recyclable material contained in the bags are captured in the calculation). Figure ES 3-3 restates the
breakdown of single stream recyclables to reflect the impact of breaking open and sorting Bagged Wastes
into the appropriate recyclable paper, recyclable containers/plastics, or contamination category. As shown,
the overall contamination rate drops slightly to 16.7 percent (with bagged newspaper still considered

ES-6

CT DEEP

 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
“contamination”). If bagged newspapers are considered acceptable, then the contamination rate drops to
15.2 percent.
Figure ES 3-3 Single-Stream Recycling Composition (Bagged Waste is Sorted)
Contaminants
16.7%
Steel Cans
1.8%

Aluminum Cans
0.6%
Glass Bottles
17.5%

Recyclable Paper
55.7%

Other Recyclable
Plastic
2.3%
Plastic Bottles
5.0%

Aseptic/Cartons
0.5%

The body of the report contains detailed single stream recycling composition as well as comparative
composition data for each of the host MRFs. The full report also comments on the incidence of deposit
containers in the disposed waste stream and in single stream recyclables.

ES 4. RESULTS – WASTE COMPOSITION BY ICI GENERATOR SECTOR
The 2015 Study analyzed disposed wastes from six ICI generator sectors:

 Grocery Stores
 Restaurants
 Hotels
 Retail Big Box Stores
 Small Retail Stores
 Offices
A snapshot of the recoverability of disposed waste is shown in the next six figures2 for these ICI generator
sectors.3

Pie charts in this section use the term “Compostable Organics” to include organic materials – food wastes, green wastes,
and low grade papers – that could be composted, digested, or otherwise recovered in a commercial processing facility
2

It is important to note that the results contained herein, while indicative of the differences in waste composition across
various ICI generator types, are based on limited sampling (in some cases very limited) and it is possible that a more
comprehensive study would find materially different results.
3

CT DEEP

ES-7

 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Figure ES 4-1 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Grocery Store Waste
Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Single Stream
Program, 17.1%

Recyclable Fiber,
27.5%

Recyclable
Containers, 2.7%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 1.0%
Compostable
Organics, 51.7%

Figure ES 4-2 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Restaurant Waste
Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Single Stream
Program, 15.6%

Recyclable Fiber,
6.5%

Recyclable
Containers,
10.1%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 1.2%

Compostable
Organics, 66.6%

ES-8

CT DEEP

 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Figure ES 4-3 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Hotel Waste
Recyclable Fiber,
7.8%
Recyclable
Containers,
12.7%

Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Single Stream
Program, 37.0%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 0.3%

Compostable
Organics, 42.2%

Figure ES 4-4 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Retail Big Box Waste

Recyclable Fiber,
29.6%
Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Single Stream
Program, 43.7%
Recyclable
Containers, 0.3%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 0.0%
Compostable
Organics, 26.3%

CT DEEP

ES-9

 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Figure ES 4-5 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Small Retail Waste
Recyclable Fiber,
18.0%

Recyclable
Containers, 4.2%

Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Single Stream
Program, 44.0%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 1.7%

Compostable
Organics, 32.1%

Figure ES 4-6 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Office Waste
Recyclable Fiber,
16.5%

Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Single Stream
Program, 29.9%

Recyclable
Containers, 4.5%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 1.3%

Compostable
Organics, 47.8%

As shown, the disposed waste profiles for these ICI generator sectors vary significantly, suggesting that
recycling and diversion programs must be customized to meet the needs of each sector. Additionally, the
maximum achievable diversion rate at each varies significantly.
The full report contains detailed profiles for the targeted ICI sectors, as well as a bar chart showing the
five most prevalent materials in the disposed waste of each sector.

ES-10

CT DEEP

 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
In 2009, the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) sponsored an
inaugural statewide waste characterization study to measure the composition of Residential and
Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) municipal solid waste (MSW or “waste”) disposed within the
State. The results of this study were published in 2010 (2010 Study) and have been used by DEEP and
other recycling and waste management program managers, planners, and businesses across Connecticut.
DEEP commissioned the 2015 Statewide Waste Characterization Study (2015 Study) to follow the same
methodology as was used in the 2010 Study. The 2015 Study sought to duplicate the methodology of the
2010 Study so that changes in the disposed waste stream could be measured and so that results could
inform DEEP’s imminent update of the State Solid Waste Management Plan. Additionally, DEEP
expanded the 2015 Study scope to include additional sampling and sorting of single stream recyclables at
two Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs), as well as targeted sampling of wastes from six specific ICI
generators.

1.2 PROJECT TEAM
In 2015, DEEP retained the Project Team of MSW Consultants, LLC, DSM Environmental Services, Inc.
(DSM), and Cascadia Consulting Group (Cascadia) to complete a statistically representative update and
analysis of Connecticut’s disposed waste stream. This Project Team also performed the 2010 Study and
was consequently able to assure high continuity of the data collection methods and analysis performed.
The roles and responsibilities of each Team member are summarized:
MSW Consultants coordinated the Project Team in all activities and had primary responsibility for:

 Project Management,
 Client Contact,
 Preparation of Study Design,
 Problem Resolution,
 Field Supervision,
 On-site Logistics,
 Sample Selection, Collection, and Sorting,
 Training of Sort Crew,
 Sorting QA/QC,
 Compilation of Sorting Data,
 Preparation of the Interim Report,
 Preparation of the Draft and Final Report.
DSM was responsible for:







Site Selection Logistics,
Performance and Analysis of Hauler Surveys to Determine the Residential/ICI Split,
ICI Special Generator Sampling Plan and Sample Acquisition,
Monitoring Dedicated Commercial Routes for Generator Samples,
Review of Interim Report,
Review of Draft and Final Report.

CT - DEEP

1-1

 1. INTRODUCTION
Cascadia was responsible for:







Validation of the Sampling Plan,
Statistical Analysis,
Overall QA/QC,
Preparation of Report Tables,
Report Review.

1.3 COMPARISON TO 2010 STUDY
From the outset, it was the intent of DEEP that the 2015 Study be performed so that the results could be
closely compared to the 2010 Study results. In particular, the 2015 Study attempted to follow the 2010
Study methodology to the greatest degree possible. The more closely the 2010 Study methodology could
be duplicated, the fewer the number of variables there are that may create differences in results between
the two Studies.
This section identifies the similarities and differences between the methodologies used in 2010 and 2015.
As shown, most aspects of the field data collection methodology were identical in both studies.
Additionally, the 2015 Study was expanded to include three new initiatives that were not performed in
2010. Similarities and differences (including the new initiatives) are described below and addressed in
greater detail in the body of the report.
1.3.1 SIMILARITIES BETWEEN STUDIES
 Host Facilities: Both the 2010 and 2015 Study performed sampling and sorting at the same host
disposal facilities:
 Bristol Resource Recovery Facility (RRF),
 Materials Innovation and Recycling Authority (MIRA) Hartford RRF,
 Covanta-Preston RRF,
 New Haven Municipal Transfer Station,
 Wheelabrator-Bridgeport RRF.

 Definitions of Waste Sectors: The 2010 and 2015 Studies retained the same two generator sectors:
Residential and Institutional/Commercial/Industrial (ICI). Both studies omitted inbound loads that
were found to be less than 80 percent pure Residential or ICI. This included all transfer trailer loads
because the mix of residential and ICI waste could not be determined.
 Obtaining Samples from Inbound Trucks: Both studies relied on systematic sampling protocols
to select vehicle for sampling and sorting. Both studies used random grab sampling (assisted by loader
operators at each host facility) to obtain materials from the tipped load for sorting.
 Sample Weights: Both studies targeted samples between 200 and 250 pounds.
 Material Categories: Material categories were substantially identical between the studies. The
following minor modifications were incorporated in the 2015 Study:
 Aseptic boxes and gable top cartons were added as a new category,
 Food waste still contained in packaging was added as a new category to be differentiated from food
wastes disposed loose in the waste stream,
 Flexible (film) plastic packaging (including pouches) was added as a new category,
 Diapers and sanitary products were added as a new category, and
 Offshore Cardboard was consolidated into the Old Corrugated Cardboard category.

1-2

CT - DEEP

 1. INTRODUCTION
 Determination of the Statewide Residential/ICI Split: In both the 2010 and 2015 Studies, the
Project Team performed two days of gate surveys at each host disposal facility to characterize inbound
wastes by generator sector. The results of the gate survey were used in both studies to allocate
statewide waste disposal between residential generators and ICI generators.
1.3.2 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE STUDIES
 Seasonality of Data Collection: Field data collection occurred over two seasons in both Studies.
However, the 2010 Study observed a more rigorous definition of the winter and fall seasons, collecting
data in February-March and October 2009, respectively. Each host facility was sampled once per
season in 2009. The 2015 Study also divided data collection into two separate events. The first season
was performed over May and June 2015 and represented the spring season. The second season was
performed in August and September 2015, reflecting the summer season. Sampling and sorting
occurred in both seasons at four of the five host facilities in 2015. Due to factors beyond the control
of the Project Team, field data collection was only performed during the summer season at the MIRA
Hartford RRF.

 Characterization of Wastes by Demographic Region: For most of the samples obtained in the
2015 Study, the Project Team recorded the city or town from which the wastes originated. With input
from DEEP, all Connecticut cities and towns were characterized as being urban, suburban, or rural. The
2015 Study consequently estimates disposed waste composition from urban, suburban and rural areas
of the state. No comparable results were developed in the 2010 Study.
 Characterization of Wastes from Targeted ICI Generator Sectors: The 2015 Study was expanded
to allow for additional, targeted analysis of the composition of disposed wastes from six ICI generator
sectors. No such generator sector-specific analysis was performed in 2010. The ICI generator sectors
targeted in the 2015 Study were:
 Grocery,
 Restaurant,
 Hotel,
 Retail – Big Box,
 Retail – Small, and
 Offices.
 Single Stream Recycling Composition Study: The 2015 Study was also expanded to include
composition analysis of single stream residential recyclables at two Material Recovery Facilities
(MRFs). DEEP and the Project Team believe this is the most comprehensive analysis undertaken by
a public entity of single stream recycling to take place in Connecticut to date. The single stream
recycling composition analysis was designed to capture a representative sample of residentially
generated single stream materials, which were sorted into substantially the same categories as the
disposed waste composition analysis. However, the single stream composition analysis utilized several
condensed categories of non-targeted materials, as well as several new categories relevant to MRF
operators. No composition analysis was performed on single stream recyclables in 2010. The
following MRFs hosted single stream composition analysis in the 2015 Study:
 MIRA Hartford Regional Recycling Center, and
 Willimantic Waste & Recycling Center, Willimantic.

CT - DEEP

1-3

 1. INTRODUCTION
1.4 REPORT ORGANIZATION
In addition to this Introduction and an Executive Summary (to be developed for the Final Report), the
report is divided into the following sections:
 Methodology: This section presents an overview of waste generation and disposal data available
from disposal facility reports, allocated by direct facility surveys. Also provided in this section is the
sampling plan that was developed to guide the study process and to provide statistically defensible
data. Additionally, this section summarizes the field data collection methods, and analytical methods
applied in the study.
 Statewide Waste Characterization: This section presents results about the composition of disposed
aggregate statewide waste, as well as the composition by residential and ICI generator sectors. Results
are presented in both tabular and graphical format to highlight findings of interest. Additionally, results
between generator sectors are compared, along with comparisons amongst host facilities and also
between the urban, suburban and rural areas of the state. Further, a comparison with the 2010 Study
has been included to indicate how the waste stream has changed or remained the same over time.
 Single-Stream Recycling Composition: Detailed results about the composition of single stream
recycling are presented in this section. Results are presented in both tabular and graphical format to
highlight findings of interest. Results are presented in the aggregate and by host MRF. Analyses of
both Recovery Rate and Deposit Containers (in Disposed Waste and in Single-Stream samples) has
been included. In addition, this section provides an analysis of hard-to-recycle multi-material
constituents of the waste and recycling stream.
 Commercial Generator Waste Composition: This section presents results about the composition
of commercial generator waste specific to each type targeted for this study. As with the other results
sections, findings have been presented in both tabular and graphical format to highlight findings of
interest.
 Conclusions and Recommendations: This section presents conclusions that can be drawn from
the 2015 Study update as well as recommendations for usage of the data and for future study.
 Appendices: Supplemental data and analysis are contained in several appendices.

1-4

CT - DEEP

 2. METHODOLOGY
2.1 HOST FACILITIES AND SCHEDULE
Table 2-1 identifies five waste disposal facilities and two single stream Material Recovery Facilities
(MRFs) that were recruited to host field data collection for this project. This table also notes the
demographics of the regions served by each of these facilities. The disposal facilities in the 2015 Study
are the same facilities that also hosted the 2010 Study field data collection.
Table 2-1 Host Facilities
Material
Stream
Disposed
Wastes

Host Facility
Covanta Bristol Resource Recovery Facility

Suburban, Rural

Wheelabrator Bridgeport RRF

Urban, Suburban

New Haven Municipal Transfer Station

Urban, Suburban

MIRA Southeast Project (Preston) RRF

Suburban, Rural

MIRA Connecticut Solid Waste System (Hartford) RRF
Single Stream
Recyclables

Service Region
Demographics

Urban, Suburban, Rural

MIRA Hartford Regional Recycling Center

Urban, Suburban

Willimantic Recycling Facility

Suburban, Rural

Figure 2-1 plots the host disposal and recycling facilities. As shown, these facilities capture waste from
much of the state.
Figure 2-1 Location of Host Facilities

CT - DEEP

2-1

 2. METHODOLOGY
2.2

WASTE TYPES AND GENERATOR SECTORS

2.2.1 DISPOSED WASTE
Consistent with the 2010 Study, the 2015 Study targeted disposed wastes from the following two
generator sectors:

 Residential: defined as waste brought to CT DEEP facilities by commercially or municipally
operated vehicles, in which 80% or more of the waste was from single-family and/or multifamily
residential sources. Vehicles chosen for sampling in the Residential waste sector included Residential
Transfer Trucks arriving from rural transfer stations as well as Packer Trucks carrying waste from
single family routes.
 Institutional/Commercial/Industrial (ICI): defined as waste brought to CT DEEP facilities by
commercially operated vehicles, in which 80% or more of the waste was from institutional,
commercial, or industrial sources. This sector excluded Construction and Demolition (C&D) debris
as well as Bulky Waste. Vehicles chosen for sampling in the ICI sector included Compacted
Dropboxes and Packer Trucks.
It should be noted that inbound loads containing less than 80% of either residential or ICI waste, and
loads originating from outside of Connecticut, were excluded from the study. It is also important to
note that neither the 2010 nor 2015 Studies targeted Bulky Wastes from the residential and ICI waste
streams. Although some Bulky Wastes are delivered to the disposal facilities that hosted this study, Bulky
Wastes are often non-processible at RRFs, and are more typically managed at Volume Reduction
Facilities (VRFs) with construction and demolition (C&D) debris. Bulky wastes (and C&D debris) were
excluded from this study.
2.2.2 ICI GENERATOR SAMPLING
The 2015 Study targeted six specific ICI generator types for sampling and sorting. These samples were
obtained from trucks that were identified via driver interview and not obtained at random, and in many
cases were specially arranged for delivery by a local hauler. The targeted commercial generator types in
the 2015 Study are:

 Grocery,
 Restaurant,
 Hotel,
 Retail-Big Box,
 Retail-Small, and
 Offices.
This effort was new in the 2015 Study and was not performed in the 2010 Study.
2.2.3 SINGLE STREAM RECYCLABLES
Only residentially generated recyclables were targeted for the composition analysis of single stream
materials. This is important to note because many MRFs process recyclables from both residential and
ICI generators, and consequently the results of the residential single stream composition analysis may
not be representative of a MRF’s plant-wide recovered commodity and residue rates (which include both
residential and ICI recyclables mixed together during processing).

2.3 FIELD DATA COLLECTION SCHEDULE
Table 2-2 summarizes the field data collection schedule for the 2015 Study. As shown, data were
collected over two seasons, representative of spring (May-June) and summer (August-September).
Conversely, the 2010 Study obtained field data in winter (February-March) and fall (October).

2-2

CT - DEEP

 2. METHODOLOGY
Table 2-2 Sorting Schedule
Dates of Field Data Collection
Season 1
Season 2

Host Facility

Covanta Bristol Resource Recovery Facility

May 15-19

Sep 14-16

Wheelabrator Bridgeport RRF

May 11-14

Sep 21-23

New Haven Municipal Transfer Station

May 20-22

Sep 17-19

MIRA Southeast Project (Preston) RRF

Jun 9-11

Sep 24-28

None

Aug 24 – Sep 3

Jun 4-8

Sep 4

None

Sep 29 – Oct 2

MIRA Connecticut Solid Waste System (Hartford) RRF [1]
MIRA Hartford Regional Recycling Center [2]
Willimantic Recycling Facility [2]

[1] The first season sort at MIRA WTF (Hartford) was canceled because of a shortage of space on the tip floor
to conduct sorting activities.
[2] The original study design called for sorting at one MRF each season. Unforeseen schedule changes to the
disposed waste sorting caused sorting at the MIRA MRF to be spread over two seasons.

2.4

STATEWIDE DISPOSED WASTE AND RECYCLED MATERIAL
QUANTITIES

2.4.1 OVERALL
DEEP tracks the flow of wastes generated in the state. Table 2-3 provides the reported annual statewide
waste disposed in Connecticut as cited in this and the 2010 Study. As shown, disposed waste quantities
have remained virtually unchanged.

Table 2-3 Disposed Wastes, 2015 and 2010 Studies
Data Point
Statewide Waste Disposal
Year of Reported Disposal Data

2015 Study

2010 Study

2,332,598 tons

2,379,687 tons

FY2013

CY2009

Statewide estimates of the disposed waste composition include both percentages and tons based on the
data in Table 2-3.
It was not within the scope of this study to attempt to estimate the statewide quantity of residentially
generated recyclables, and consequently composition results for single stream materials do not include
quantities, only percentages. Due to lack of data availability, it also was beyond the scope of this study to
apply the composition percentages for other results sets to disposal tonnages.
2.4.2 RESIDENTIAL VS ICI BREAKDOWN
At the current time, there are no routinely reported data to indicate the fraction of disposed wastes
originating from Residential and ICI sources. In order to determine a reasonable estimate, the 2015
Study, like the 2010 Study, included a survey of incoming trucks at each of the host disposal facilities to
assess this split (hauler survey).

The purpose of the hauler survey was to provide a basis for allocating total mixed solid waste tons
disposed in Connecticut, as provided by CT DEEP, between residential and ICI wastes so that the
percent composition of each waste stream determined by hand sorting could be applied to total tons by
generator type at the state level. The following two rounds of hauler surveys, roughly corresponding to
the two season hand sorting, were completed.
CT - DEEP

2-3

 2. METHODOLOGY
 Season 1 (Spring Season) of Hauler Surveys began on Wednesday, May 13, 2015 and finished on
Wednesday, June 10, 2015. Team member DSM Environmental Services, Inc. (DSM) carried out
one day of hauler surveys at each of the five facilities participating in the waste composition study,
resulting in 272 completed surveys. The number of completed surveys at some participating facilities
were limited due to the fullness of tipping floors, resulting in less truck traffic and longer wait times
to enter the tipping floor.
 Season 2 (Summer Season) of Hauler Surveys started on Monday, August 24, 2015 and finished on
Tuesday, September 28, 2015. As was the case during Season 1, DSM carried out one day of hauler
surveys at each of the facilities participating in the waste composition study, resulting in 278
completed hauler surveys. The number of completed surveys was more evenly split among
participating facilities because the tipping floors were not as full as seen in Season 1.
Surveys were not carried out on transfer trailers, dump trucks, or private vehicles; only on roll-offs and
packer trucks carrying municipal solid waste (MSW). Loads containing bulky waste, C&D debris, or
‘other waste’ were eliminated from completed surveys because hand sorting did not include bulky waste
loads or C&D wastes, and therefore the MSW allocation is for residential and ICI waste only.
The following bullets describe the surveying carried out at each host disposal facility:

 Wheelabrator Bridgeport RRF: Season 1 hauler surveys were performed on Wednesday, May 13,
2015 at the Bridgeport facility resulting in 26 hauler surveys. Season 2 had 42 completed hauler
surveys at the Bridgeport facility during the afternoon of Monday, September 21, 2015 and the
morning of Tuesday, September 22, 2015 resulting in one full surveying day. Season 1 drivers
reported waiting two to four hours to tip due to the fullness of the tipping floor. The limited
number of Season 1 hauler surveys reflect the full tipping floor and the lack of trucks entering the
facility that were not transfer trailers. Season 2 saw an increase in hauler surveys with a decrease in
average wait times.
 New Haven Municipal Transfer Station: A total of 24 hauler surveys were obtained during
Season 1 at the New Haven Municipal Transfer Station on Thursday, May 14, 2015 and 24 hauler
surveys during Season 2 on Thursday, August 27, 2015. Season 1 surveys included ‘Bulky’ waste
coming in from dormitory cleanouts at Yale University; these surveys were ultimately excluded from
the analysis. Drivers did not have to wait to tip at the New Haven Municipal Transfer Station and it
appeared that the tipping floor was not full. The majority of haulers using the New Haven
Municipal Transfer Station were from the City of New Haven, or private haulers that service the
Yale University campus.
 MIRA Connecticut Mid-Connecticut (Hartford) RRF: A total of 112 hauler surveys were
obtained during Season 1 at the MIRA Connecticut Solid Waste System (Hartford) RRF on
Thursday, June 4, 2015 and 75 driver surveys during Season 2 on August 26, 2015. The day prior to
surveying for Season 1, MIRA had stopped accepting trucks in the early afternoon to ‘catch up’ with
the amount of waste on the tipping floor. Due to this early closure they were able to accept more
trucks at a lower wait time on the day the survey took place. The number of surveys completed at
MIRA Hartford during Season 2 may reflect a more typical delivery day at the facility
 Bristol RRF: Forty-three (43) hauler surveys were obtained during Season 1 at the Bristol RRF on
Friday, June 5, 2014 and 59 surveys during Season 2 on Monday, August 24, 2015. During Season 1
drivers were reporting a wait time upwards of five hours due to the fullness of the tipping room
floor. Season 2 saw significantly decreased wait times for drivers, and an increase in truck surveys.
 Covanta Preston RRF – Two partial days of hauler surveys were performed at the Covanta
(Preston) facility during Season 1 on Tuesday, June 9, 2015 and Wednesday, June 10, 2015 resulting
in a total of 67 hauler surveys; and 78 hauler surveys at Covanta (Preston) on Monday, September
28th, 2015 during Season 2. Preston did not see a significant change in wait times, or completed
surveys between Season 1 and Season 2.
2-4

CT - DEEP

 2. METHODOLOGY
For the surveys, each hauler’s truck number was matched with the corresponding weight ticket so that
the surveys could be tabulated by tonnage rather than number of loads observed. Table 2-4 provides the
results of the hauler surveys.
Table 2-4 Hauler Survey Results
Survey Summary
No. of
Tonnage of Percent of
Trucks
Trucks
Total
Surveyed
Surveyed
Tonnage

Facility

Generator
Residential

ICI

Wheelabrator Bridgeport, RRF

68

673

15.3%

58.7%

41.3%

New Haven Municipal Transfer Station

48

323

7.3%

58.8%

41.2%

MIRA, Mid-CT (Hartford) RRF

187

1593

36.2%

51.7%

48.3%

Bristol RRF
Covanta, Preston RRF

102
145

829
979

18.9%
22.3%

75.6%
54.5%

24.4%
45.5%

550

4,397

100%

58.4%

41.6%

Total

As presented in Table 2-4, truck surveys at MIRA, Mid-Connecticut (Hartford) RRF represent 36
percent of total truck tons captured during the surveys, with the next closest facility (Covanta, Preston
RRF) representing another 22 percent. Combined, these two facilities represent 58 percent of the total
truck tons surveyed, somewhat influencing the residential versus commercial allocation. As illustrated by
Table 2-4, with the exception of the Bristol RRF, all of the participating facilities had an incoming
residential percentage (excluding transfer trailer waste) between 51% and 59% and a commercial
percentage between 41% and 49%.
It should be noted that the statewide allocation found in the 2010 Study 56%/44% residential/ICI,
compared to the 58%/42% found in 2015. These results suggest that the mix of Residential and ICI
wastes at these five host facilities have remained relatively consistent since the 2010 Study.
However, as cautioned in the 2010 waste characterization report, the above allocation is based on truck
surveys of waste delivered to in-state facilities, many of which have contracts with municipalities.
Because municipalities control primarily residential waste, it is likely that the hauler surveys at these
facilities under-represent ICI waste. As such, the waste composition results may be influenced by
decisions of haulers to haul certain wastes to in-state facilities and transfer other waste to out-of-state
facilities. This is an unknown variable that could influence the state-wide results. Therefore it is
important to keep in mind in reviewing the data in this report that it is statistically representative of waste
delivered to the host facilities, and that we have extrapolated these data to total tons disposed in-state,
ignoring waste delivered out-of-state.
2.4.3 DISPOSAL QUANTITIES BY DEMOGRAPHIC REGION
At the request of DEEP, the 2015 Study sought to differentiate waste composition from urban,
suburban and rural areas of the State. The U.S. Census Bureau classifies as “Urban” all territory,
population, and housing units located within urbanized areas (UAs) and urban clusters (UCs). It
delineates UA and UC boundaries to encompass densely settled territory, which generally consists of:

 A cluster of one or more block groups or census blocks each of which has a population density of at
least 1,000 people per square mile at the time, and
 Surrounding block groups and census blocks each of which has a population density of at least 500
people per square mile at the time, and
 Less densely settled blocks that form enclaves or indentations, or are used to connect dis-contiguous
areas with qualifying densities.

CT - DEEP

2-5

 2. METHODOLOGY
“Rural” has been classified as all territory, population, and housing units located outside of UAs and
UCs. Geographic entities, such as metropolitan areas, counties, minor civil divisions (MCDs), and
places, often contain both urban and rural territory, population, and housing units.
For the 2015 Study, DEEP classified every city and town in Connecticut as being Urban, Suburban or
Rural. Table 2-5 summarizes the population, square mileage and population density of each
demographic type based on the DEEP data. As shown, the majority of the state’s population resides in
municipalities that meet the definition of an Urban location.
Table 2-5 Disposal Quantities by Demographic Region
2013
Population

Origin
Urban

Population
Density
(persons/sq. mi.)

Area (sq. mi.)

2,268,865

978.9

2,318

Suburban

649,263

893.8

726

Rural

677,952

2,973.2

228

3,596,080

4,845.9

742

Total

Appendix A contains a detailed listing of the demographic assignment of each town and city in
Connecticut.

2.5 SAMPLING TARGETS
The 2015 Study targeted substantially more samples than the 2010 Study as a result of the addition of the
single stream recycling and ICI generator samples. Table 2-6 summarizes the 2015 sampling targets by
facility and waste type, as well as the actual number of samples obtained.
Table 2-6 Sampling Targets by Host Facility
Material Stream
Disposed Waste

Host Facility

Planned
Samples
48

Actual
Samples
48

Variance

Wheelabrator Bridgeport RRF

48

48

0

New Haven Municipal Transfer Station

48

48

0

Covanta Preston RRF

48

52

+4

Bristol Resource Recovery Facility (RRF)

MIRA Hartford RRF

48

51

+3

240

247

+7

MIRA Hartford Material Recovery Facility (MRF)

40

37

-3

Willimantic Waste Paper MRF

40

43

+3

80

80

0

Grocery

8

8

0

Restaurant

8

8

0

Hotel

8

2

-6

Retail Establishments – Big Box

8

3

-5

Retail Establishments – Small

8

13

+5

Office

8

8

0

48

43

-6

368

370

+1

Subtotal – Disposed Wastes
Single Stream
Recyclables

Subtotal – Single Stream Recyclables
ICI Generator
Types

0

Subtotal – Generator Samples
Total

2-6

CT - DEEP

 2. METHODOLOGY
As shown, the Project Team met overall sampling and sorting targets. However, the following anomalies
are noted:

 Difficulty Obtaining ICI Generator Samples: The Project Team’s strategy for obtaining ICI
generator samples involved recruiting haulers to run special routes; or capturing targeted wastes from
roll-off compactor boxes from the desired ICI sector identified during the hauler survey and random
sampling. In practice, it was not possible to achieve the precise distribution of ICI generator
samples as originally targeted, for the following reasons:
 On more than one occasion, unforeseen schedule changes eliminated previously scheduled ICI
generator routes from being delivered on a scheduled day.
 Recruited haulers’ first obligation is to get their primary routes collected; and on at least one
occasion, staffing shortages at the participating hauler on the day of a scheduled ICI generator
route caused cancellation of the delivery.
 Surprisingly, the Project Team found very few roll-off compactor boxes originating in retail bigbox stores. It is not known if there are simply fewer big box stores in Connecticut that use
compactor boxes (as opposed to dumpsters serviced by front loaders) or if these loads are being
delivered to other disposal facilities within or outside the state.
 Mis-characterized Single Stream Samples: In the first season, three of 40 single stream samples
taken at MIRA Hartford Recycling Center were later found to be from commercial sources, not
residential, and were omitted from the analysis. These three residential samples were made up in the
second season MRF sort (at Willimantic).
 No Seasonality for MIRA RRF Samples: Although not shown in Table 2-6, no sampling was
performed at the MIRA RRF in the first season due to insufficient space available for obtaining
samples on the facility tip floor.
To overcome the issues above, the Project Team maintained planned sampling and sorting productivity
and collected additional random samples in cases where ICI generator samples could not be captured,
allowing overall sampling targets to be met.
2.6 MATERIAL CATEGORIES AND GROUPS
Samples of waste were manually sorted into the same material categories as the 2010 Study, with the
following exceptions:
 Aseptic boxes and gable top cartons were added as a new category,
 Food waste still contained in packaging was added as a new category,
 Flexible (film) plastic packaging (including pouches) was added as a new category,
 Diapers and sanitary products were added as a new category, and
 Offshore Cardboard was consolidated into the Old Corrugated Cardboard category.
The resulting 72 material categories and detailed definitions used for the waste characterization study are
shown in Table 2-7.

CT - DEEP

2-7

 2. METHODOLOGY
Table 2-7 Material Categories for Disposed Waste
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous

These material categories were condensed for the single stream recycling composition analysis. While all
categories of targeted recyclables were sorted in both the refuse and recycling composition analysis,
many categories that are considered “reject” or “contaminant” at a MRF were consolidated.
Additionally, the categories of “Bagged Newspaper” and “Bagged Wastes” were added to the recycled
material categories to account for these common contaminants at MRFs. The 46 categories used for the
single stream composition analysis are included in Table 2-8.

2-8

CT - DEEP

 2. METHODOLOGY
Table 2-8 Material Categories for Single Stream Recycling
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Non-Recyclable Paper
Newspaper, Bagged
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene
Bulky Plastic Items
Plastic Films
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
CT Deposit Glass Beverage Containers
Flat Glass
Broken Glass

Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Organics
Food Waste
Yard Waste
Construction & Demolition Materials
C&D Debris
Wood
Household Hazardous Waste (HHW)
HHW
Empty HHW Containers
Electronics
Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Other Miscellaneous
Bagged Wastes

Detailed definitions of the disposed waste and single stream recycling material categories are contained in
Appendix B.

2.7

SAMPLING METHODS

2.7.1 RANDOM SAMPLING
The Field Supervisor followed a systematic selection procedure to identify residential and ICI waste
vehicles for sampling. To calculate vehicle sampling frequency for each waste sector, the Project Team
established a sampling interval for each based on input from the facility scalehouse each day. Sampling
intervals were determined by dividing the total expected number of loads for each sector arriving at the
facility on the scheduled day – based on questions asked of each facility in the planning phase of the
study – by the number of samples needed each day. The resulting number is the sampling frequency, and
determined whether every third vehicle, every sixth vehicle, or every 20th vehicle is selected for
sampling. This strategy is referred to as “selecting every nth vehicle” within a waste sector and subsector.
A Vehicle Selection Form is shown in Appendix C. It should be noted that, during the second season,
the sampling interval was informed by the results of the gate survey performed during the first season.

All vehicles entering the sampling facility were surveyed by the project Field Supervisor or at times a
weighmaster in the scalehouse. Information was recorded about the vehicle type, city of origin, and
waste type; and the net weight of each sampled load waste obtained.
Once a vehicle was selected for sampling, the Field Supervisor recorded the sample data and placed a
Sample Placard on the vehicle’s windshield or dashboard. The Sample Placard contained a sample
identification number, unique to every sample taken, that was recorded on the survey form and on the

CT - DEEP

2-9

 2. METHODOLOGY
sample data sheet kept by the sorting crew. Selected loads were directed to the tipping area where a
sample would be safely and accurately collected. Figure 2-2 shows a tipped load awaiting sampling.
Figure 2-2 Photograph of Tipped Load

During manual sorting, the Crew Chief would also note on the Hand-Sort Tally Sheet any unusual
circumstances associated with the load or the sample. In cases where an insufficient number of vehicles
were available for sampling at a disposal facility, the data collection crew would first change the nth
vehicle to reduce the number between samples or make up the missing samples at a different location.
This strategy could also be used when samples were missed for some other unforeseen reason. In all
cases, the sampling plan would assign the frequencies of vehicles to be selected in such a way as to
minimize the chance of “running out” of vehicles to represent a particular waste sector at a disposal
facility.
2.7.2 GRAB SAMPLES FROM TIPPED LOADS
Selected loads of waste were tipped in the designated area at each host facility. From each selected load,
one sample of waste was selected based on systematic “grab” from the load, treating the tipped load as a
clock face. For example, if the tipped pile was viewed from the top as a clock face with 12:00 being the
part of the load closest to the front of the truck, the first sample would be taken at the 12:00 position.
Subsequent samples would be taken from 3 o’clock, 6 o’clock, and 9 o’clock. For the next four loads, the
extraction point would shift to 1, 4, 7, and 10 o’clock, and so-on. This concept of systematically rotating
around subsequent loads is shown in Figure 2-3.

Figure 2-3 Systematic Sampling Guide for Tipped Loads

2-10

CT - DEEP

 2. METHODOLOGY
From each extraction point, the loader operator was instructed to take a grab sample. From each grab, a
sample weighing at least 200 pounds was extracted from the pile and pre-weighed (to verify that the
minimum sample weight had been achieved and to prevent sorting overly large samples, which would
diminish sorting productivity). Pre-weighed samples were loaded into barrels for placement on the sort
table, although bulky items were weighed and recorded separately (thereby eliminating the need to sort
them at the sort table). Prior to sorting, a sorting crew member took a photograph of each sample, with
the sample placard and identification number visible in the picture.
Depending upon the availability of host facility personnel, the Field Supervisor either collected the
sample directly from the bucket of the front-end loader, or directed the sample to be dumped on a tarp
or a paved surface. When collecting samples directly from the loader bucket, 35-gallon cans or carts
were arranged side-by-side on a tarp, with the loader bucket positioned directly overhead. The Field
Supervisor collected the sample systematically, by working from one side of the bucket to the other,
emptying all of the contents from the front of the bucket to the back, until the desired sample weight
was achieved. To help minimize sample collection bias, samples were collected from the loader bucket
in an alternating fashion, that is, working from the left side of the bucket to the right side for one
sample, and then from right to left on the next sample. A photograph of a sample in the loader bucket
is shown in Figure 2-4, with a sample queued and labeled for sorting is shown in Figure 2-5.
Figure 2-4 Sample in a Loader Bucket

Figure 2-5 Sample Queued for Sorting

CT - DEEP

2-11

 2. METHODOLOGY
2.7.3 SPECIAL GENERATOR SAMPLES
The same methodology was used for taking samples from ICI generator loads. However, because of the
need to recruit haulers to collect wastes from each generator category, the 2015 Study methodology
allowed up to four samples to be obtained from a single specially-collected load.
2.7.4 SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING SAMPLES
The same methodology was used for taking samples of single stream recyclables. However, singlestream recycling samples were targeted at 150 pounds rather than 200 pounds. Also, grab sampling of
single stream loads was slightly modified to capture representative material from the dense inner section
of the load and the lighter exterior of the tipped load. For the single stream loads, before the grab
sample was obtained, the Field Supervisor directed a loader or skid steer to cut off a cross section of the
tipped load, so that the inner section and outer edges was exposed, prior to taking the grab sample.
Grab samples were obtained systematically from the edge to the middle of successive cross sections.

2.8

MANUAL SORTING

2.8.1 SORTING PROCEDURE
Once each sample was acquired, the material was manually sorted into the prescribed component
categories. Plastic 20-gallon bins with sealed bottoms were used to contain the separated components. A
picture of a sample being sorted is shown in Figure 2-6.

Figure 2-6 Manual Sorting

Once the sample was acquired and placed on the sorting table, the material was sorted by hand into the
prescribed component categories. Plastic 20-gallon bins with sealed bottoms were used to contain the
separated components. Sorters were asked to specialize in certain material groups, with someone
handling the paper categories, another the plastics, another the glass and metals, and so on. In this way,
sorters became highly knowledgeable in a short period of time as to the definitions of individual material
categories.
The Crew Chief monitored the homogeneity of the component bins as they accumulated, rejecting
materials that were improperly classified. Open bins allowed the Crew Chief to see the material at all
times and verify the purity of each component as it was weighed, before recording the weight into the
database. The materials were sorted to particle size of 2 inches or less by hand, until no more than a
small amount of homogeneous fine material (―mixed residue‖) remained. This layer of mixed 2-inchminus material was allocated to the appropriate categories based on the best judgment of the Crew Chief
— most often a combination of Other Paper, Other Organics, or Food Waste. The overall goal was to
sort each sample directly into component categories in order to reduce the amount of indistinguishable
fines or miscellaneous categories.
2-12

CT - DEEP

 2. METHODOLOGY
It should be noted that this sorting method also included the use of a customized, sturdy-framed sorting
table that included a removable screen. The screen size was ½ inch, which allowed small particles to
pass through to a tray under the screen. These particles, or fines, were swept into their own category.
2.8.2 WEIGHING SORTED SAMPLES
The Crew Chief was singularly responsible for overseeing all weighing and data recording of each
manually sorted sample. Once each sample was sorted, and fines swept from the table, the weigh-out
was performed. Each bin containing sorted materials from the just completed samples was carried over
to the scale. Sorting laborers assisted with carrying and weighing the bins of sorted material, and the
Crew Chief recorded all data.

The Crew Chief used a waste composition data sheet to record the composition weights. Each data
sheet containing the sorted weights of each sample was matched up against the Field Supervisor’s sample
sheet to assure accurate tracking of the samples each day. Figure 2-7 shows the scale and a weigh-out in
progress.
Figure 2-7 Weigh-out

2.8.3 SORTING WET AND ORGANICS CONTAMINATED WASTE
During the sorting event, it was common to encounter materials that were contaminated or combined
with organics or liquids. In such situations, the contaminating material was removed to the extent
possible. All food was separated from other materials and all liquid, if beverage based, was removed
from containers and placed in the food waste bin for weighing.
2.8.4 SORTING PACKAGED FOODS
For the 2015 Study, packaged food was separated from food that was loose in the sample or contained in
a bag, box or other container for disposal. Packaged food included food that remained in its factory or
retail packaging, including jars, cans, clamshells, flexible packaging, and any other packaging.

It should be noted that food was removed from the packaging in all cases, except when it was not
practical to do so under normal sorting conditions. So, foods that could be easily emptied with the help
of gravity were removed; foods that were viscous and not easily removed (e.g., peanut butter,
mayonnaise) would remain in their packaging, as would all food still in its original packaging. Figure 2-8
shows packaged food from a food manufacturer (left) and loose food (right) from a grocery store load.

CT - DEEP

2-13

 2. METHODOLOGY
Figure 2-8 Classification of Food Waste

2.8.5 SITE MAINTENANCE AND CLEANUP
As guests at each of the host facilities, the Project Team took considerable effort to leave the work area
clean and safe for subsequent operations. The sorting crew was also responsible for keeping litter to a
minimum. The Project Team concluded each day of sorting operations with sufficient time to perform
site clean-up. Clean-up included the following types of activities:

 Organized stacking and stowing of sorting supplies in a designated location;
 Removal of sorted wastes for burial or transfer (the host facility loader operator would help with
this);
 Sweeping and cleaning the sort area to prevent windblown litter and other situations that could
attract vectors;
 Removal and discard of day-use personal protective equipment and decontaminating personnel;
 Checking out with the Facility Manager each day; and
 Covering any unsorted samples with a tarp, to leave for manual sorting the next day.
2.9

DATA ANALYSIS

2.9.1 QA/QC PROCEDURE
The collection process followed a well-established set of quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)
strategies to ensure data accuracy and integrity. The QA/QC process involved the following procedures:

 Assigning a unique combination sample number, facility of origin, date and time to each sample, and
transferring that information to the tally sheet that was used to record material weights for the
sample.
 Encoding the type of waste load into the sample number. For example, on a particular date, samples
of commercial waste would be numbered Com-1, Com-2, etc.
 Using the vehicle selection form to track the numbers of each type of load obtained and sampled.
 Verifying that data forms were obtained for each day the data collection crew was in the field.
 Designing the data entry databases to prevent out-of-range values for vehicle and sample
characteristics such as vehicle type, net weight, etc.
 Random checks of computer-entered data against the paper forms, to verify that all numbers were
being entered correctly, and to look for any systematic or random errors.
2-14

CT - DEEP

 2. METHODOLOGY
Following each season of fieldwork, all field forms were transmitted to MSW Consultants’ office and
entered into a waste composition database created specifically for the Connecticut Statewide Study.
After the sample tally sheets were checked by the Field Supervisor, the data manager verified that all
required data was recorded properly and also supervised the data entry process. As an additional step in
quality control, an inspection of randomly selected records was carried out to monitor the accuracy of
the data entry process.
2.9.2 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Generally, the waste composition calculations and the aggregation across groups was completed as
follows. Composition estimates represented the ratio of the components’ weight to the total waste
for each noted material component in a particular segment of the waste stream. They were derived by
summing each component’s weight across all of the relevant samples and dividing by the sum of the
total weight of waste, as shown in the following equation:

c

w

ij

rj

i

i

i

where:
c = weight of particular material component
w = sum of all component weights
for i = 1 to n
where n = number of selected samples
for j = 1 to m
where m = number of material components

The confidence interval for this estimate was derived in two steps. First, the variance around the estimate
was calculated, accounting for the fact that the ratio included two random variables (the component and
total sample weights). The variance of the ratio estimator equation follows:


1
1




Vrj      2   
 n  w  



 c

ij

 r j wi



2

i

n 1








where:

w

i

w

i

n

(Note: the standard deviation is the square root of the variance term.)
Second, confidence intervals at the 90% confidence level were calculated for a component’s mean as
follows:



r j  t  Vrj



where:
t = the value of the t-statistic corresponding to a 90% confidence level

CT - DEEP

2-15

 2. METHODOLOGY
A weighted average of composition percents was used when the findings for small segments of the waste
stream were aggregated to describe a larger piece of the waste stream. The weighted average for an
aggregated composition estimate was performed as follows:





O j  p1 * rj1  ( p2 * rj 2 )  ( p3 * rj 3 )...

where:
p = the proportion of tonnage contributed by the noted substream (i.e., the weighting factor)
r = ratio of component weight to total waste weight in the noted substream (i.e., the composition percent
for the given material component)
for j = 1 to m
where m = number of material components

The variance of the weighted average was calculated:
VarO j  ( p12 * Vrj 1 )  ( p2 2 * Vrj 2 )  ( p3 2 * Vrj 3 )...

(Note: the standard deviation is the square root of the variance term.)

2-16

CT - DEEP

 3.

STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS

3.1 STATEWIDE AGGREGATE MSW COMPOSITION
Figure 3-1 shows the composition and tonnage of disposed wastes in 2015, aggregating the Residential
and ICI generator sectors. As shown, Paper and Food Waste are the most common material groups.
Figure 3-1 Municipal Solid Waste Composition and Quantities Disposed (tons)
Electronics Other Wastes
291,940
11,906
12.5%
0.5%
Household
Hazardous
Waste
16,943
0.7%
C&D Debris
276,995
11.9%

Paper
539,493
23.1%

Plastic
275,613
11.8%

Other Organics
258,922
11.1%

Metal
82,443
3.5%
Food Waste
519,832
22.3%

Glass
58,512
2.5%

Figure 3-2 compares the composition in 2015 with the same result from the 2010 Study. The most
noteworthy change in the waste stream since 2010 is the heightened fraction of Food Waste remaining in
disposed wastes, along with relatively lower incidence of most other materials. This will be discussed in
more detail in the Residential and ICI results sections later in this chapter. It should be noted that when
data are presented in percentages, a significant change in the percent of one fraction of the waste stream
automatically results in a change in the percentages of all other materials. For example, the large increase
in food waste drives down the percentage composition of other materials.

CT - DEEP

3-1

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Figure 3-2 Comparison of 2010 and 2015 MSW Composition
30.0%
25.9%

25.0%

23.1%

22.3%

20.0%
14.7%

15.0%

13.5%

11.8%

13.2%
11.1%

14.1%
11.9%

12.5%
9.3%

10.0%
4.5%

5.0%

3.5%

2.1% 2.5%

0.5% 0.7%

2.1%

0.5%

2010

Other Wastes

Electronics

HHW

C&D Debris

Other Organics

Food Waste

Glass

Metal

Plastic

Paper

0.0%

2015

Figure 3-3 shows the breakdown of recoverable materials within the disposed MSW stream. This figure
categorizes materials as they would be separated in a residential curbside program with separate recycling,
organics, and trash collection.1
Figure 3-3 Recoverability of Disposed Wastes in Existing Curbside/On-site Collection Programs
Recyclable Fiber,
11.2%
Recyclable
Containers, 4.7%
Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Curbside
Collection
Program, 41.3%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 1.3%

Compostable
Organics, 41.4%

The above figure highlights a number of important findings:

In practice, there are many materials included in the red pie piece in Figure 3-3 that are readily recyclable or recoverable
in an organics program. This figure intends only to show the limitations of recycling and organics diversion through
curbside collection.
1

3-2

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
 The fraction of targeted curbside recyclables – dry fiber and plastic, metal and glass containers –
remaining in the waste stream is a relatively small piece of the pie at a combined 15.9 percent.
 Compostable organics – which include food wastes, green wastes, and some compostable papers – are
quite significant at 41.4 percent. However, it is important to note that these materials may not be
easily source- separated prior to disposal, nor separated from disposed wastes such that they could be
recovered for feedstock in a plant designed to manage organic wastes.
 Even with significantly enhanced capture of targeted fiber, recyclable containers, and organics, over
41 percent of the disposed waste stream is not readily recyclable in existing curbside (or on-site
commercial) recycling programs without:
 Adding materials to the existing programs,
 Making better use of other outlets for diverting materials (home composting, scrap metal recyclers,
reuse stores, etc.)
 Adding new recycling programs possibly in conjunction with development of local markets to
accept such materials.
It is also critical to note that the above figure represents the rosiest possible definition of what is
“recoverable” in existing programs. Manual sorters were trained to separate all items for placement in the
correct category, and did not make any adjustments for contamination of sorted materials, nor the ability
of a mechanical processing system to accurately separate such materials for recovery. The results of this
exercise can be considered an “academic” characterization of the wastes stream. Many of the recyclable
and compostable organic items would never be recovered or diverted because of contamination, or
because they are so intermingled with non-recoverable items prior to placement in the waste receptacle (or
as a result of the collection process) that no processing line could economically separate and recover the
item.

CT - DEEP

3-3

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Figure 3-4 shows the top 10 most prevalent materials in the MSW stream in both the 2010 and 2015
Studies. As shown, the most prevalent material in both studies was Food Waste and Compostable Paper,
although the incidence of both has increased in 2015.
Figure 3-4 Comparison of 2015 and 2010 Top 10 Materials
25%

22.3%

20%

8.6%

10%

10.7%
5.8%
4.7%
4.7% 5.7% 4.1% 5.7%

5%

7.2%
4.3% 3.5% 3.7%

3.5%

3.6% 3.1%

2010

Other Recyclable Paper

Other Film

Leaves and Grass

Corrugated
Cardboard/Kraft Paper

Textiles

Wood – Treated

Compostable Paper

Food Waste

0%

Diapers & Sanitary
Products

0.0%

1.4%

3.0%

Bottom Fines and Dirt

15% 13.5%

2015

Table 3-1 on the following page provides a detailed statistical profile of the 2015 statewide aggregate
disposed waste stream. For each material category, the mean percent, confidence intervals, and estimated
tonnage are shown.
Confidence intervals are calculated at a 90 percent level of confidence. It should be noted that the sum of
the mean percentages for all of the individual materials within a material group sum to the mean percentage
shown for the group. For example, the sum of all of the paper materials is the same as the 23.1 percent
shown for Paper as a material group. However, the same does not hold true for the confidence intervals.
Confidence intervals are calculated individually for each row in this table; the sum of the confidence
intervals for each individual material will not equal the confidence interval for the material group as a
whole.

3-4

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Table 3-1 Detailed MSW Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
23.1%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
4.7%
0.6%
High Grade Office Paper
1.1%
0.3%
Magazines/Catalogs
0.8%
0.2%
Newsprint
1.4%
0.4%
Phone Books and Directories
0.1%
0.0%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.3%
0.1%
Other Recyclable Paper
3.1%
0.4%
Compostable Paper
10.7%
0.9%
Remainder/Composite Paper
0.9%
0.2%
Plastic
11.8%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.6%
0.1%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.2%
0.0%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.3%
0.0%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.5%
0.1%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.2%
0.1%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.7%
0.1%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.1%
0.0%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.5%
0.1%
Durable Plastic Items
0.8%
0.2%
Film (non-bag)
0.8%
0.1%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.7%
0.1%
Other Film
3.7%
0.3%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.2%
0.1%
Pallets – Plastic
0.1%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
2.3%
0.4%
Metal
3.5%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.4%
0.1%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.5%
0.1%
Other Ferrous
0.3%
0.1%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.2%
0.2%
Appliances
0.3%
0.3%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.2%
0.2%
Remainder/Composite Metal
1.4%
0.3%
Glass
2.5%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.1%
0.2%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.2%
0.1%
Deposit Glass
0.3%
0.1%
Flat Glass
0.1%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.8%
0.3%

Tons
539,493
109,601
26,511
18,902
32,276
2,207
5,990
72,116
249,829
22,061
275,613
13,378
5,634
7,293
12,018
5,009
17,433
2,897
11,700
19,693
18,318
16,902
85,934
4,077
1,627
53,701
82,443
2,502
3,062
8,619
11,553
7,085
5,076
6,932
4,045
33,567
58,512
25,100
4,513
7,311
1,841
19,746

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Tons
Food Waste
22.3%
519,832
Food Waste, Loose
19.5%
1.7%
455,450
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
2.8%
0.8%
64,382
Other Organics
11.1%
258,922
Branches and Stumps
0.5%
0.3%
11,722
Prunings and Trimmings
1.9%
0.6%
44,819
Leaves and Grass
4.3%
0.9%
100,548
Manures
0.2%
0.2%
5,082
Diapers & Sanitary Products
3.5%
0.6%
80,550
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.7%
0.2%
16,201
C&D Debris
11.9%
276,995
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.3%
0.3%
8,099
Wood – Treated
5.7%
1.1%
132,162
Wood – Untreated
1.7%
0.6%
39,953
Asphalt Roofing
0.3%
0.2%
6,642
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.6%
0.3%
13,932
Carpet
1.2%
0.5%
29,032
Carpet Padding
0.3%
0.2%
6,876
Remainder/Composite C&D
1.7%
0.6%
40,300
Household Hazardous Waste
0.7%
16,943
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
76
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
4
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
772
Paint
0.0%
0.0%
1,079
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
102
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.1%
0.1%
1,387
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.3%
0.1%
7,941
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
125
Other Hazardous Waste
0.2%
0.1%
5,458
Electronics
0.5%
11,906
Computer-related Electronics
0.1%
0.1%
2,624
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.3%
0.1%
6,472
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.0%
0.1%
923
Other Larger Electronics
0.1%
0.1%
1,885
Other Wastes
12.5%
291,940
Bulky Items
1.6%
0.7%
37,940
Textiles
5.7%
0.7%
131,904
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.0%
618
Bottom Fines and Dirt
3.0%
0.4%
70,709
Other Miscellaneous
2.2%
0.5%
50,768
Grand Total
100%
2,332,598
No. of Samples
247

Table 3-2 compares the composition and disposed MSW tonnage for 2015 and 2010.
Table 3-2 Comparison of Detailed MSW Composition

CT - DEEP

3-5

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Estimate Percent Composition
Material Category
2010
2015 Change
Paper
25.9% 23.1% -2.8%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
5.8%
4.7%
-1.1%
High Grade Office Paper
1.7%
1.1%
-0.6%
Magazines/Catalogs
1.3%
0.8%
-0.5%
Newsprint
2.0%
1.4%
-0.6%
Phone Books and Directories
0.3%
0.1%
-0.2%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
NA
0.3%
NA
Other Recyclable Paper
3.6%
3.1%
-0.5%
Compostable Paper
8.6%
10.7%
2.1%
Remainder/Composite Paper
2.5%
0.9%
-1.6%
Plastic
14.7% 11.8% -2.9%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.5%
0.6%
0.0%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.5%
0.3%
-0.1%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.5%
0.5%
0.1%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.5%
0.7%
0.3%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.8%
0.1%
-0.7%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.7%
0.5%
-0.2%
Durable Plastic Items
3.6%
0.8%
-2.8%
Film (non-bag)
0.6%
0.8%
0.2%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.5%
0.7%
0.2%
Other Film
3.5%
3.7%
0.2%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
NA
0.2%
NA
Pallets – Plastic
0.3%
0.1%
-0.2%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
2.4%
2.3%
-0.1%
Metal
4.5%
3.5%
-1.0%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
NA
0.4%
NA
Tin/Steel Containers
0.8%
0.5%
-0.3%
Other Ferrous
1.6%
0.3%
-1.3%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.6%
0.2%
-0.4%
Appliances
0.5%
0.3%
-0.2%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.7%
1.4%
0.7%
Glass
2.1%
2.5%
0.4%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.2%
1.1%
-0.1%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
Deposit Glass
0.3%
0.3%
0.0%
Flat Glass
0.2%
0.1%
-0.1%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.3%
0.8%
0.5%
Food Waste
13.5% 22.3%
8.8%
Food Waste, Loose
13.5%
19.5%
6.0%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
NA
2.8%
NA

Estimated Tons
2010
2015
Change
616,223
539,493 -76,730
138,240
109,601
-28,639
41,229
26,511
-14,717
30,570
18,902
-11,668
47,510
32,276
-15,234
7,797
2,207
-5,590
NA
5,990
NA
85,517
72,116
-13,401
205,542
249,829
44,288
59,819
22,061
-37,759
349,480
275,613 -73,867
12,531
13,378
847
3,126
5,634
2,508
10,734
7,293
-3,441
10,829
12,018
1,189
4,398
5,009
611
11,546
17,433
5,887
20,095
2,897
-17,197
16,021
11,700
-4,321
86,325
19,693
-66,633
13,329
18,318
4,989
11,823
16,902
5,079
83,478
85,934
2,456
NA
4,077
NA
6,989
1,627
-5,361
58,258
53,701
-4,557
107,475
82,443
-25,032
1,249
2,502
1,254
3,519
3,062
-457
NA
8,619
NA
18,878
11,553
-7,325
38,452
7,085
-31,367
14,936
5,076
-9,859
12,185
6,932
-5,252
1,849
4,045
2,195
16,408
33,567
17,160
51,065
58,512
7,447
27,659
25,100
-2,558
4,272
4,513
242
7,364
7,311
-53
3,621
1,841
-1,780
8,150
19,746
11,595
321,481
519,832 198,351
321,481
455,450 133,969
NA
64,382
NA

Table 3-2 Comparison of Detailed MSW Composition (continued)

3-6

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS

Material Category
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total

2010
13.2%
0.4%
2.2%
7.2%
0.2%
NA
3.2%
14.1%
0.1%
4.7%
2.7%
0.3%
0.6%
3.5%
0.8%
1.5%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.0%
0.2%
2.1%
0.4%
0.4%
1.0%
0.4%
9.3%
2.5%
4.1%
0.0%
1.4%
1.3%
100.0%

2015 Change
11.1% -2.1%
0.5%
0.1%
1.9%
-0.2%
4.3%
-2.9%
0.2%
0.0%
3.5%
NA
0.7%
-2.5%
11.9% -2.2%
0.3%
0.2%
5.7%
1.0%
1.7%
-1.0%
0.3%
0.0%
0.6%
0.0%
1.2%
-2.2%
0.3%
-0.5%
1.7%
0.3%
0.7%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.3%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.0%
0.5%
-1.6%
0.1%
-0.3%
0.3%
-0.2%
0.0%
-0.9%
0.1%
-0.3%
12.5%
3.2%
1.6%
-0.9%
5.7%
1.6%
0.0%
0.0%
3.0%
1.6%
2.2%
0.9%
100.0% 0.0%

2010
2015
314,734
258,922
10,149
11,722
51,550
44,819
172,408
100,548
5,432
5,082
NA
80,550
75,195
16,201
334,817
276,995
2,752
8,099
111,404
132,162
63,566
39,953
6,145
6,642
15,263
13,932
83,125
29,032
17,945
6,876
34,616
40,300
12,986
16,943
142
76
178
4
1,562
772
815
1,079
281
102
950
1,387
4,298
7,941
50
125
4,711
5,458
50,738
11,906
9,125
2,624
10,225
6,472
22,734
923
8,655
1,885
220,687
291,940
60,223
37,940
96,521
131,904
196
618
33,303
70,709
30,445
50,768
2,379,687 2,332,598

Change
-55,812
1,574
-6,731
-71,861
-350
NA
-58,993
-57,821
5,347
20,757
-23,612
497
-1,331
-54,093
-11,069
5,684
3,957
-66
-173
-790
264
-179
436
3,643
75
747
-38,833
-6,500
-3,752
-21,810
-6,770
71,253
-22,282
35,383
422
37,406
20,324
-47,089

3.1.1 FOOD WASTE IN PACKAGING
DEEP recognized that a significant fraction of food is discarded while still contained in packaging, and
that this still-packaged food waste may be problematic for some processors. Given the heightened interest
in the state at the current time in developing anaerobic digestion, composting, and other organics recovery
facilities in an attempt to increase diversion of organics, DEEP requested a closer analysis of food wastes.

In an effort to investigate the constraints of separating food, the 2015 Study attempted to differentiate
between (a) packaged food from (b) food that is loose in the sample or is contained in a bag, box or other

CT - DEEP

3-7

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
container for disposal. Packaged food includes food that is remaining in its factory or retail packaging,
including jars, cans, clamshells, flexible packaging, and any other packaging.
Table 3-3 summarizes the observed split between food that was found loose in the waste stream compared
to food that was discarded while still substantially contained in some form of packaging. Presumably the
12.4 percent of disposed food waste still contained in packaging would either not be available for capture
in many organics recovery systems, or else might diminish the performance of such systems.
Table 3-3 Analysis of Loose and Packaged Food in Connecticut Waste Stream
Tons
Material
Disposed Percent
Food Waste - Loose
455,450
88.6%
Food Waste - Emptied from Packaging
64,382
12.4%
100%
Total 519,832
It is critical to note that this study did not include food discarded in film plastic bags (including garbage
bags) as being “contained in packaging.” The manual sorting process for waste characterization studies is
very effective at fully separating food from all packaging and other materials – much more so than a
mechanical processing line would be expected to perform. Any processing system that is intending to
accept mixed wastes should expect to encounter a significantly higher fraction of food wastes that are not
easily separable without substantial resources devoted to the task.
3.1.2 FLEXIBLE FILM PACKAGING
DEEP also specified film pouches and other hard-to-recycle films as a material type of interest. Flexible
Film Packaging was defined in this study as:

Plastic film packaging that is multi-layered (laminated) with multiple resins, sometimes with flat
bottoms allowing pouch to stand on its own. May contain non-plastic foil layers and "tie-layers"
that bond or fuse different layers together. Mostly used for preserving food. Examples include
coffee bags, juice pouches, wine pouches, baby food, and some soap or detergent pouches.
Significant growth in the use of flexible film packaging has been widely reported, due to its attractive
lifecycle environmental and economic profile. The 2015 Study tested the incidence of flexible film
packaging on the disposed waste stream.
Summary data are shown in Table 3-4. As shown in this table, flexible film packaging was found to be
almost negligible in the disposed waste stream, at approximately 0.2% and just over 4,000 tons statewide.
Of particular interest, flexible film packaging makes up only 1.5 percent of all plastics in disposed wastes.
Given that one of the primary objectives of flexible film packaging is to greatly reduce the weight associated
with transporting packaged food and other goods, it is perhaps not surprising that this type of packaging
makes up such a small fraction of the waste stream.
Table 3-4 Analysis of Flexible Film Packaging in Connecticut Waste Stream
Material
Percentage
Tons
All Plastics
11.8% 275,613
Flexible Plastic Packaging
0.2%
4,077
Flexible Plastic Packaging as a
1.5%
Percentage of All Plastics

3-8

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
3.2 STATEWIDE RESIDENTIAL WASTE COMPOSITION
Figure 3-5 shows the composition and tonnage of Residential wastes in 2015. As shown, Paper and Food
Waste are the most common material groups, although significant contributions come from Other Wastes,
Other Organics, C&D Debris and Plastics.
Figure 3-5 2015 Residential Waste Composition and Disposed Quantities (tons)
Electronics
5,417
0.4%

Other Wastes
211,338
15.5%

Paper
273,036
20.0%

Household
Hazardous
Waste
10,487
0.8%
C&D Debris
167,408
12.3%

Plastic
146,175
10.7%

Other Organics
197,491
14.5%

Food Waste
272,656
20.0%

Metal
40,029
2.9%
Glass
38,526
2.8%

Figure 3-6 compares the composition of Residential waste in 2015 with the same result from the 2010
Study. Although it was beyond the scope of this study to determine the causes of observed changes in the
waste stream, these findings suggest that expansion of curbside single stream recycling has successfully
reduced the incidence of targeted recyclables in the disposed waste stream. A side effect of increased
recycling – observed in many other waste characterization studies that have been updated in the past three
years – is that the percentage of Food Waste, C&D Debris, and Other wastes is significantly higher as
targeted recyclables are removed from the stream.
Figure 3-6 Comparison of 2015 and 2010 Residential Waste Composition
30.0%
25.0%

25.2%

20.0%

20.0%

20.0%

15.5%

14.5%

13.7%

12.9%
10.7%

15.0%

18.4%
12.3%
10.6%

10.1%

10.0%
4.6%

5.0%

2.9% 2.2% 2.8%

0.4% 0.8%

2.0%
0.4%

2010

CT - DEEP

3-9

2015

Other Wastes

Electronics

HHW

C&D Debris

Other Organics

Food Waste

Glass

Metal

Plastic

Paper

0.0%

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Figure 3-7 below shows the mean percentage of recoverable materials in the residential waste stream. The
“Not Currently Recoverable” portion includes materials that are potentially recoverable, but are not
targeted in residential single stream recycling programs. Readers are encouraged to review the discussion
surrounding Figure 3-3 for additional consideration about how to interpret the data in Figure 3-7.
Figure 3-7 Recoverability of Residential Wastes in Existing Curbside Programs
Recyclable Fiber,
9.4%
Recyclable
Containers, 4.8%
Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Curbside
Collection
Program, 44.5%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 1.0%

Compostable
Organics, 40.3%

Figure 3-8 compares the top ten most prevalent materials in the 2015 and 2010 Studies. This figure
highlights the significant increase in the contribution of food waste. This figure also shows a significant
reduction in Leaves and Grass; it must be noted that some of this difference may be attributable to the
different seasons in which sorting was performed in each Study, and whether heavy generation of grass
clippings (spring) and leaves (fall) were or were not captured during the sampling periods.
Figure 3-8 Comparison of 2015 and 2010 Top 10 Materials – Residential Sector
25%

13.7%
10.7%
5.8%

4.3%

4.2% 3.6%

0.0%

Leaves and Grass

Wood – Treated

Textiles

Compostable Paper

Food Waste

0%

2010

3-10

1.8%

3.5% 3.9% 3.2% 3.1% 2.9%

Prunings and Trimmings

5%

6.3%
3.8%

Other Film

5.4%

7.4%

Bottom Fines and Dirt

10.2% 9.6%

10%

Other Recyclable Paper

15%

20.0%

Diapers & Sanitary
Products

20%

2015

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS

Table 3-5 provides a detailed statistical profile of the statewide disposed Residential waste stream.
Table 3-5 Detailed Residential Waste Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
20.0%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
2.1%
0.4%
High Grade Office Paper
0.8%
0.2%
Magazines/Catalogs
0.9%
0.2%
Newsprint
1.9%
0.7%
Phone Books and Directories
0.1%
0.1%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.2%
0.1%
Other Recyclable Paper
3.6%
0.5%
Compostable Paper
9.6%
0.8%
Remainder/Composite Paper
0.8%
0.2%
Plastic
10.7%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.6%
0.1%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.3%
0.0%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.3%
0.0%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.6%
0.1%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.1%
0.0%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.7%
0.1%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.1%
0.0%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.5%
0.1%
Durable Plastic Items
0.6%
0.2%
Film (non-bag)
0.5%
0.1%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.9%
0.1%
Other Film
3.2%
0.3%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.2%
0.0%
Pallets – Plastic
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
2.2%
0.5%
Metal
2.9%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.4%
0.1%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.5%
0.1%
Other Ferrous
0.2%
0.1%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.3%
0.3%
Appliances
0.1%
0.1%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Metal
1.1%
0.3%
Glass
2.8%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.2%
0.3%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.2%
0.1%
Deposit Glass
0.3%
0.1%
Flat Glass
0.1%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Glass
1.0%
0.5%

Tons
273,036
28,551
10,631
12,206
26,157
1,548
2,892
48,870
130,759
11,422
146,175
8,068
3,447
3,856
8,056
1,213
9,294
1,066
7,271
8,411
7,481
12,262
43,487
2,105
178
29,979
40,029
1,640
1,826
5,173
7,415
3,356
4,291
1,125
62
15,139
38,526
15,881
2,954
3,668
1,756
14,266

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Tons
Food Waste
20.0%
272,656
Food Waste, Loose
17.8%
1.9%
242,767
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
2.2%
0.4%
29,889
Other Organics
14.5%
197,491
Branches and Stumps
0.7%
0.4%
9,968
Prunings and Trimmings
2.9%
1.0%
38,900
Leaves and Grass
5.8%
1.3%
79,262
Manures
0.1%
0.2%
1,766
Diapers & Sanitary Products
4.3%
0.8%
58,381
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.7%
0.2%
9,215
C&D Debris
12.3%
167,408
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.4%
0.4%
5,322
Wood – Treated
6.3%
1.6%
86,020
Wood – Untreated
1.3%
0.6%
18,011
Asphalt Roofing
0.2%
0.2%
3,353
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.5%
0.3%
7,461
Carpet
1.7%
0.8%
22,491
Carpet Padding
0.5%
0.4%
6,453
Remainder/Composite C&D
1.3%
0.5%
18,297
Household Hazardous Waste
0.8%
10,487
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
33
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
2
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
632
Paint
0.1%
0.1%
727
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
88
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.1%
0.1%
1,239
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.3%
0.2%
4,768
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
125
Other Hazardous Waste
0.2%
0.1%
2,872
Electronics
0.4%
5,417
Computer-related Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
216
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.3%
0.1%
4,138
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.0%
0.0%
232
Other Larger Electronics
0.1%
0.1%
830
Other Wastes
15.5%
211,338
Bulky Items
2.2%
1.0%
29,310
Textiles
7.4%
0.9%
101,413
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.0%
235
Bottom Fines and Dirt
3.5%
0.6%
47,332
Other Miscellaneous
2.4%
0.6%
33,049
Grand Total
100%
1,362,563
No. of Samples
136

The following observations can be made about the results in Table 3-5:

 Curbside Recycling: The incidence of recyclable paper (including OCC) and containers is relatively
low, suggesting that the curbside programs that have been implemented in Connecticut have made an
impact at diverting these materials from disposal.
 Diversity of Plastic Waste: The diversity of plastic resins, packaging types, durable product types,
and overall uses remains high as in the 2010 Study.
 Food Waste: Food waste is the most significant material in the residential waste stream, by weight,
with most of the food being disposed after removal from its original packaging (although often re-

CT - DEEP

3-11

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS







wrapped in plastic or other packaging and placed in plastics trash bags). Experience has shown that
recovery of food waste is costly, both from a collection and a processing standpoint, and therefore
recovery projections should err on the conservative side.
C&D Debris: A meaningful fraction of C&D debris, mostly associated with home renovation
projects, is disposed in residential waste.
Electronic Waste: There was very little electronic waste, suggesting that programs available to divert
these materials are successful keeping them out of landfills.
HHW: Similarly, the incidence of HHW is quite low, with much of this group attributable to the
empty HHW containers which contain a significant amount of the weight.
Compostability of Other Organics: Although this category is significant, only the green waste
categories are compostable. It is not clear if the seasonality of sampling events impacted the incidence
of these green waste categories.
Problem Materials: There are still a number of materials that are commonly disposed that cannot
be readily diverted. These include Diapers and Sanitary Products, Treated Wood, Fines, and a number
of “remainder and composite” (catch-all) categories.

3-12

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Table 3-6 compares Residential waste stream composition in 2010 and 2015.
Table 3-6 Comparison of 2010 and 2015 Residential Waste Composition
Estimate Percent Composition
Material Category
2010
2015 Change
Paper
25.2% 20.0% -5.1%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
2.7%
2.1%
-0.6%
High Grade Office Paper
1.5%
0.8%
-0.7%
Magazines/Catalogs
1.6%
0.9%
-0.7%
Newsprint
2.3%
1.9%
-0.4%
Phone Books and Directories
0.3%
0.1%
-0.2%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
NA
0.2%
NA
Other Recyclable Paper
4.2%
3.6%
-0.6%
Compostable Paper
10.2%
9.6%
-0.6%
Remainder/Composite Paper
2.4%
0.8%
-1.6%
Plastic
12.9% 10.7% -2.2%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.6%
0.6%
0.0%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.2%
0.3%
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.2%
0.3%
0.1%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.5%
0.6%
0.1%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.2%
0.1%
-0.1%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.5%
0.7%
0.2%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.8%
0.5%
-0.2%
Durable Plastic Items
2.8%
0.6%
-2.2%
Film (non-bag)
0.4%
0.5%
0.1%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.7%
0.9%
0.2%
Other Film
3.9%
3.2%
-0.7%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
NA
0.2%
NA
Pallets – Plastic
0.1%
0.0%
-0.1%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
2.0%
2.2%
0.2%
Metal
4.6%
2.9%
-1.6%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
NA
0.4%
NA
Tin/Steel Containers
0.9%
0.5%
-0.4%
Other Ferrous
1.5%
0.2%
-1.2%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.8%
0.3%
-0.5%
Appliances
0.7%
0.1%
-0.6%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.5%
1.1%
0.6%
Glass
2.2%
2.8%
0.6%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.3%
1.2%
-0.1%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
Deposit Glass
0.3%
0.3%
0.0%
Flat Glass
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.5%
1.0%
0.5%
Food Waste
13.7% 20.0%
6.3%
Food Waste, Loose
13.7%
17.8%
4.1%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
NA
2.2%
NA

CT - DEEP

3-13

Estimated Tons
2010
335,752
35,683
19,445
21,787
30,903
4,163
NA
55,594
136,111
32,065
172,626
7,779
2,076
2,942
6,691
2,018
7,041
1,196
10,160
37,782
5,678
9,005
51,880
NA
1,423
26,953
60,953
866
1,507
NA
12,297
19,389
10,818
8,934
116
7,026
29,921
16,862
2,279
3,760
293
6,729
183,112
183,112
NA

2015
Change
273,036 -62,716
28,551
-7,132
10,631
-8,814
12,206
-9,581
26,157
-4,746
1,548
-2,615
2,892
NA
48,870
-6,724
130,759
-5,352
11,422
-20,644
146,175 -26,451
8,068
289
3,447
1,371
3,856
914
8,056
1,364
1,213
-805
9,294
2,253
1,066
-130
7,271
-2,889
8,411
-29,371
7,481
1,803
12,262
3,257
43,487
-8,393
2,105
NA
178
-1,244
29,979
3,026
40,029
-20,924
1,640
774
1,826
319
5,173
NA
7,415
-4,881
3,356
-16,033
4,291
-6,527
1,125
-7,809
62
-54
15,139
8,113
38,526
8,605
15,881
-980
2,954
676
3,668
-92
1,756
1,463
14,266
7,538
272,656
89,544
242,767
59,655
29,889
NA

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Table 3-6 Comparison of 2010 and 2015 Residential Waste Composition (continued)
Material Category
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total

2010
18.4%
0.3%
3.1%
10.7%
0.3%
NA
4.0%
10.6%
0.0%
3.8%
0.5%
0.1%
0.7%
4.0%
0.4%
1.1%
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.1%
2.0%
0.1%
0.6%
1.1%
0.2%
10.1%
2.2%
5.4%
0.0%
1.8%
0.7%
100.0%

3-14

2015 Change
14.5% -3.9%
0.7%
0.4%
2.9%
-0.2%
5.8%
-4.9%
0.1%
-0.2%
4.3%
NA
0.7%
-3.3%
12.3%
1.7%
0.4%
0.3%
6.3%
2.5%
1.3%
0.8%
0.2%
0.2%
0.5%
-0.1%
1.7%
-2.3%
0.5%
0.1%
1.3%
0.3%
0.8%
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.3%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.4%
-1.6%
0.0%
-0.1%
0.3%
-0.2%
0.0%
-1.1%
0.1%
-0.1%
15.5%
5.4%
2.2%
0.0%
7.4%
2.1%
0.0%
0.0%
3.5%
1.7%
2.4%
1.7%
100.0% 0.0%

2010
2015
Change
244,976
197,491 -47,485
4,139
9,968
5,828
41,384
38,900
-2,484
142,441
79,262
-63,179
3,928
1,766
-2,163
NA
58,381
NA
53,084
9,215
-43,869
141,057
167,408
26,350
665
5,322
4,657
51,222
86,020
34,797
7,225
18,011
10,785
698
3,353
2,655
8,969
7,461
-1,507
53,008
22,491
-30,517
5,007
6,453
1,446
14,263
18,297
4,035
5,147
10,487
5,340
36
33
-3
26
2
-25
1,101
632
-469
744
727
-17
125
88
-36
271
1,239
968
1,443
4,768
3,325
22
125
103
1,378
2,872
1,494
26,811
5,417
-21,394
1,637
216
-1,421
7,369
4,138
-3,231
15,021
232
-14,789
2,784
830
-1,954
134,295
211,338
77,043
29,341
29,310
-32
71,819
101,413
29,594
102
235
132
23,903
47,332
23,429
9,130
33,049
23,919
1,334,651 1,362,563 27,912

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
3.3 STATEWIDE ICI WASTE COMPOSITION
Figure 3-9 shows the composition and tonnage of ICI wastes in 2015. As shown, Paper and Food Waste
are the most common material groups in the ICI stream.
Figure 3-9 ICI Waste Composition
Other Wastes
80,602
8.3%

Electronics
6,489
0.7%

Paper
266,457
27.5%

Household
Hazardous
Waste
6,456
0.7%
C&D Debris
109,588
11.3%

Plastic
129,438
13.3%

Other Organics
61,431
6.3%
Food Waste
247,176
25.5%

Glass
19,986
2.1%

Metal
42,414
4.4%

Figure 3-10 compares the composition of ICI waste in 2015 with the same result from the 2010 Study.
Once again, there is an increased incidence of Food Waste. The magnitude of the increase in Food Waste
tonnage cannot be readily explained in the absence of a better understanding of changes in waste
generation, collection, and processing dynamics at the five host facilities since the 2010 Study. Such
changes in these dynamics are also suggested by the decrease in C&D. Ultimately, it was beyond the scope
of this study to pinpoint the causes of the observed change in disposed Food Waste and C&D at the host
disposal facilities in the 2015 Study.
Figure 3-10 Comparison of 2015 and 2010 ICI Composition
30.0% 26.8%27.5%

25.5%

25.0%
20.0%

18.5%

16.9%
13.2%

13.3%

15.0%
10.0%

4.5% 4.4%

5.0%

11.3%
8.3% 8.3%

6.7% 6.3%
2.0% 2.1%

0.8% 0.7%

2.3%
0.7%

2010

CT - DEEP

3-15

2015

Other Wastes

Electronics

HHW

C&D Debris

Other Organics

Food Waste

Glass

Metal

Plastic

Paper

0.0%

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Figure 3-11 below shows the mean percentage of recoverable materials in the ICI waste stream. The “Not
Currently Recoverable” portion includes materials that are potentially recoverable, but are not targeted in
a typical single stream recycling programs. Readers are encouraged to review the discussion surrounding
Figure 3-3 for additional consideration about how to interpret the data in Figure 3-11.
Figure 3-11 Recoverability of ICI Wastes in Existing Single Stream Programs
Recyclable Fiber,
13.8%
Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Single Stream
Recycling
Program, 36.8%

Recyclable
Containers, 4.6%
Other Recyclable
Plastic, 1.8%

Compostable
Organics, 43.0%

Figure 3-12 compares the top ten most prevalent ICI materials in the 2015 and 2010 Studies. This figure
highlights the significant increase in the contribution of both food waste and compostable paper. The
most common materials remained fairly consistent between the two studies.
Figure 3-12 Comparison of 2015 and 2010 Top 10 Materials – ICI Sector
30%

25.5%

25%

6.6%

9.8%

8.4%

5%

5.8% 4.8%

3.0%

4.4%

2.4% 3.1% 3.0% 2.4%

0.9% 2.4%

2.9% 2.4%

2010

3-16

Remainder/Composite
Plastic

Textiles

Other Film

Wood – Treated

Corrugated
Cardboard/Kraft Paper

Compostable Paper

Food Waste

0%

0.0%

2.3%

Diapers & Sanitary
Products

10%

12.3%

Other Recyclable Paper

15% 13.2%

Bottom Fines and Dirt

20%

2015

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Table 3-7 provides a detailed statistical profile of the statewide disposed ICI waste stream.
Table 3-7 Detailed ICI Waste Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Tons
Paper
27.5%
266,457
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
8.4%
1.4%
81,049
High Grade Office Paper
1.6%
0.6%
15,880
Magazines/Catalogs
0.7%
0.3%
6,696
Newsprint
0.6%
0.2%
6,119
Phone Books and Directories
0.1%
0.1%
659
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.3%
0.1%
3,098
Other Recyclable Paper
2.4%
0.6%
23,246
Compostable Paper
12.3%
1.7% 119,070
Remainder/Composite Paper
1.1%
0.4%
10,639
Plastic
13.3%
129,438
PET Bottles/Jars
0.5%
0.1%
5,310
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.2%
0.1%
2,186
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.4%
0.1%
3,437
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.4%
0.1%
3,962
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.4%
0.3%
3,796
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.8%
0.1%
8,138
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.2%
0.1%
1,831
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.5%
0.1%
4,429
Durable Plastic Items
1.2%
0.5%
11,282
Film (non-bag)
1.1%
0.3%
10,837
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.5%
0.1%
4,640
Other Film
4.4%
0.5%
42,447
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.2%
0.2%
1,972
Pallets – Plastic
0.1%
0.2%
1,449
Remainder/Composite Plastic
2.4%
0.7%
23,721
Metal
4.4%
42,414
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.0%
862
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.1%
0.0%
1,236
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.4%
0.1%
3,446
Tin/Steel Containers
0.4%
0.1%
4,138
Other Ferrous
0.4%
0.3%
3,729
Other Non-Ferrous
0.1%
0.1%
785
Appliances
0.6%
0.8%
5,807
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks0.4%
0.5%
3,983
Remainder/Composite Metal
1.9%
0.6%
18,429
Glass
2.1%
19,986
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.0%
0.3%
9,219
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.2%
0.1%
1,559
Deposit Glass
0.4%
0.1%
3,643
Flat Glass
0.0%
0.0%
85
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.6%
0.3%
5,480

CT - DEEP

3-17

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Tons
Food Waste
25.5%
247,176
Food Waste, Loose
21.9%
3.1% 212,683
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
3.6%
1.8%
34,493
Other Organics
6.3%
61,431
Branches and Stumps
0.2%
0.2%
1,755
Prunings and Trimmings
0.6%
0.6%
5,919
Leaves and Grass
2.2%
1.2%
21,286
Manures
0.3%
0.4%
3,316
Diapers & Sanitary Products
2.3%
1.1%
22,169
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.7%
0.4%
6,987
C&D Debris
11.3%
109,588
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.3%
0.3%
2,776
Wood – Treated
4.8%
1.7%
46,142
Wood – Untreated
2.3%
1.0%
21,943
Asphalt Roofing
0.3%
0.4%
3,289
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.7%
0.7%
6,471
Carpet
0.7%
0.4%
6,541
Carpet Padding
0.0%
0.1%
423
Remainder/Composite C&D
2.3%
1.2%
22,003
Household Hazardous Waste
0.7%
6,456
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
43
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
3
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
140
Paint
0.0%
0.0%
351
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
13
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
0.0%
147
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.3%
0.1%
3,174
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
0
Other Hazardous Waste
0.3%
0.2%
2,586
Electronics
0.7%
6,489
Computer-related Electronics
0.2%
0.3%
2,408
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.2%
0.1%
2,334
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.1%
0.1%
691
Other Larger Electronics
0.1%
0.1%
1,056
Other Wastes
8.3%
80,602
Bulky Items
0.9%
0.6%
8,631
Textiles
3.1%
0.9%
30,491
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.1%
383
Bottom Fines and Dirt
2.4%
0.3%
23,377
Other Miscellaneous
1.8%
0.7%
17,719
Grand Total
100%
970,035
No. of Samples
111

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Table 3-8 compares the ICI waste stream composition in 2010 and 2015.
Table 3-8 Comparison of 2010 and 2015 ICI Waste Composition
Estimate Percent Composition
Material Category
2010
2015 Change
Paper
26.8% 27.5%
0.6%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
9.8%
8.4%
-1.5%
High Grade Office Paper
2.1%
1.6%
-0.4%
Magazines/Catalogs
0.8%
0.7%
-0.2%
Newsprint
1.6%
0.6%
-1.0%
Phone Books and Directories
0.3%
0.1%
-0.3%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
NA
0.3%
NA
Other Recyclable Paper
2.9%
2.4%
-0.5%
Compostable Paper
6.6%
12.3%
5.6%
Remainder/Composite Paper
2.7%
1.1%
-1.6%
Plastic
16.9% 13.3% -3.6%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.5%
0.5%
0.1%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.7%
0.4%
-0.4%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.4%
0.4%
0.0%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.2%
0.4%
0.2%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.4%
0.8%
0.4%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
1.8%
0.2%
-1.6%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.6%
0.5%
-0.1%
Durable Plastic Items
4.6%
1.2%
-3.5%
Film (non-bag)
0.7%
1.1%
0.4%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.3%
0.5%
0.2%
Other Film
3.0%
4.4%
1.4%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
NA
0.2%
NA
Pallets – Plastic
0.5%
0.1%
-0.4%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
3.0%
2.4%
-0.6%
Metal
4.5%
4.4%
-0.1%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.2%
0.1%
-0.1%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
NA
0.4%
NA
Tin/Steel Containers
0.6%
0.4%
-0.2%
Other Ferrous
1.8%
0.4%
-1.4%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.4%
0.1%
-0.3%
Appliances
0.3%
0.6%
0.3%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
0.2%
0.4%
0.2%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.9%
1.9%
1.0%
Glass
2.0%
2.1%
0.0%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.0%
1.0%
-0.1%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
Deposit Glass
0.3%
0.4%
0.0%
Flat Glass
0.3%
0.0%
-0.3%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.1%
0.6%
0.4%
Food Waste
13.2% 25.5% 12.2%
Food Waste, Loose
13.2%
21.9%
8.7%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
NA
3.6%
NA

3-18

Estimated Tons
2010
280,471
102,556
21,784
8,783
16,607
3,634
NA
29,923
69,430
27,754
176,854
4,751
1,049
7,792
4,137
2,380
4,504
18,899
5,861
48,543
7,650
2,818
31,598
NA
5,566
31,305
46,523
382
2,012
NA
6,581
19,063
4,118
3,250
1,733
9,382
21,144
10,797
1,993
3,604
3,328
1,422
138,369
138,369
NA

2015
Change
266,457 -14,014
81,049
-21,507
15,880
-5,903
6,696
-2,087
6,119
-10,487
659
-2,975
3,098
NA
23,246
-6,677
119,070
49,640
10,639
-17,115
129,438 -47,416
5,310
558
2,186
1,137
3,437
-4,355
3,962
-175
3,796
1,416
8,138
3,634
1,831
-17,067
4,429
-1,432
11,282
-37,262
10,837
3,186
4,640
1,822
42,447
10,849
1,972
NA
1,449
-4,117
23,721
-7,583
42,414
-4,108
862
480
1,236
-776
3,446
NA
4,138
-2,444
3,729
-15,335
785
-3,332
5,807
2,556
3,983
2,250
18,429
9,047
19,986
-1,158
9,219
-1,578
1,559
-434
3,643
39
85
-3,243
5,480
4,058
247,176 108,806
212,683
74,313
34,493
NA

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Table 3-8 Comparison of 2010 and 2015 ICI Waste Composition (continued)
Material Category
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total

CT - DEEP

2010
2015 Change
6.7%
6.3%
-0.3%
0.6%
0.2%
-0.4%
1.0%
0.6%
-0.4%
2.9%
2.2%
-0.7%
0.1%
0.3%
0.2%
NA
2.3%
NA
2.1%
0.7%
-1.4%
18.5% 11.3% -7.2%
0.2%
0.3%
0.1%
5.8%
4.8%
-1.0%
5.4%
2.3%
-3.1%
0.5%
0.3%
-0.2%
0.6%
0.7%
0.1%
2.9%
0.7%
-2.2%
1.2%
0.0%
-1.2%
1.9%
2.3%
0.3%
0.8%
0.7%
-0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.3%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.3%
-0.1%
2.3%
0.7%
-1.6%
0.7%
0.2%
-0.5%
0.3%
0.2%
0.0%
0.7%
0.1%
-0.7%
0.6%
0.1%
-0.5%
8.3%
8.3%
0.0%
3.0%
0.9%
-2.1%
2.4%
3.1%
0.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.9%
2.4%
1.5%
2.0%
1.8%
-0.2%
100.0% 100.0% 0.0%

3-19

2010
69,758
6,010
10,166
29,968
1,503
NA
22,111
193,759
2,086
60,182
56,340
5,447
6,294
30,117
12,938
20,354
7,839
106
151
461
71
156
679
2,855
28
3,333
23,928
7,488
2,856
7,713
5,871
86,392
30,881
24,702
94
9,400
21,315
1,045,036

2015
Change
61,431
-8,327
1,755
-4,255
5,919
-4,248
21,286
-8,682
3,316
1,813
22,169
NA
6,987
-15,124
109,588 -84,172
2,776
690
46,142
-14,040
21,943
-34,397
3,289
-2,158
6,471
176
6,541
-23,576
423
-12,515
22,003
1,649
6,456
-1,383
43
-62
3
-149
140
-321
351
280
13
-143
147
-532
3,174
319
0
-28
2,586
-747
6,489
-17,438
2,408
-5,080
2,334
-522
691
-7,021
1,056
-4,816
80,602
-5,790
8,631
-22,251
30,491
5,789
383
290
23,377
13,977
17,719
-3,596
970,035 -75,001

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
3.4 COMPARISON BY GENERATOR SECTOR
Figure 3-13 compares the percentage composition of material groups for Residential and ICI waste. On
a percentage basis, it is shown that ICI waste contains a higher incidence of Paper and Food Waste, while
the Residential sector disposes a higher percentage of Other Organics (which include yard debris and
diapers) and Other Wastes.
Figure 3-13 Comparison of Waste Composition by Generator Sector
30.0%

27.5%

25.5%

25.0%
20.0%

20.0%

20.0%

15.0%

15.5%

14.5%

13.3%
10.7%

12.3%

11.3%
8.3%

10.0%

6.3%

5.0%

2.9%

4.4%

2.8% 2.1%

0.8% 0.7% 0.4% 0.7%

Other Wastes

Electronics

ICI

HHW

Other Organics

Residential

C&D Debris

Food Waste

Glass

Metal

Plastic

Paper

0.0%

Figure 3-14 shows the same results, instead displaying the tonnage of materials disposed. Because of the
estimated split between Residential and Commercial tons, the absolute quantity of both Paper and Food
Waste is comparable in both generator sectors.
Figure 3-14 Comparison of Waste Tonnage by Generator Sector
300,000

Tons Disposed

250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0

Residential

3-20

ICI

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Figure 3-15 compares the top ten most prevalent Residential and ICI materials in the 2015 Study.
Figure 3-15 Comparison of Residential and ICI Top 10 Materials
30%

25.5%

25%
20%

20.0%

15%

12.3%
9.6%

10%
5%

8.4%
2.1%

4.8%

6.3%

7.4%
4.4%
3.2% 3.1%

2.4% 2.2% 2.4%

3.5%

2.4%

3.6%

4.3%
2.3%

CT - DEEP

3-21

Residential

Other Recyclable Paper

Bottom Fines and Dirt

Remainder/Composite
Plastic

Diapers & Sanitary Products

ICI

Textiles

Other Film

Wood – Treated

Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft
Paper

Compostable Paper

Food Waste

0%

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Table 3-9 compares the composition and disposed tons from the Residential and ICI sectors.
Table 3-9 Comparison of Waste Composition by Generator Sector
Estimate Percent Composition
ResDifferMaterial Category
idential
ICI
ence
Paper
20.0% 27.5%
7.4%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
2.1%
8.4%
6.3%
High Grade Office Paper
0.8%
1.6%
0.9%
Magazines/Catalogs
0.9%
0.7%
-0.2%
Newsprint
1.9%
0.6%
-1.3%
Phone Books and Directories
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.2%
0.3%
0.1%
Other Recyclable Paper
3.6%
2.4%
-1.2%
Compostable Paper
9.6%
12.3%
2.7%
Remainder/Composite Paper
0.8%
1.1%
0.3%
Plastic
10.7% 13.3%
2.6%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.6%
0.5%
0.0%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.3%
0.2%
0.0%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.3%
0.4%
0.1%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.6%
0.4%
-0.2%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.1%
0.4%
0.3%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.7%
0.8%
0.2%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.5%
0.5%
-0.1%
Durable Plastic Items
0.6%
1.2%
0.5%
Film (non-bag)
0.5%
1.1%
0.6%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.9%
0.5%
-0.4%
Other Film
3.2%
4.4%
1.2%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
Pallets – Plastic
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
2.2%
2.4%
0.2%
Metal
2.9%
4.4%
1.4%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.4%
0.4%
0.0%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.5%
0.4%
-0.1%
Other Ferrous
0.2%
0.4%
0.1%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.3%
0.1%
-0.2%
Appliances
0.1%
0.6%
0.5%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
0.0%
0.4%
0.4%
Remainder/Composite Metal
1.1%
1.9%
0.8%
Glass
2.8%
2.1%
-0.8%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.2%
1.0%
-0.2%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.2%
0.2%
-0.1%
Deposit Glass
0.3%
0.4%
0.1%
Flat Glass
0.1%
0.0%
-0.1%
Remainder/Composite Glass
1.0%
0.6%
-0.5%
Food Waste
20.0% 25.5%
5.5%
Food Waste, Loose
17.8%
21.9%
4.1%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
2.2%
3.6%
1.4%

3-22

Estimated Tons
Residential
ICI
273,036
266,457
28,551
81,049
10,631
15,880
12,206
6,696
26,157
6,119
1,548
659
2,892
3,098
48,870
23,246
130,759
119,070
11,422
10,639
146,175
129,438
8,068
5,310
3,447
2,186
3,856
3,437
8,056
3,962
1,213
3,796
9,294
8,138
1,066
1,831
7,271
4,429
8,411
11,282
7,481
10,837
12,262
4,640
43,487
42,447
2,105
1,972
178
1,449
29,979
23,721
40,029
42,414
1,640
862
1,826
1,236
5,173
3,446
7,415
4,138
3,356
3,729
4,291
785
1,125
5,807
62
3,983
15,139
18,429
38,526
19,986
15,881
9,219
2,954
1,559
3,668
3,643
1,756
85
14,266
5,480
272,656
247,176
242,767
212,683
29,889
34,493

Difference
6,579
-52,498
-5,249
5,511
20,038
889
-206
25,624
11,689
782
16,737
2,758
1,261
419
4,094
-2,583
1,156
-765
2,841
-2,870
-3,355
7,622
1,040
133
-1,271
6,258
-2,386
778
590
1,727
3,278
-373
3,506
-4,681
-3,921
-3,290
18,541
6,663
1,396
25
1,671
8,787
25,481
30,085
-4,604

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Table 3-9 Comparison of Waste Composition by Generator Sector (continued)
Estimate Percent Composition
ResDifferMaterial Category
idential
ICI
ence
Other Organics
14.5%
6.3%
-8.2%
Branches and Stumps
0.7%
0.2%
-0.6%
Prunings and Trimmings
2.9%
0.6%
-2.2%
Leaves and Grass
5.8%
2.2%
-3.6%
Manures
0.1%
0.3%
0.2%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
4.3%
2.3%
-2.0%
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.7%
0.7%
0.0%
C&D Debris
12.3% 11.3% -1.0%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.4%
0.3%
-0.1%
Wood – Treated
6.3%
4.8%
-1.6%
Wood – Untreated
1.3%
2.3%
0.9%
Asphalt Roofing
0.2%
0.3%
0.1%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.5%
0.7%
0.1%
Carpet
1.7%
0.7%
-1.0%
Carpet Padding
0.5%
0.0%
-0.4%
Remainder/Composite C&D
1.3%
2.3%
0.9%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.8%
0.7%
-0.1%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Paint
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.1%
0.0%
-0.1%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
0.3%
0.3%
0.0%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.2%
0.3%
0.1%
Electronics
0.4%
0.7%
0.3%
Computer-related Electronics
0.0%
0.2%
0.2%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.3%
0.2%
-0.1%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
Other Larger Electronics
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
Other Wastes
15.5%
8.3%
-7.2%
Bulky Items
2.2%
0.9%
-1.3%
Textiles
7.4%
3.1%
-4.3%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
3.5%
2.4%
-1.1%
Other Miscellaneous
2.4%
1.8%
-0.6%
Grand Total
100.0% 100.0%

CT - DEEP

3-23

Estimated Tons
ResDifferidential
ICI
ence
197,491
61,431
136,061
9,968
1,755
8,213
38,900
5,919
32,981
79,262
21,286
57,976
1,766
3,316
-1,551
58,381
22,169
36,213
9,215
6,987
2,228
167,408
109,588 57,820
5,322
2,776
2,546
86,020
46,142
39,877
18,011
21,943
-3,932
3,353
3,289
63
7,461
6,471
991
22,491
6,541
15,950
6,453
423
6,030
18,297
22,003
-3,705
10,487
6,456
4,030
33
43
-10
2
3
-1
632
140
492
727
351
376
88
13
75
1,239
147
1,092
4,768
3,174
1,594
125
0
125
2,872
2,586
287
5,417
6,489
-1,072
216
2,408
-2,192
4,138
2,334
1,804
232
691
-459
830
1,056
-226
211,338
80,602 130,736
29,310
8,631
20,679
101,413
30,491
70,922
235
383
-149
47,332
23,377
23,954
33,049
17,719
15,330
1,362,563 970,035 392,528

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
3.5 RESULTS BY DEMOGRAPHIC REGION
The following subsections provide detailed statistical results for Residential and ICI wastes from the
Urban, Suburban and Rural regions of the state.
Table 3-10 provides a count of the number of samples obtained for each combination of generator sector
and demographic origin.
Table 3-10 Urban, Suburban and Rural Waste Sample Counts
Sector

Residential
Samples

ICI
Samples

Total
Samples

114

78

192

Suburban

11

10

21

Rural

10

12

22

135

100

235

Urban

Total

As shown in the table, the majority of samples were found (through scalehouse personnel and driver
interviews) to have originated in cities or towns classified as Urban based on their population density. This
exercise confirms that the statewide aggregate results presented in this report are heavily weighted toward
Urban areas of the state, and future studies may want to increase sampling from Suburban and Rural areas.
Also because of the relatively small samples size for Suburban and Rural wastes, the composition estimates
for these two demographic regions exhibit lower certainty (i.e., wider confidence intervals) compared to
the results from Urban areas. It is therefore less meaningful to rigorously compare the results across
demographic regions.
Finally, no data are available to use as weighting factors to aggregate Residential and ICI waste within each
demographic stratum. Because of these reasons, this report presents the tabular results separately for
Residential and ICI waste within each demographic region, but does not aggregate waste composition by
demographic stratum or attempt to compare the results.

3-24

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
3.5.1 URBAN WASTE COMPOSITION
Table 3-11 presents the composition of Residential waste generated in Urban areas of the State.

Table 3-11 Urban/Residential Waste Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
20.3%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
2.0%
0.4%
High Grade Office Paper
0.9%
0.2%
Magazines/Catalogs
0.8%
0.2%
Newsprint
1.9%
0.6%
Phone Books and Directories
0.2%
0.1%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.2%
0.1%
Other Recyclable Paper
3.7%
0.5%
Compostable Paper
9.8%
0.8%
Remainder/Composite Paper
0.8%
0.2%
Plastic
11.2%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.6%
0.1%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.3%
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.3%
0.0%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.7%
0.1%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.1%
0.0%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.7%
0.1%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.1%
0.0%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.6%
0.1%
Durable Plastic Items
0.6%
0.2%
Film (non-bag)
0.7%
0.1%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
1.1%
0.1%
Other Film
3.2%
0.3%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.2%
0.0%
Pallets – Plastic
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
1.9%
0.3%
Metal
2.9%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.2%
0.0%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.5%
0.1%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.6%
0.1%
Other Ferrous
0.3%
0.1%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.2%
0.2%
Appliances
0.1%
0.1%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.9%
0.2%
Glass
2.4%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.1%
0.2%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.2%
0.1%
Deposit Glass
0.2%
0.1%
Flat Glass
0.1%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.9%
0.4%

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Food Waste
20.9%
Food Waste, Loose
18.2%
1.8%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
2.6%
0.5%
Other Organics
14.7%
Branches and Stumps
0.5%
0.4%
Prunings and Trimmings
2.0%
0.7%
Leaves and Grass
6.6%
1.4%
Manures
0.1%
0.1%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
4.7%
0.6%
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.8%
0.3%
C&D Debris
10.9%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.5%
0.5%
Wood – Treated
5.0%
1.6%
Wood – Untreated
1.3%
0.6%
Asphalt Roofing
0.2%
0.2%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.5%
0.3%
Carpet
1.8%
0.7%
Carpet Padding
0.2%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite C&D
1.4%
0.7%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.6%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
Paint
0.0%
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
0.1%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.3%
0.1%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.2%
0.1%
Electronics
0.4%
Computer-related Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.3%
0.1%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.0%
0.0%
Other Larger Electronics
0.1%
0.1%
Other Wastes
15.7%
Bulky Items
2.6%
1.4%
Textiles
7.3%
0.9%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
3.8%
0.7%
Other Miscellaneous
1.9%
0.4%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
114

Table 3-12 presents the composition of ICI waste generated in Urban areas of the State.
Table 3-12 Urban/ICI Waste Composition

CT - DEEP

3-25

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
29.3%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
11.2%
2.6%
High Grade Office Paper
1.9%
0.7%
Magazines/Catalogs
0.6%
0.2%
Newsprint
0.6%
0.2%
Phone Books and Directories
0.0%
0.0%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.4%
0.1%
Other Recyclable Paper
2.0%
0.6%
Compostable Paper
11.4%
1.9%
Remainder/Composite Paper
1.2%
0.5%
Plastic
12.7%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.4%
0.1%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.3%
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.3%
0.1%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.4%
0.1%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.4%
0.4%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.8%
0.2%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.1%
0.1%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.5%
0.1%
Durable Plastic Items
0.6%
0.3%
Film (non-bag)
1.5%
0.5%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.4%
0.1%
Other Film
4.1%
0.6%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.1%
0.0%
Pallets – Plastic
0.1%
0.2%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
2.7%
1.1%
Metal
4.0%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.3%
0.1%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.7%
0.5%
Other Ferrous
0.4%
0.3%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.3%
0.5%
Appliances
0.6%
1.0%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks0.1%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Metal
1.5%
0.7%
Glass
1.9%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
0.8%
0.4%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.2%
0.1%
Deposit Glass
0.3%
0.1%
Flat Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.6%
0.4%

3-26

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Food Waste
24.9%
Food Waste, Loose
21.1%
3.4%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
3.8%
1.9%
Other Organics
8.2%
Branches and Stumps
0.4%
0.4%
Prunings and Trimmings
0.8%
0.6%
Leaves and Grass
1.8%
1.2%
Manures
1.6%
2.1%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
2.1%
1.3%
Remainder/Composite Organic
1.6%
1.4%
C&D Debris
10.6%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.4%
0.5%
Wood – Treated
3.0%
1.7%
Wood – Untreated
4.1%
2.0%
Asphalt Roofing
0.4%
0.5%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.4%
0.5%
Carpet
0.5%
0.4%
Carpet Padding
0.1%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite C&D
1.7%
0.9%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.9%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
Paint
0.0%
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
0.0%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.4%
0.2%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.4%
0.4%
Electronics
0.9%
Computer-related Electronics
0.3%
0.5%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.2%
0.1%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.1%
0.2%
Other Larger Electronics
0.2%
0.4%
Other Wastes
6.8%
Bulky Items
1.1%
1.0%
Textiles
2.0%
0.6%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.1%
0.1%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
1.9%
0.3%
Other Miscellaneous
1.7%
1.0%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
78

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
3.5.2 SUBURBAN WASTE COMPOSITION
Table 3-13 presents the composition of Residential waste generated in Suburban areas of the State.

Table 3-13 Suburban/Residential Waste Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
21.7%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
2.7%
1.4%
High Grade Office Paper
0.5%
0.6%
Magazines/Catalogs
0.7%
0.4%
Newsprint
0.7%
0.4%
Phone Books and Directories
0.0%
0.0%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.2%
0.1%
Other Recyclable Paper
3.8%
1.4%
Compostable Paper
12.1%
2.6%
Remainder/Composite Paper
1.0%
0.7%
Plastic
9.6%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.5%
0.2%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.2%
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.2%
0.1%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.4%
0.2%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.0%
0.0%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.6%
0.2%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.1%
0.1%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.3%
0.2%
Durable Plastic Items
1.1%
0.8%
Film (non-bag)
0.7%
0.5%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.5%
0.1%
Other Film
3.1%
0.8%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.1%
0.1%
Pallets – Plastic
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
1.7%
0.9%
Metal
1.9%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.3%
0.2%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.4%
0.2%
Other Ferrous
0.2%
0.2%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.0%
0.0%
Appliances
0.0%
0.0%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.8%
0.5%
Glass
3.3%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.7%
1.2%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.5%
0.7%
Deposit Glass
0.4%
0.3%
Flat Glass
0.2%
0.3%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.6%
0.2%

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Food Waste
18.1%
Food Waste, Loose
16.3%
2.9%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
1.8%
0.9%
Other Organics
17.3%
Branches and Stumps
2.1%
3.4%
Prunings and Trimmings
5.2%
4.1%
Leaves and Grass
5.6%
3.2%
Manures
0.0%
0.0%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
3.8%
2.3%
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.6%
0.4%
C&D Debris
8.0%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.0%
0.1%
Wood – Treated
4.2%
3.2%
Wood – Untreated
0.4%
0.6%
Asphalt Roofing
0.0%
0.0%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.3%
0.4%
Carpet
0.1%
0.1%
Carpet Padding
1.4%
2.2%
Remainder/Composite C&D
1.6%
1.8%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.4%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
Paint
0.0%
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
0.0%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.2%
0.1%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.2%
0.2%
Electronics
0.4%
Computer-related Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.3%
0.3%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.1%
0.1%
Other Larger Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Wastes
19.3%
Bulky Items
0.0%
0.0%
Textiles
8.2%
3.7%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
3.5%
1.7%
Other Miscellaneous
7.5%
6.0%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
11

Table 3-14 presents the composition of ICI waste generated in Suburban areas of the State.
Table 3-14 Suburban/ICI Waste Composition

CT - DEEP

3-27

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
30.1%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
7.8%
3.3%
High Grade Office Paper
1.2%
1.1%
Magazines/Catalogs
1.4%
1.2%
Newsprint
0.8%
0.8%
Phone Books and Directories
0.0%
0.0%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.3%
0.3%
Other Recyclable Paper
5.2%
3.8%
Compostable Paper
12.5%
3.5%
Remainder/Composite Paper
1.0%
0.7%
Plastic
14.2%
PET Bottles/Jars
1.1%
0.7%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.3%
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.4%
0.2%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.3%
0.1%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.3%
0.4%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
1.1%
0.4%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.8%
1.2%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.3%
0.1%
Durable Plastic Items
1.5%
1.0%
Film (non-bag)
0.6%
0.6%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.5%
0.3%
Other Film
4.2%
1.0%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
1.4%
2.0%
Pallets – Plastic
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
1.6%
0.8%
Metal
7.0%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.2%
0.1%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.6%
0.5%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.2%
0.1%
Other Ferrous
0.2%
0.4%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.0%
0.0%
Appliances
0.0%
0.0%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 3.3%
5.4%
Remainder/Composite Metal
2.4%
2.2%
Glass
1.8%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
0.7%
0.5%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Deposit Glass
0.4%
0.2%
Flat Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.7%
0.5%

3-28

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Food Waste
25.2%
Food Waste, Loose
21.1%
8.2%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
4.1%
3.3%
Other Organics
7.1%
Branches and Stumps
0.0%
0.0%
Prunings and Trimmings
0.2%
0.3%
Leaves and Grass
5.3%
7.4%
Manures
0.0%
0.0%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
1.4%
1.4%
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.1%
0.1%
C&D Debris
4.0%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.0%
0.1%
Wood – Treated
1.1%
1.1%
Wood – Untreated
1.2%
1.7%
Asphalt Roofing
0.0%
0.0%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.6%
1.0%
Carpet
0.4%
0.5%
Carpet Padding
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite C&D
0.7%
0.9%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.5%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
Paint
0.1%
0.2%
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
0.0%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.1%
0.2%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.2%
0.3%
Electronics
1.1%
Computer-related Electronics
0.8%
1.4%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.2%
0.2%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.0%
0.0%
Other Larger Electronics
0.1%
0.2%
Other Wastes
9.0%
Bulky Items
0.2%
0.3%
Textiles
4.4%
3.2%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
2.4%
0.8%
Other Miscellaneous
2.1%
1.3%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
10

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
3.5.3 RURAL WASTE COMPOSITION
Table 3-15 presents the composition of Residential waste generated in Rural areas of the State.

Table 3-15 Rural/Residential Waste Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
22.7%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
2.5%
1.2%
High Grade Office Paper
0.5%
0.3%
Magazines/Catalogs
1.9%
0.9%
Newsprint
1.8%
1.0%
Phone Books and Directories
0.0%
0.0%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.2%
0.1%
Other Recyclable Paper
5.6%
3.3%
Compostable Paper
9.0%
3.0%
Remainder/Composite Paper
1.1%
0.6%
Plastic
12.4%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.5%
0.3%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.2%
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.3%
0.2%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.5%
0.2%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.2%
0.2%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.9%
0.3%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.1%
0.1%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.4%
0.2%
Durable Plastic Items
1.1%
1.2%
Film (non-bag)
0.5%
0.3%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.8%
0.3%
Other Film
3.8%
1.6%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.1%
0.1%
Pallets – Plastic
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
3.1%
1.8%
Metal
4.5%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.2%
0.1%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.3%
0.1%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.6%
0.4%
Other Ferrous
0.3%
0.4%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.1%
0.1%
Appliances
0.0%
0.0%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Metal
2.9%
2.7%
Glass
4.0%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.3%
0.9%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.1%
0.1%
Deposit Glass
0.7%
0.5%
Flat Glass
0.0%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Glass
2.0%
1.8%

CT - DEEP

3-29

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Food Waste
20.8%
Food Waste, Loose
17.8%
6.9%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
3.1%
1.7%
Other Organics
8.0%
Branches and Stumps
0.8%
1.3%
Prunings and Trimmings
2.3%
2.8%
Leaves and Grass
1.3%
1.9%
Manures
0.0%
0.0%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
3.0%
1.3%
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.6%
0.3%
C&D Debris
11.7%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.0%
0.0%
Wood – Treated
9.5%
8.5%
Wood – Untreated
0.5%
0.6%
Asphalt Roofing
0.0%
0.0%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.0%
0.0%
Carpet
0.1%
0.2%
Carpet Padding
0.8%
1.0%
Remainder/Composite C&D
0.8%
1.1%
Household Hazardous Waste
1.9%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.1%
0.1%
Paint
0.0%
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.1%
0.2%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 1.2%
1.0%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.1%
0.1%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.3%
0.3%
Electronics
0.5%
Computer-related Electronics
0.1%
0.1%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.4%
0.4%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.0%
0.0%
Other Larger Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Wastes
13.5%
Bulky Items
1.4%
1.5%
Textiles
6.1%
2.3%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.1%
0.1%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
2.8%
1.0%
Other Miscellaneous
3.1%
1.8%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
10

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
Table 3-16 presents the composition of ICI waste generated in Rural areas of the State.
Table 3-16 Rural/ICI Waste Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
28.7%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
9.2%
3.5%
High Grade Office Paper
3.1%
3.0%
Magazines/Catalogs
0.3%
0.3%
Newsprint
0.5%
0.3%
Phone Books and Directories
0.0%
0.0%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.2%
0.1%
Other Recyclable Paper
2.3%
0.6%
Compostable Paper
11.5%
3.1%
Remainder/Composite Paper
1.6%
1.7%
Plastic
14.0%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.5%
0.2%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.2%
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.6%
0.2%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.3%
0.1%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.0%
0.1%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
1.0%
0.3%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.3%
0.3%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.5%
0.2%
Durable Plastic Items
2.2%
2.1%
Film (non-bag)
0.5%
0.4%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.6%
0.3%
Other Film
5.5%
2.3%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.1%
0.0%
Pallets – Plastic
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
1.9%
0.8%
Metal
4.8%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.2%
0.1%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.3%
0.1%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.4%
0.3%
Other Ferrous
0.2%
0.3%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.0%
0.0%
Appliances
1.0%
1.7%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks0.2%
0.3%
Remainder/Composite Metal
2.4%
2.1%
Glass
2.2%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.2%
1.3%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.2%
0.2%
Deposit Glass
0.5%
0.3%
Flat Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.3%
0.2%

3-30

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Food Waste
20.6%
Food Waste, Loose
18.2%
9.2%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
2.3%
1.1%
Other Organics
4.8%
Branches and Stumps
0.0%
0.0%
Prunings and Trimmings
0.1%
0.1%
Leaves and Grass
0.8%
1.0%
Manures
0.3%
0.5%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
2.5%
1.6%
Remainder/Composite Organic
1.0%
1.1%
C&D Debris
13.4%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.0%
0.0%
Wood – Treated
9.9%
4.7%
Wood – Untreated
0.6%
0.6%
Asphalt Roofing
0.0%
0.0%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.0%
0.0%
Carpet
0.2%
0.3%
Carpet Padding
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite C&D
2.7%
3.6%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.3%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
Paint
0.0%
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
0.0%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.2%
0.1%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.0%
0.0%
Electronics
0.2%
Computer-related Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.2%
0.3%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.0%
0.0%
Other Larger Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Wastes
11.0%
Bulky Items
0.7%
1.2%
Textiles
4.0%
3.4%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
2.3%
0.6%
Other Miscellaneous
3.9%
4.0%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
12

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
3.6 RESULTS BY HOST FACILITY
This section compares the aggregate composition of wastes from each of the five host disposal facilities
from the 2015 and 2010 Studies. Detailed statistical results by host facility for the 2015 Study, including
aggregate, Residential and ICI wastes, are contained in Appendix D.
3.6.1 MIRA CONNECTICUT SOLID WASTE SYSTEM (HARTFORD) RRF
Table 3-17 compares the composition of aggregate waste at the MIRA Hartford RRF.

Table 3-17 Comparison of Aggregate Waste Composition (MIRA Hartford RRF)
Estimate Percent Composition
Material Category
2010
2015 Change
Paper
25.3% 21.2% -4.1%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
3.4%
4.3%
1.0%
High Grade Office Paper
1.6%
0.7%
-0.9%
Magazines/Catalogs
1.3%
0.9%
-0.4%
Newsprint
2.4%
1.4%
-1.0%
Phone Books and Directories
0.2%
0.1%
-0.1%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
NA
0.2%
NA
Other Recyclable Paper
3.5%
2.5%
-1.0%
Compostable Paper
10.2%
10.1%
-0.1%
Remainder/Composite Paper
2.6%
1.0%
-1.7%
Plastic
14.0% 12.6% -1.5%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.4%
0.5%
0.2%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.2%
0.3%
0.2%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.4%
0.5%
0.1%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.1%
0.5%
0.3%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.4%
0.8%
0.3%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.6%
0.1%
-0.5%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.5%
0.4%
-0.2%
Durable Plastic Items
4.1%
0.9%
-3.2%
Film (non-bag)
0.4%
0.4%
0.1%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.5%
0.6%
0.2%
Other Film
3.6%
3.9%
0.3%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
NA
0.1%
NA
Pallets – Plastic
0.4%
0.2%
-0.2%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
2.4%
3.3%
0.9%
Metal
4.1%
3.4%
-0.7%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
NA
0.3%
NA
Tin/Steel Containers
0.7%
0.4%
-0.3%
Other Ferrous
2.1%
0.3%
-1.8%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.9%
0.4%
-0.5%
Appliances
0.1%
0.0%
-0.1%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.0%
0.2%
0.2%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.3%
1.7%
1.4%
Glass
1.9%
2.9%
0.9%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.2%
1.3%
0.1%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.1%
0.3%
0.2%
Deposit Glass
0.3%
0.3%
0.0%
Flat Glass
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.2%
0.9%
0.6%

CT - DEEP

3-31

Estimate Percent Composition
Material Category
2010
Food Waste
13.0%
Food Waste, Loose
13.0%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
NA
Other Organics
15.5%
Branches and Stumps
0.1%
Prunings and Trimmings
3.5%
Leaves and Grass
9.6%
Manures
0.1%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
NA
Remainder/Composite Organic
2.3%
C&D Debris
15.0%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.0%
Wood – Treated
4.1%
Wood – Untreated
2.6%
Asphalt Roofing
0.1%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
1.1%
Carpet
5.0%
Carpet Padding
1.0%
Remainder/Composite C&D
1.1%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.6%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
Paint
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.2%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.3%
Electronics
2.8%
Computer-related Electronics
0.7%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.4%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
1.7%
Other Larger Electronics
0.0%
Other Wastes
7.7%
Bulky Items
2.1%
Textiles
3.0%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
1.3%
Other Miscellaneous
1.3%
Grand Total
100%

2015 Change
22.9% 10.0%
21.2%
8.2%
1.7%
NA
10.7% -4.9%
0.4%
0.3%
2.8%
-0.7%
4.2%
-5.3%
0.2%
0.1%
2.8%
NA
0.2%
-2.0%
13.1% -1.9%
0.0%
0.0%
6.2%
2.1%
2.0%
-0.6%
0.4%
0.3%
1.0%
-0.1%
1.1%
-3.9%
0.5%
-0.5%
1.9%
0.8%
0.8%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
-0.2%
0.5%
-2.4%
0.2%
-0.5%
0.3%
-0.2%
0.0%
-1.7%
0.0%
0.0%
11.9%
4.3%
0.9%
-1.2%
6.4%
3.4%
0.0%
0.0%
2.7%
1.4%
2.0%
0.7%
100%

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
3.6.2 COVANTA-BRISTOL RRF
Table 3-18 compares the composition of aggregate waste at the Bristol RRF.

Table 3-18 Comparison of Aggregate Waste Composition (Bristol RRF)
Estimate Percent Composition
Material Category
2010
Paper
25.3%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
4.9%
High Grade Office Paper
1.9%
Magazines/Catalogs
1.5%
Newsprint
1.7%
Phone Books and Directories
0.6%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
NA
Other Recyclable Paper
3.8%
Compostable Paper
8.3%
Remainder/Composite Paper
2.7%
Plastic
14.0%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.6%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.2%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.4%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.3%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.4%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.1%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.8%
Durable Plastic Items
4.2%
Film (non-bag)
0.7%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.5%
Other Film
3.6%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
NA
Pallets – Plastic
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
1.9%
Metal
5.5%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.0%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.1%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
NA
Tin/Steel Containers
1.1%
Other Ferrous
2.7%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.3%
Appliances
0.5%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.2%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.6%
Glass
2.3%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
0.9%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.1%
Deposit Glass
0.1%
Flat Glass
0.2%
Remainder/Composite Glass
1.1%

2015
22.7%
2.5%
1.4%
0.7%
1.2%
0.1%
0.3%
4.1%
11.6%
0.8%
10.6%
0.7%
0.3%
0.2%
0.6%
0.0%
0.6%
0.1%
0.4%
1.1%
1.0%
0.6%
3.3%
0.2%
0.0%
1.6%
3.7%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.5%
0.5%
0.3%
0.3%
0.0%
1.7%
2.1%
0.7%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
1.0%

Change
-2.6%
-2.4%
-0.5%
-0.8%
-0.5%
-0.5%
NA
0.3%
3.3%
-1.8%
-3.4%
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
0.1%
-0.3%
0.1%
0.0%
-0.3%
-3.1%
0.3%
0.1%
-0.3%
NA
-0.1%
-0.2%
-1.9%
0.0%
0.0%
NA
-0.6%
-2.2%
0.0%
-0.3%
-0.2%
1.1%
-0.2%
-0.2%
0.0%
0.2%
-0.1%
-0.1%

3-32

Estimate Percent Composition
Material Category
2010
Food Waste
10.6%
Food Waste, Loose
10.6%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
NA
Other Organics
15.6%
Branches and Stumps
0.8%
Prunings and Trimmings
1.5%
Leaves and Grass
9.4%
Manures
0.5%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
NA
Remainder/Composite Organic
3.4%
C&D Debris
14.6%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.0%
Wood – Treated
5.0%
Wood – Untreated
1.6%
Asphalt Roofing
0.0%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.5%
Carpet
4.7%
Carpet Padding
0.7%
Remainder/Composite C&D
2.0%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.6%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.1%
Paint
0.2%
Sharps
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.1%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.1%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.2%
Electronics
1.2%
Computer-related Electronics
0.0%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.3%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.7%
Other Larger Electronics
0.2%
Other Wastes
10.1%
Bulky Items
3.7%
Textiles
3.9%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
1.4%
Other Miscellaneous
1.2%
Grand Total
100%

2015
18.7%
17.0%
1.8%
14.7%
1.2%
1.8%
5.7%
0.0%
4.8%
1.2%
11.3%
0.6%
3.8%
2.5%
0.2%
0.5%
1.7%
0.2%
1.9%
0.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4%
0.0%
0.3%
0.3%
0.0%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
15.0%
2.7%
5.2%
0.0%
4.0%
3.1%
100%

Change
8.1%
6.3%
NA
-0.9%
0.3%
0.3%
-3.7%
-0.5%
NA
-2.2%
-3.3%
0.5%
-1.2%
0.9%
0.1%
-0.1%
-3.0%
-0.5%
-0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
-0.1%
-0.1%
0.0%
-0.1%
0.3%
0.0%
0.1%
-0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
-0.7%
-0.2%
4.9%
-0.9%
1.3%
0.0%
2.7%
1.8%

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
3.6.3 COVANTA-PRESTON RRF
Table 3-19 compares the composition of aggregate waste at the Covanta-Preston RRF.

Table 3-19 Comparison of Aggregate Waste Composition (Covanta-Preston RRF)
Estimate Percent Composition
Material Category
2010
Paper
24.0%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
4.9%
High Grade Office Paper
1.9%
Magazines/Catalogs
1.0%
Newsprint
1.1%
Phone Books and Directories
0.2%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
NA
Other Recyclable Paper
3.6%
Compostable Paper
8.5%
Remainder/Composite Paper
2.8%
Plastic
18.1%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.6%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
1.0%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.7%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.2%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.8%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
1.9%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.9%
Durable Plastic Items
2.9%
Film (non-bag)
0.4%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.5%
Other Film
4.0%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
NA
Pallets – Plastic
0.3%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
3.6%
Metal
4.4%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.0%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.3%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
NA
Tin/Steel Containers
0.5%
Other Ferrous
0.5%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.3%
Appliances
1.7%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.0%
Remainder/Composite Metal
1.1%
Glass
1.9%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
0.8%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.4%
Deposit Glass
0.5%
Flat Glass
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.1%

CT - DEEP

2015
24.8%
6.3%
1.4%
0.7%
1.8%
0.1%
0.2%
2.9%
10.4%
0.9%
10.9%
0.5%
0.2%
0.3%
0.4%
0.1%
0.7%
0.2%
0.5%
0.7%
0.8%
0.7%
3.7%
0.2%
0.0%
1.9%
4.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.3%
0.4%
0.1%
0.0%
1.1%
0.5%
1.5%
2.5%
1.0%
0.1%
0.4%
0.0%
1.0%

Change
0.7%
1.4%
-0.5%
-0.3%
0.7%
-0.1%
NA
-0.7%
1.9%
-1.9%
-7.1%
-0.1%
0.1%
-0.6%
-0.4%
-0.2%
-0.1%
-1.7%
-0.4%
-2.2%
0.3%
0.2%
-0.3%
NA
-0.3%
-1.7%
-0.3%
0.1%
-0.2%
NA
-0.1%
-0.3%
-0.3%
-0.6%
0.5%
0.4%
0.6%
0.2%
-0.3%
-0.1%
0.0%
0.9%

3-33

Estimate Percent Composition
Material Category
2010
Food Waste
17.6%
Food Waste, Loose
17.6%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
NA
Other Organics
8.6%
Branches and Stumps
0.2%
Prunings and Trimmings
1.6%
Leaves and Grass
3.4%
Manures
0.2%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
NA
Remainder/Composite Organic
3.3%
C&D Debris
12.2%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.1%
Wood – Treated
5.3%
Wood – Untreated
2.4%
Asphalt Roofing
0.2%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.1%
Carpet
2.1%
Carpet Padding
0.7%
Remainder/Composite C&D
1.3%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.7%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
Paint
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.1%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.4%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.2%
Electronics
1.6%
Computer-related Electronics
0.1%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.3%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.8%
Other Larger Electronics
0.3%
Other Wastes
10.9%
Bulky Items
3.2%
Textiles
4.7%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
1.3%
Other Miscellaneous
1.6%
Grand Total
100%

2015
18.3%
16.4%
2.0%
9.4%
0.1%
1.8%
3.7%
0.1%
2.9%
0.7%
17.0%
0.5%
10.3%
1.3%
0.5%
0.5%
1.6%
0.3%
2.0%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.0%
0.1%
0.4%
0.0%
0.3%
0.0%
0.1%
12.0%
2.6%
4.5%
0.0%
2.7%
2.3%
100%

Change
0.7%
-1.2%
NA
0.8%
0.0%
0.2%
0.3%
-0.1%
NA
-2.6%
4.8%
0.5%
5.0%
-1.1%
0.3%
0.4%
-0.6%
-0.4%
0.7%
-0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
-0.1%
0.0%
-0.1%
-1.2%
-0.1%
0.0%
-0.8%
-0.2%
1.2%
-0.7%
-0.2%
0.0%
1.3%
0.7%

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
3.6.4 WHEELABRATOR-BRIDGEPORT RRF
Table 3-20 compares the composition of aggregate waste at the Wheelabrator-Bridgeport RRF.

Table 3-20 Comparison of Aggregate Waste Composition (Wheelabrator-Bridgeport RRF)
Estimate Percent Composition
Material Category
2010
Paper
29.0%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
10.6%
High Grade Office Paper
1.5%
Magazines/Catalogs
1.4%
Newsprint
2.3%
Phone Books and Directories
0.4%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
NA
Other Recyclable Paper
3.6%
Compostable Paper
7.0%
Remainder/Composite Paper
2.3%
Plastic
14.3%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.7%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.8%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.3%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.1%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.4%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
1.4%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.5%
Durable Plastic Items
3.2%
Film (non-bag)
0.7%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.5%
Other Film
3.0%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
NA
Pallets – Plastic
0.3%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
2.1%
Metal
4.6%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.2%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.1%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
NA
Tin/Steel Containers
0.8%
Other Ferrous
1.3%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.7%
Appliances
0.4%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.0%
Remainder/Composite Metal
1.1%
Glass
2.5%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.8%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.3%
Deposit Glass
0.3%
Flat Glass
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.1%

2015
26.5%
5.2%
1.5%
1.0%
1.1%
0.2%
0.3%
4.0%
12.2%
1.2%
13.2%
0.6%
0.4%
0.4%
0.8%
0.1%
1.1%
0.1%
0.7%
0.9%
1.2%
1.1%
4.0%
0.3%
0.0%
1.6%
3.4%
0.1%
0.2%
0.7%
0.8%
0.6%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.8%
2.4%
1.3%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
0.5%

Change
-2.5%
-5.4%
0.0%
-0.5%
-1.2%
-0.2%
NA
0.4%
5.2%
-1.1%
-1.1%
-0.1%
0.3%
-0.5%
0.5%
0.0%
0.7%
-1.2%
0.2%
-2.3%
0.5%
0.6%
1.0%
NA
-0.3%
-0.6%
-1.2%
-0.1%
0.1%
NA
0.0%
-0.7%
-0.6%
-0.4%
0.0%
-0.4%
-0.2%
-0.4%
0.0%
-0.1%
0.0%
0.4%

3-34

Estimate Percent Composition
Material Category
2010
Food Waste
13.6%
Food Waste, Loose
13.6%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
NA
Other Organics
11.5%
Branches and Stumps
0.9%
Prunings and Trimmings
1.1%
Leaves and Grass
5.2%
Manures
0.1%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
NA
Remainder/Composite Organic
4.3%
C&D Debris
12.1%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.3%
Wood – Treated
3.4%
Wood – Untreated
4.4%
Asphalt Roofing
1.0%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.0%
Carpet
1.2%
Carpet Padding
0.5%
Remainder/Composite C&D
1.3%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.4%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.1%
Paint
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.2%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.1%
Electronics
2.2%
Computer-related Electronics
0.4%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.7%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.1%
Other Larger Electronics
1.1%
Other Wastes
9.6%
Bulky Items
2.0%
Textiles
5.1%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
1.7%
Other Miscellaneous
0.8%
Grand Total
100%

2015
29.1%
22.0%
7.1%
7.5%
0.5%
0.6%
2.1%
0.0%
3.7%
0.6%
5.2%
0.7%
1.6%
1.3%
0.0%
0.2%
0.4%
0.0%
1.0%
0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4%
0.0%
0.5%
0.8%
0.0%
0.3%
0.2%
0.2%
11.0%
0.7%
5.7%
0.1%
2.8%
1.6%
100%

Change
15.5%
8.4%
NA
-4.1%
-0.3%
-0.6%
-3.1%
-0.1%
NA
-3.7%
-6.9%
0.4%
-1.8%
-3.1%
-1.0%
0.2%
-0.8%
-0.5%
-0.3%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
-0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.0%
0.5%
-1.5%
-0.3%
-0.4%
0.1%
-0.8%
1.4%
-1.4%
0.7%
0.1%
1.1%
0.8%

CT - DEEP

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS
3.6.5 NEW HAVEN MUNICIPAL TRANSFER STATION
Table 3-21 compares the composition of aggregate waste at the New Haven Municipal Transfer Station.

Table 3-21 Comparison of Aggregate Waste Composition (New Haven Municipal Transfer Station)
Estimate Percent Composition
Material Category
2010
Paper
26.9%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
10.5%
High Grade Office Paper
2.2%
Magazines/Catalogs
0.9%
Newsprint
1.9%
Phone Books and Directories
0.5%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
NA
Other Recyclable Paper
3.4%
Compostable Paper
5.9%
Remainder/Composite Paper
1.5%
Plastic
12.7%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.7%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.2%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.3%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.6%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.2%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.3%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.1%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.7%
Durable Plastic Items
2.6%
Film (non-bag)
0.9%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.7%
Other Film
3.0%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
NA
Pallets – Plastic
0.2%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
2.2%
Metal
4.0%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.2%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
NA
Tin/Steel Containers
1.3%
Other Ferrous
0.5%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.5%
Appliances
0.1%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.6%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.9%
Glass
2.4%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
1.1%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.1%
Deposit Glass
0.4%
Flat Glass
0.6%
Broken Glass
0.2%

CT - DEEP

2015
21.6%
6.1%
1.2%
0.5%
1.3%
0.1%
0.3%
2.2%
9.0%
0.8%
11.1%
0.6%
0.4%
0.3%
0.6%
0.1%
0.6%
0.0%
0.7%
0.5%
1.1%
0.9%
3.0%
0.2%
0.0%
2.1%
2.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.4%
0.6%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.7%
1.9%
0.9%
0.1%
0.3%
0.0%
0.6%

Change
-5.3%
-4.4%
-1.0%
-0.4%
-0.7%
-0.4%
NA
-1.2%
3.1%
-0.7%
-1.6%
0.0%
0.2%
0.0%
0.1%
-0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
-2.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
NA
-0.2%
-0.1%
-1.9%
0.0%
0.0%
NA
-0.7%
-0.3%
-0.5%
-0.1%
-0.6%
-0.2%
-0.5%
-0.1%
0.0%
-0.1%
-0.6%
0.3%

3-35

Estimate Percent Composition
Material Category
2010
Food Waste
13.1%
Food Waste, Loose
13.1%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
NA
Other Organics
11.0%
Branches and Stumps
0.6%
Prunings and Trimmings
0.9%
Leaves and Grass
4.8%
Manures
0.5%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
NA
Remainder/Composite Organic
4.1%
C&D Debris
17.0%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.5%
Wood – Treated
8.2%
Wood – Untreated
1.9%
Asphalt Roofing
0.0%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
1.4%
Carpet
2.0%
Carpet Padding
0.3%
Remainder/Composite C&D
2.7%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.3%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
Paint
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.1%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.1%
Electronics
1.9%
Computer-related Electronics
0.3%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.5%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.4%
Other Larger Electronics
0.6%
Other Wastes
10.8%
Bulky Items
1.9%
Textiles
5.8%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
1.5%
Other Miscellaneous
1.7%
Grand Total
100%

2015
25.9%
22.2%
3.7%
16.6%
0.2%
0.9%
7.6%
1.8%
4.2%
1.9%
5.5%
0.1%
2.1%
0.5%
0.0%
0.1%
1.7%
0.0%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.0%
0.3%
1.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.1%
0.5%
13.6%
1.6%
6.4%
0.0%
3.8%
1.8%
100%

Change
12.8%
9.2%
NA
5.6%
-0.4%
0.0%
2.8%
1.2%
NA
-2.2%
-11.5%
-0.4%
-6.1%
-1.4%
0.0%
-1.3%
-0.3%
-0.3%
-1.7%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.2%
-0.8%
0.1%
-0.3%
-0.3%
-0.2%
2.7%
-0.3%
0.6%
0.0%
2.3%
0.1%

 3. STATEWIDE WASTE CHARACTERIZATION RESULTS

This page intentionally left blank.

3-36

CT - DEEP

 4.

SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING RESULTS

4.1 AGGREGATE SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING COMPOSITION
The results in this section combine all 81 samples of residential single stream recyclables to generate the
average composition of these recyclables.
4.1.1 COMPOSITION WITH BAGGED WASTE CONSIDERED A CONTAMINANT
The sorting protocol for single stream recyclables included a category for Bagged Wastes. The results
below treat bagged waste as if 100 percent of the material in the bags were non-targeted materials, i.e.,
contamination. Newspapers that have not been removed from the sleeves are also considered nonrecyclable in these figures.

Figure 4-1 illustrates the breakdown of recyclable paper (blue), recyclable containers and plastics (green)
and contamination (red) in single stream recycling. Recyclable containers comprise just over 27 percent
of the total, with glass bottles (including broken glass) the most prevalent container type by weight.
Figure 4-1 Single-Stream Recycling Composition (Bagged Waste as Contaminant)
Contaminants
18.2%
Steel Cans
1.7%

Aluminum Cans
0.6%
Recyclable Paper
54.6%

Glass Bottles
17.2%
Other Recyclable
Plastic
2.3%
Plastic Bottles
4.9%

CT - DEEP

Aseptic/Cartons
0.4%

4-1

 4.

SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING RESULTS

Figure 4-2 presents the 10 most prevalent individual material categories found in single stream recyclables.
Eight of the top 10 items are materials that are actively targeted in single stream programs. Non-recyclable
Paper (including Newspapers in sleeves) and Bagged Waste made the top 10 list as contaminants,
confirming what is often reported anecdotally by MRF operators.
Figure 4-2 Single-Stream Recycling Results (Top 10 Materials)
20%

18.2%

18%
16%

14.7%

14%

12.1%

12%
10%
7.9%

8%

7.1%

2.9%

2.1%

2.0%

PET Bottles/Jars

3.2%

4%

Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass

5.2%

6%

2%

4-2

Bagged Wastes

Non-Recyclable Paper

Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass

Magazines/Catalogs

Broken Glass

Other Recyclable Paper

Newsprint

Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper

0%

CT - DEEP

 4. SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING RESULTS
Table 4-1 provides a detailed statistical profile of the single stream recyclable samples obtained for this
project. For each material category, the mean percent and confidence intervals are shown. Confidence
intervals are calculated at a 90 percent level of confidence.
Table 4-1 Single-Stream Recycling Composition (Bagged Waste as Contaminant)
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Recyclable Paper
54.6%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
18.2%
2.4%
High Grade Office Paper
1.8%
0.5%
Magazines/Catalogs
7.1%
1.0%
Newsprint
14.7%
1.7%
Phone Books and Directories
0.7%
0.4%
Other Recyclable Paper
12.1%
0.9%
Aseptic Boxes & Cartons
0.4%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.4%
0.1%
Non-Recyclable Paper
4.7%
Non-Recyclable Paper
3.2%
0.6%
Newspaper, Bagged
1.5%
0.6%
Plastic Bottles
4.9%
PET Bottles/Jars
2.0%
0.2%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.7%
0.1%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
1.9%
0.2%
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
0.2%
0.0%
Rigid Plastic - Recyclable
2.3%
PET Containers other than Bottles
0.5%
0.1%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.3%
0.1%
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
0.6%
0.1%
Bulky Plastic Items
0.9%
0.4%
Non-Recyclable Plastic
3.0%
Expanded Polystyrene
0.1%
0.0%
Plastic Films
1.4%
0.5%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
1.5%
0.2%
Glass Bottles
17.2%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
5.2%
0.9%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass 2.1%
0.6%
CT Deposit Glass Beverage Containers
2.0%
0.4%
Broken Glass
7.9%
1.5%

CT - DEEP

4-3

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Non-Recyclable Glass
0.2%
Flat Glass
0.2%
0.1%
Metal - Aluminum Cans
0.6%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.3%
0.0%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.3%
0.1%
Metal - Steel Cans
1.7%
Tin/Steel Containers
1.7%
0.2%
Metal - Other
2.2%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.1%
0.0%
Other Ferrous
1.0%
0.4%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.1%
0.1%
Appliances
0.0%
0.0%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.1%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.8%
0.4%
Contaminants - Compostable Organics
1.5%
Food Waste
0.8%
0.3%
Yard Waste
0.6%
0.6%
Contaminants - Other
6.7%
C&D Debris
0.5%
0.4%
Wood
0.7%
0.6%
HHW
0.1%
0.0%
Empty HHW Containers
0.5%
0.1%
Electronics
0.5%
0.2%
Bulky Items
0.0%
0.0%
Textiles
1.0%
0.6%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
0.1%
0.0%
Other Miscellaneous
0.4%
0.2%
Bagged Wastes
2.9%
1.0%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
81

 4.

SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING RESULTS

4.1.2 BAGGED WASTE COMPOSITION
Bagged wastes were subsequently analyzed to determine what materials are arriving at single stream MRFs
still contained in bags. Figure 4-3 shows the incidence of both targeted recyclables and contaminants in
bagged wastes. As shown, bagged wastes were found to be roughly split between trash and recyclables.
In practice, some bags contained mostly or entirely recyclables, while other contained mostly or entirely
trash. Other bags contained a mix.

Figure 4-3 Composition of Bagged Waste
Steel Cans
0.8%

Contaminants
45.7%

Aluminum Cans
0.3%
Glass Bottles
9.1%
Other Recyclable
Plastic
1.2%
Plastic Bottles
3.0%
Aseptic/Cartons
2.2%

Recyclable Paper
37.7%

4-4

CT - DEEP

 4. SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING RESULTS
Table 4-2 provides a detailed summary of the composition of bagged wastes found in the inbound single
stream recyclable samples. This table excludes newspapers still in the sleeve.
Table 4-2 Bagged Waste Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Recyclable Paper
37.7%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
1.7%
0.6%
High Grade Office Paper
2.8%
3.0%
Magazines/Catalogs
2.0%
0.9%
Newsprint
11.5%
8.3%
Phone Books and Directories
0.0%
0.0%
Other Recyclable Paper
19.6%
8.8%
Aseptic Boxes & Cartons
2.2%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
2.2%
2.8%
Non-Recyclable Paper
6.9%
Non-Recyclable Paper
6.9%
6.4%
Newspaper, Bagged
0.0%
0.0%
Plastic Bottles
3.0%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.8%
0.5%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers 1.2%
0.7%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.8%
0.4%
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
0.1%
0.1%
Rigid Plastic - Recyclable
1.2%
PET Containers other than Bottles
0.6%
0.4%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.0%
0.0%
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
0.5%
0.3%
Bulky Plastic Items
0.0%
0.0%
Non-Recyclable Plastic
10.7%
Expanded Polystyrene
0.6%
0.4%
Plastic Films
5.3%
3.0%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
4.9%
4.0%
Glass Bottles
9.1%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
4.9%
1.2%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass 0.7%
0.7%
CT Deposit Glass Beverage Containers
0.5%
0.6%
Broken Glass
3.1%
2.1%

CT - DEEP

4-5

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Non-Recyclable Glass
0.8%
Flat Glass
0.8%
0.7%
Metal - Aluminum Cans
0.3%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.3%
0.4%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.0%
0.1%
Metal - Steel Cans
0.8%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.8%
0.5%
Metal - Other
1.3%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.3%
0.3%
Other Ferrous
0.3%
0.3%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.0%
0.0%
Appliances
0.6%
1.0%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.1%
0.3%
Contaminants - Compostable Organics
9.5%
Food Waste
7.7%
6.0%
Yard Waste
1.7%
3.1%
Contaminants - Other
16.5%
C&D Debris
0.1%
0.2%
Wood
1.8%
2.1%
HHW
0.0%
0.0%
Empty HHW Containers
0.0%
0.0%
Electronics
0.2%
0.2%
Bulky Items
3.3%
4.0%
Textiles
2.2%
2.8%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
5.4%
4.5%
Other Miscellaneous
3.5%
5.1%
Bagged Wastes
0.0%
0.0%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
7

 4.

SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING RESULTS

4.1.3 COMPOSITION WITH BAGGED WASTE SORTED TO PROPER CATEGORY
The composition of single stream recyclables has been restated in this section to reflect the impact of
breaking open and sorting the bagged wastes into the appropriate category. Figure 4-4 restates the
breakdown of recyclable paper, recyclable containers/plastics, and contamination. As shown, the overall
contamination rate drops slightly to 16.7 percent (with bagged newspaper still considered
“contamination”). If bagged newspapers are considered acceptable, then the contamination rate drops to
15.2 percent.

Figure 4-4 Single-Stream Recycling Composition (Bagged Waste is Sorted)
Contaminants
16.7%
Steel Cans
1.8%

Aluminum Cans
0.6%
Glass Bottles
17.5%

Recyclable Paper
55.7%

Other Recyclable
Plastic
2.3%
Plastic Bottles
5.0%

Aseptic/Cartons
0.5%

4-6

CT - DEEP

 4. SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING RESULTS
Table 4-3 provides a detailed summary of single stream recycling composition with bagged wastes sorted
into the appropriate category. Newspapers in sleeves remain a separate category in this table.
Table 4-3 Single-Stream Recycling Composition (Bagged Waste is Sorted)
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
61.1%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
18.3%
2.4%
High Grade Office Paper
1.9%
0.5%
Magazines/Catalogs
7.1%
1.0%
Newsprint
15.0%
1.7%
Phone Books and Directories
0.7%
0.4%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.5%
0.1%
Other Recyclable Paper
12.7%
0.9%
Non-Recyclable Paper
3.4%
0.6%
Newspaper, Bagged
1.5%
0.6%
Plastic
10.6%
PET Bottles/Jars
2.1%
0.2%
PET Containers other than Bottles
0.5%
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.8%
0.1%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
1.9%
0.2%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.3%
0.1%
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
0.2%
0.0%
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
0.6%
0.1%
Expanded Polystyrene
0.2%
0.0%
Bulky Plastic Items
0.9%
0.4%
Plastic Films
1.6%
0.5%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
1.6%
0.2%
Glass
17.7%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
5.4%
0.9%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass 2.1%
0.6%
CT Deposit Glass Beverage Containers
2.0%
0.4%
Flat Glass
0.2%
0.1%
Broken Glass
8.0%
1.5%

CT - DEEP

4-7

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Metal
4.6%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.3%
0.0%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.3%
0.1%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.1%
0.0%
Tin/Steel Containers
1.8%
0.2%
Other Ferrous
1.0%
0.4%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.1%
0.1%
Appliances
0.0%
0.1%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.1%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.8%
0.4%
Organics
1.8%
Food Waste
1.1%
0.3%
Yard Waste
0.7%
0.7%
Construction & Demolition Materials
1.2%
C&D Debris
0.5%
0.4%
Wood
0.7%
0.6%
Household Hazardous Waste (HHW)
0.6%
HHW
0.1%
0.0%
Empty HHW Containers
0.5%
0.1%
Electronics
0.5%
Electronics
0.5%
0.2%
Other Wastes
2.0%
Bulky Items
0.1%
0.2%
Textiles
1.1%
0.6%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
0.2%
0.1%
Other Miscellaneous
0.5%
0.3%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
81

 4.

SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING RESULTS

4.2 SINGLE STREAM COMPOSITION BY MRF
Single stream samples from each host MRF were analyzed separately to investigate differences in the
inbound material. Figure 4-5 shows this comparison for the case where bagged wastes and newspapers
still in the sleeve are considered to be contaminants. As shown, the two MRFs are receiving a relatively
comparable mix of inbound material.
Figure 4-5 Comparison of Single Stream Recycling Composition by MRF (Bagged Waste as
Contaminant)
60%

56.3%
52.7%

50%

40%

30%
19.8%
16.9%

18.9%
15.7%

20%

10%

4.5% 5.2%
0.5% 0.4%

1.8% 2.7%

0.5% 0.7%

1.3% 2.1%

Hartford

Contaminants

Steel Cans

Aluminum Cans

Glass Bottles

Other Recyclable Plastic

Plastic Bottles

Aseptic/Cartons

Recyclable Paper

0%

Willimantic

Figure 4-6 shows the same comparison for the case where bagged wastes is sorted into the appropriate
categories (although newspapers still in the sleeve are still classified as contamination).

4-8

CT - DEEP

 4. SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING RESULTS
Figure 4-6 Comparison of Single Stream Recycling Composition by MRF (Bagged Waste is
Sorted)
60%

57.1%
54.1%

50%

40%

30%
19.3%

20%

17.7%
15.7%

15.9%

10%

4.7% 5.3%
0.5% 0.4%

1.9% 2.7%

0.5% 0.7%

1.4% 2.1%

Hartford

CT - DEEP

4-9

Willimantic

Contaminants

Steel Cans

Aluminum Cans

Glass Bottles

Other Recyclable Plastic

Plastic Bottles

Aseptic/Cartons

Recyclable Paper

0%

 4.

SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING RESULTS

Table 4-4 provides a detailed comparison of the single stream recycling composition at the two
participating MRFS.
Table 4-4 Comparison of Single Stream Recyclables MIRA Hartford and Willimantic MRFs
Estimate Percent Composition
WilliMaterial Category
Hartford mantic Average
Paper
56.7% 62.4% 59.7%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
19.0% 17.6% 18.2%
High Grade Office Paper
2.3%
1.3%
1.8%
Magazines/Catalogs
7.4%
6.8%
7.1%
Newsprint
11.9% 17.2% 14.7%
Phone Books and Directories
0.6%
0.7%
0.7%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.5%
0.4%
0.4%
Other Recyclable Paper
11.4% 12.7% 12.1%
Non-Recyclable Paper
2.7%
3.6%
3.2%
Newspaper, Bagged
0.9%
2.1%
1.5%
Plastic
9.5% 10.8% 10.2%
PET Bottles/Jars
1.9%
2.1%
2.0%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.8%
0.7%
0.7%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
1.6%
2.1%
1.9%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.3%
0.2%
0.3%
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
Expanded Polystyrene
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
Bulky Plastic Items
0.4%
1.4%
0.9%
Plastic Films
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
1.6%
1.3%
1.5%
Glass
19.1% 16.0% 17.4%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
4.6%
5.7%
5.2%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
1.6%
2.6%
2.1%
CT Deposit Glass beverage containers
1.4%
2.5%
2.0%
Other Glass
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
Broken Glass
11.3%
4.9%
7.9%

Estimate Percent Composition
WilliMaterial Category
Hartford mantic Average
Metal
4.4%
4.6%
4.5%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.2%
0.3%
0.3%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.3%
0.4%
0.3%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
Tin/Steel Containers
1.3%
2.1%
1.7%
Other Ferrous
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
Appliances
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Metal
1.3%
0.4%
0.8%
Organics
2.3%
0.8%
1.5%
Food Waste
1.0%
0.7%
0.8%
Yard Waste
1.3%
0.1%
0.6%
Construction & Demolition Materials
1.7%
0.6%
1.1%
C&D Debris
0.7%
0.3%
0.5%
Wood
1.0%
0.4%
0.7%
Household Hazardous Waste (HHW)
0.5%
0.7%
0.6%
HHW
0.1%
0.0%
0.1%
Empty HHW Containers
0.4%
0.6%
0.5%
Electronics
0.2%
0.7%
0.5%
Electronics
0.2%
0.7%
0.5%
Other Wastes
5.6%
3.4%
4.5%
Bulky Items
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Textiles
1.5%
0.6%
1.0%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
Other Miscellaneous
0.2%
0.7%
0.4%
Bagged Wastes
3.8%
2.1%
2.9%
Grand Total
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Detailed composition data for MIRA Hartford and Willimantic MRFs, with bagged waste treated as both
a contaminant and sorted properly, are contained in Appendix E.

4.3 ANALYSIS OF DEPOSIT CONTAINERS
Connecticut’s beverage container deposit law targets beer, carbonated soft drinks, and water. These
beverage types are packaged in PET plastic bottles, aluminum cans, and glass bottles. The 2015 Study
include separate categories for Connecticut deposit bottles and cans as well as non-deposit categories of
PET plastic, aluminum and glass. Table 4-5 summarizes the data focusing on Connecticut deposit
containers.
Table 4-5 Analysis of Deposit Containers in Connecticut Waste Stream

Container Type
PET Bottles & Jars
Aluminum Cans (Beverage/Non-Bev)
Glass Bottles & Jars
Total
Deposit Containers as a
Fraction of All Material

Total
Disposed
(tons)
20,671

Disposed Waste
Fraction of Total
Tons That are
Deposit
Containers
35.3%

Disposed
Deposit
Containers
(tons)
7,293

Single Stream
Fraction of
Total That are
Deposit
Containers
26.4%

5,565

55.0%

3,062

57.7%

36,925

19.8%

7,311

21.2%

63,160

28.0%

17,666

24.1%

0.8%

4-10

3.0%

CT - DEEP

 4. SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING RESULTS
The following observations are made about deposit containers in the disposed waste stream and in single
stream recyclables:

 The majority of PET bottles/jars and glass bottles/jars being placed in the disposed waste and single
stream are non-deposit containers. This suggests that a significant fraction of PET and glass deposit
containers are being redeemed through normal channels within the state. It also may suggest that
there are many other types of non-carbonated beverages and non-beverage products being packaged
in PET bottles and glass jars. It was beyond the scope of this study to investigate the universe of
deposit container recycling.
 By weight, deposit containers make up only 0.8 percent of disposed wastes, but this projects to over
17,600 tons of deposit containers that are nonetheless still being disposed.
 Deposit containers were found to be 3.0 percent of single stream recyclables.1
 Just over half of the aluminum cans found in both the disposed waste stream and in single stream
recyclables were deposit containers. While this may seem like a high fraction, it nonetheless suggests
that aluminum cans are being redeemed at a reasonably high level. This conclusion is inferred because
the vast majority of aluminum cans sold in the market contain carbonated beverages (beer and soda).
Non-deposit aluminum cans include primarily juices and aluminum cat food tins (which were included
with non-deposit aluminum cans by definition for this study).
It was beyond the scope of this study to analyze the overall performance of the deposit system, and
several statements above may warrant further investigation.

1

No tonnage data for single stream recyclables was available for inclusion in this report.

CT - DEEP

4-11

 4. SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING RESULTS

 

This page intentionally left blank.

4-12 CT - DEEP

5.

ICI GENERATOR RESULTS

5.1 OVERVIEW
The 2015 Study analyzed disposed wastes from six ICI generator types:
 Grocery Stores,
 Restaurants,
 Hotels,
 Retail Big Box Stores,
 Small Retail Stores, and
 Offices.
This chapter contains disposed waste composition profiles for these six generators. For each generator
type, the top five most prevalent disposed waste categories are shown, along with a detailed statistical
profile of the disposed wastes.
It is important to note that the results contained herein, while indicative of the differences in waste
composition across various ICI generator types, are based on limited sampling (in some cases very limited)
and it is possible that a more comprehensive study would find materially different results.

5.2 ICI GENERATOR RESULTS: GROCERY STORES
A total of nine samples were obtained from Grocery Stores. Figure 5-1 shows the most prevalent materials
in Grocery waste, which cumulatively make up 84.0 percent of wastes from this generator. Although not
shown in the table, roughly 13.5 percent of Food Waste was contained in packaging.
Figure 5-1 Top 5 Most Prevalent Constituents in Grocery Store Waste
Food Waste

38.4%

Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper

25.2%

Compostable Paper

13.0%

Other Film

4.0%

Wood – Treated

3.4%
0%

CT - DEEP

10%

5-1

20%

30%

40%

50%

 5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS
Figure 5-2 shows the incidence of routinely recycled materials (corrugated cardboard, fiber, bottles and
cans) as well as compostable organic materials (primarily food waste and low grade paper).1 In contrast to
the overall ICI waste stream, the vast majority of grocery store waste has potential to be diverted; however.
Figure 5-2 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Grocery Store Waste
Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Single Stream
Program, 17.1%

Recyclable Fiber,
27.5%

Recyclable
Containers, 2.7%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 1.0%
Compostable
Organics, 51.7%

Pie charts in this section use the term “Compostable Organics” to include organic materials – food wastes, green wastes,
and low grade papers – that could be composted, digested, or otherwise recovered in a commercial processing facility.
1

5-2

CT - DEEP

 5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS
Table 5-1 shows the detailed statistical analysis of grocery store samples.
Table 5-1 Detailed Grocery Waste Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
42.2%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
25.2%
8.6%
High Grade Office Paper
0.9%
0.9%
Magazines/Catalogs
0.0%
0.0%
Newsprint
0.3%
0.3%
Phone Books and Directories
0.0%
0.0%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.1%
0.1%
Other Recyclable Paper
1.1%
0.7%
Compostable Paper
13.0%
5.4%
Remainder/Composite Paper
1.6%
2.2%
Plastic
12.2%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.5%
0.6%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.6%
0.3%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.2%
0.1%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.3%
0.2%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.1%
0.2%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.8%
0.5%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.5%
0.6%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
1.0%
0.9%
Durable Plastic Items
0.2%
0.3%
Film (non-bag)
2.7%
0.9%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.6%
0.5%
Other Film
4.0%
1.6%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.0%
0.0%
Pallets – Plastic
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
0.7%
0.4%
Metal
1.2%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.2%
0.1%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.5%
0.6%
Other Ferrous
0.0%
0.0%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.0%
0.0%
Appliances
0.0%
0.0%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.4%
0.6%
Glass
0.2%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
0.1%
0.1%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.1%
0.1%
Deposit Glass
0.0%
0.1%
Flat Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.0%
0.0%

CT - DEEP

5-3

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Food Waste
38.4%
Food Waste, Loose
24.9% 10.7%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
13.5%
5.5%
Other Organics
0.5%
Branches and Stumps
0.0%
0.0%
Prunings and Trimmings
0.3%
0.4%
Leaves and Grass
0.0%
0.0%
Manures
0.0%
0.0%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.2%
0.4%
C&D Debris
3.5%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.0%
0.0%
Wood – Treated
3.4%
1.9%
Wood – Untreated
0.0%
0.0%
Asphalt Roofing
0.0%
0.0%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.0%
0.0%
Carpet
0.0%
0.0%
Carpet Padding
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite C&D
0.1%
0.1%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.3%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
Paint
0.0%
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.2%
0.3%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.1%
0.1%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.0%
0.0%
Electronics
0.0%
Computer-related Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.0%
0.0%
Other Larger Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Wastes
1.4%
Bulky Items
0.0%
0.0%
Textiles
0.2%
0.1%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
0.8%
0.2%
Other Miscellaneous
0.5%
0.5%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
9

 5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS
5.3 ICI GENERATOR RESULTS: RESTAURANTS
Eight samples were obtained from Restaurants. Figure 5-3 shows the most prevalent materials in
Restaurant waste, which cumulatively make up 81.6 percent of wastes from this generator. Virtually all of
the disposed food waste was loose (i.e., not contained in packaging).
Figure 5-3 Top 5 Most Prevalent Constituents in Restaurant Waste
Food Waste

53.7%

Compostable Paper

12.9%

Other Film

6.7%

Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper

4.6%

Bottom Fines and Dirt

3.7%
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Figure 5-4 shows the incidence of routinely recycled materials (corrugated cardboard, fiber, bottles and
cans) as well as compostable organic materials (primarily food waste and low grade paper). In contrast to
the overall ICI waste stream, the vast majority of restaurant waste has potential to be diverted.
Figure 5-4 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Restaurant Waste
Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Single Stream
Program, 15.6%

Recyclable Fiber,
6.5%

Recyclable
Containers,
10.1%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 1.2%

Compostable
Organics, 66.6%

5-4

CT - DEEP

 5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS
Table 5-2 shows the detailed statistical analysis of restaurant samples.
Table 5-2 Detailed Restaurant Waste Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
19.7%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
4.6%
2.7%
High Grade Office Paper
0.1%
0.1%
Magazines/Catalogs
0.1%
0.1%
Newsprint
0.7%
0.5%
Phone Books and Directories
0.0%
0.0%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.2%
0.1%
Other Recyclable Paper
1.0%
0.4%
Compostable Paper
12.9%
3.6%
Remainder/Composite Paper
0.1%
0.1%
Plastic
12.5%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.5%
0.2%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.2%
0.1%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
1.0%
0.3%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.9%
1.5%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.8%
0.3%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.0%
0.0%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.2%
0.1%
Durable Plastic Items
0.1%
0.1%
Film (non-bag)
0.5%
0.3%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.1%
0.0%
Other Film
6.7%
2.1%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.1%
0.1%
Pallets – Plastic
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
1.3%
0.9%
Metal
2.8%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.2%
0.1%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.2%
0.1%
Tin/Steel Containers
1.4%
0.8%
Other Ferrous
0.0%
0.0%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.0%
0.1%
Appliances
0.0%
0.0%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.9%
1.1%
Glass
6.7%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
3.5%
2.3%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
1.4%
1.4%
Deposit Glass
0.9%
0.5%
Flat Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.8%
0.7%

CT - DEEP

5-5

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Food Waste
53.7%
Food Waste, Loose
53.1%
9.1%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
0.6%
0.4%
Other Organics
0.1%
Branches and Stumps
0.0%
0.0%
Prunings and Trimmings
0.0%
0.0%
Leaves and Grass
0.0%
0.0%
Manures
0.0%
0.0%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
0.1%
0.1%
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.0%
0.0%
C&D Debris
0.1%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.0%
0.0%
Wood – Treated
0.1%
0.1%
Wood – Untreated
0.0%
0.0%
Asphalt Roofing
0.0%
0.0%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.0%
0.0%
Carpet
0.0%
0.0%
Carpet Padding
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite C&D
0.0%
0.0%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.1%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
Paint
0.0%
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
0.0%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.0%
0.0%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.1%
0.1%
Electronics
0.0%
Computer-related Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.0%
0.0%
Other Larger Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Wastes
4.3%
Bulky Items
0.0%
0.1%
Textiles
0.4%
0.3%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
3.7%
0.7%
Other Miscellaneous
0.3%
0.1%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
8

 5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS
5.4 ICI GENERATOR RESULTS: HOTELS
Only two samples were obtained from Hotels, so it is not possible to make judgements on the
representativeness of the reported data. Figure 5-5 shows the most prevalent materials in Hotel waste,
which cumulatively make up 65.1 percent of wastes from this generator.
Figure 5-5 Top 5 Most Prevalent Constituents in Hotel Waste
Food Waste

27.2%

Compostable Paper

15.1%

Textiles

13.8%

Wood – Treated

4.7%

Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass

4.3%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Figure 5-6 shows the incidence of routinely recycled materials (corrugated cardboard, fiber, bottles and
cans) as well as compostable organic materials (primarily food waste and low grade paper). Hotel waste
appears to have comparable divertibility with the overall ICI waste stream, although with significantly more
recyclable containers.
Figure 5-6 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Hotel Waste
Recyclable Fiber,
7.8%
Recyclable
Containers,
12.7%

Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Single Stream
Program, 37.0%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 0.3%

Compostable
Organics, 42.2%

5-6

CT - DEEP

 5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS
Table 5-3 shows the detailed statistical analysis of hotel samples.
Table 5-3 Detailed Hotel Waste Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
25.2%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
2.4%
2.3%
High Grade Office Paper
0.1%
0.2%
Magazines/Catalogs
2.4%
4.0%
Newsprint
1.3%
2.0%
Phone Books and Directories
0.0%
0.0%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
1.0%
0.6%
Other Recyclable Paper
1.6%
0.7%
Compostable Paper
15.1%
2.5%
Remainder/Composite Paper
1.3%
2.1%
Plastic
12.8%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.4%
0.0%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.2%
0.4%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.3%
0.3%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.8%
0.2%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.0%
0.1%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.8%
1.0%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.5%
0.7%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.9%
1.5%
Durable Plastic Items
0.0%
0.0%
Film (non-bag)
1.3%
2.1%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.4%
0.2%
Other Film
4.2%
1.3%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.1%
0.2%
Pallets – Plastic
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
2.8%
2.8%
Metal
1.8%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.1%
0.0%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.4%
0.6%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.2%
0.1%
Other Ferrous
0.2%
0.0%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.0%
0.0%
Appliances
0.0%
0.0%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.8%
0.9%
Glass
9.3%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
4.3%
4.2%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.4%
0.7%
Deposit Glass
4.3%
3.7%
Flat Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.3%
0.1%

CT - DEEP

5-7

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Food Waste
27.2%
Food Waste, Loose
25.7% 16.7%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
1.5%
2.5%
Other Organics
0.9%
Branches and Stumps
0.0%
0.0%
Prunings and Trimmings
0.0%
0.0%
Leaves and Grass
0.0%
0.0%
Manures
0.0%
0.0%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
0.1%
0.2%
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.8%
1.3%
C&D Debris
4.7%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.0%
0.0%
Wood – Treated
4.7%
7.7%
Wood – Untreated
0.0%
0.0%
Asphalt Roofing
0.0%
0.0%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.0%
0.0%
Carpet
0.0%
0.0%
Carpet Padding
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite C&D
0.0%
0.0%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.3%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
Paint
0.0%
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
0.0%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.3%
0.4%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.0%
0.0%
Electronics
0.3%
Computer-related Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.3%
0.1%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.0%
0.0%
Other Larger Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Wastes
17.6%
Bulky Items
0.0%
0.0%
Textiles
13.8% 21.2%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
3.4%
1.8%
Other Miscellaneous
0.4%
0.3%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
2

 5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS
5.5 ICI GENERATOR RESULTS: RETAIL BIG BOX STORES
Only three samples were obtained from Retail Big Box stores, so it is not possible to make judgements on
the representativeness of the reported data. Figure 5-7 shows the most prevalent materials in Retail Big
Box waste, which cumulatively make up about 61 percent of wastes from this generator. Interestingly,
significant amounts of corrugated cardboard were found in these samples. Additionally, one sample
contained a sizeable amount of compressed fuel cylinders, which is likely skewing the results given that
only three samples were obtained.
Figure 5-7 Top 5 Most Prevalent Constituents in Retail Big Box Waste
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper

16.4%

Other Recyclable Paper

12.4%

Food Waste

11.5%

Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane
Tanks

10.7%

Wood – Treated

9.9%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

Figure 5-8 shows the incidence of routinely recycled materials (corrugated cardboard, fiber, bottles and
cans) as well as compostable organic materials (primarily food waste and low grade paper). Hotel waste
appears to have comparable divertibility with the overall ICI waste stream, although with significantly more
recyclable containers.
Figure 5-8 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Retail Big Box Waste

Recyclable Fiber,
29.6%
Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Single Stream
Program, 43.7%
Recyclable
Containers, 0.3%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 0.0%
Compostable
Organics, 26.3%

5-8

CT - DEEP

 5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS
Table 5-4 shows the detailed statistical analysis of retail big box samples.
Table 5-4 Detailed Retail Big Box Waste Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
38.0%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
16.4%
8.2%
High Grade Office Paper
0.8%
1.2%
Magazines/Catalogs
0.0%
0.0%
Newsprint
0.0%
0.1%
Phone Books and Directories
0.0%
0.0%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.0%
0.0%
Other Recyclable Paper
12.4% 12.0%
Compostable Paper
8.3% 11.8%
Remainder/Composite Paper
0.1%
0.1%
Plastic
16.8%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.0%
0.1%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.0%
0.0%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.0%
0.1%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.0%
0.0%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.2%
0.2%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
2.6%
4.0%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.0%
0.0%
Durable Plastic Items
0.0%
0.0%
Film (non-bag)
2.5%
4.1%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.3%
0.4%
Other Film
0.8%
0.9%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
4.1%
6.7%
Pallets – Plastic
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
6.2%
9.7%
Metal
10.9%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.0%
0.0%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.0%
0.0%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.2%
0.3%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.0%
0.0%
Other Ferrous
0.0%
0.0%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.0%
0.0%
Appliances
0.0%
0.0%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
10.7% 17.7%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.0%
0.0%
Glass
0.1%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Deposit Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Flat Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.1%
0.1%

CT - DEEP

5-9

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Food Waste
11.5%
Food Waste, Loose
2.3%
3.2%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
9.2% 15.3%
Other Organics
0.1%
Branches and Stumps
0.0%
0.0%
Prunings and Trimmings
0.0%
0.0%
Leaves and Grass
0.0%
0.0%
Manures
0.0%
0.0%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
0.1%
0.2%
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.0%
0.0%
C&D Debris
16.5%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.0%
0.0%
Wood – Treated
9.9% 16.2%
Wood – Untreated
6.6% 10.7%
Asphalt Roofing
0.0%
0.0%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.0%
0.0%
Carpet
0.0%
0.0%
Carpet Padding
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite C&D
0.0%
0.0%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.0%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
Paint
0.0%
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
0.0%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.0%
0.0%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.0%
0.0%
Electronics
0.0%
Computer-related Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.0%
0.0%
Other Larger Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Wastes
6.2%
Bulky Items
5.8%
9.6%
Textiles
0.0%
0.0%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
0.3%
0.4%
Other Miscellaneous
0.0%
0.0%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
3

 5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS
5.6 ICI GENERATOR RESULTS: SMALL RETAIL STORES
A total of 13 samples were obtained from Small Retail Stores. Figure 5-9 shows the most prevalent
materials in small retail waste, which cumulatively make up only 44.9 percent of wastes from this generator.
Figure 5-9 Top 5 Most Prevalent Constituents in Small Retail Waste
Food Waste

14.5%

Other Film

9.7%

Compostable Paper

8.1%

Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper

7.9%

Remainder/Composite Paper

4.7%
0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10% 12% 14% 16%

Figure 5-10 shows the incidence of routinely recycled materials (corrugated cardboard, fiber, bottles and
cans) as well as compostable organic materials (primarily food waste and low grade paper). This waste
profile appears to have comparable divertibility with the overall ICI waste stream.
Figure 5-10 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Small Retail Waste
Recyclable Fiber,
18.0%

Recyclable
Containers, 4.2%

Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Single Stream
Program, 44.0%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 1.7%

Compostable
Organics, 32.1%

5-10

CT - DEEP

 5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS
Table 5-5 shows the detailed statistical analysis of small retail samples.
Table 5-5 Detailed Retail Small Generator Waste Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
31.0%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
7.9%
2.8%
High Grade Office Paper
3.7%
4.1%
Magazines/Catalogs
2.2%
2.4%
Newsprint
1.1%
1.0%
Phone Books and Directories
0.0%
0.0%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.2%
0.2%
Other Recyclable Paper
3.2%
2.0%
Compostable Paper
8.1%
1.5%
Remainder/Composite Paper
4.7%
5.7%
Plastic
19.8%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.4%
0.2%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.1%
0.0%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.5%
0.2%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.8%
0.5%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.3%
0.3%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
0.7%
0.1%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.3%
0.4%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.2%
0.1%
Durable Plastic Items
1.3%
1.1%
Film (non-bag)
2.0%
1.5%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.5%
0.3%
Other Film
9.7%
8.0%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.1%
0.1%
Pallets – Plastic
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
2.9%
1.2%
Metal
3.6%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.2%
0.1%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.1%
0.0%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.3%
0.2%
Other Ferrous
1.0%
0.9%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.1%
0.1%
Appliances
0.0%
0.0%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Metal
1.8%
1.7%
Glass
1.4%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
0.6%
0.4%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.1%
0.1%
Deposit Glass
0.4%
0.2%
Flat Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.3%
0.2%

CT - DEEP

5-11

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Food Waste
14.5%
Food Waste, Loose
12.2%
7.7%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
2.3%
1.0%
Other Organics
6.4%
Branches and Stumps
0.0%
0.0%
Prunings and Trimmings
3.6%
4.1%
Leaves and Grass
2.2%
3.3%
Manures
0.0%
0.0%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
0.5%
0.2%
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.3%
0.2%
C&D Debris
14.2%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.0%
0.0%
Wood – Treated
3.5%
2.8%
Wood – Untreated
3.8%
3.6%
Asphalt Roofing
0.0%
0.0%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.1%
0.1%
Carpet
3.1%
3.7%
Carpet Padding
1.9%
2.1%
Remainder/Composite C&D
1.8%
2.0%
Household Hazardous Waste
1.5%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
Paint
0.0%
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
0.0%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 1.3%
1.0%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.2%
0.2%
Electronics
0.1%
Computer-related Electronics
0.1%
0.1%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.0%
0.0%
Other Larger Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Wastes
7.6%
Bulky Items
2.1%
2.4%
Textiles
2.7%
2.0%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
1.6%
0.5%
Other Miscellaneous
1.2%
0.8%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
13

 5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS
5.7 ICI GENERATOR RESULTS: OFFICES
A total of 8 samples were obtained from Offices. Figure 5-11 shows the most prevalent materials in small
retail waste, which cumulatively make up approximately 64 percent of wastes from this generator.
Figure 5-11 Top 5 Most Prevalent Constituents in Office Waste
Compostable Paper

27.3%

Food Waste

19.0%

Bulky Items

7.2%

Other Film

5.9%

Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper

5.0%
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Figure 5-12 shows the incidence of routinely recycled materials (corrugated cardboard, fiber, bottles and
cans) as well as compostable organic materials (primarily food waste and low grade paper). This waste
profile closely matches the overall ICI waste stream.
Figure 5-12 Recoverable Fiber, Containers and Organics in Office Waste
Recyclable Fiber,
16.5%

Not Currently
Recoverable in a
Single Stream
Program, 29.9%

Recyclable
Containers, 4.5%

Other Recyclable
Plastic, 1.3%

Compostable
Organics, 47.8%

5-12

CT - DEEP

 5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS
Table 5-6 shows the detailed statistical analysis of office generator samples.
Table 5-6 Detailed Office Generator Waste Composition
Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Paper
45.4%
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
5.0%
2.5%
High Grade Office Paper
4.7%
2.8%
Magazines/Catalogs
1.7%
1.3%
Newsprint
2.7%
2.4%
Phone Books and Directories
0.1%
0.2%
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
0.2%
0.1%
Other Recyclable Paper
2.3%
1.1%
Compostable Paper
27.3%
8.0%
Remainder/Composite Paper
1.5%
0.7%
Plastic
14.9%
PET Bottles/Jars
0.7%
0.5%
PET Containers Other than Bottles
0.4%
0.3%
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
0.6%
0.3%
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
0.4%
0.3%
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
0.3%
0.3%
Plastic Containers #3-#7
1.7%
0.9%
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
0.4%
0.3%
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
0.7%
0.3%
Durable Plastic Items
0.6%
0.6%
Film (non-bag)
0.5%
0.1%
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
0.4%
0.2%
Other Film
5.9%
1.3%
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
0.2%
0.2%
Pallets – Plastic
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Plastic
2.3%
0.8%
Metal
1.8%
Aluminum Beverage Containers
0.1%
0.1%
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers 0.2%
0.1%
Aluminum Plates & Foils
0.2%
0.1%
Tin/Steel Containers
0.3%
0.2%
Other Ferrous
0.5%
0.5%
Other Non-Ferrous
0.0%
0.0%
Appliances
0.0%
0.0%
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks 0.3%
0.5%
Remainder/Composite Metal
0.3%
0.3%
Glass
0.6%
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
0.4%
0.3%
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
0.1%
0.1%
Deposit Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Flat Glass
0.0%
0.0%
Remainder/Composite Glass
0.2%
0.2%

CT - DEEP

5-13

Est.
Conf.
Material Category
Percent Int (+/-)
Food Waste
19.0%
Food Waste, Loose
16.8%
6.5%
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
2.2%
1.0%
Other Organics
0.5%
Branches and Stumps
0.0%
0.0%
Prunings and Trimmings
0.1%
0.1%
Leaves and Grass
0.0%
0.0%
Manures
0.0%
0.0%
Diapers & Sanitary Products
0.4%
0.4%
Remainder/Composite Organic
0.0%
0.1%
C&D Debris
6.2%
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
0.0%
0.0%
Wood – Treated
0.3%
0.3%
Wood – Untreated
1.5%
2.4%
Asphalt Roofing
0.0%
0.0%
Drywall/Gypsum Board
0.0%
0.0%
Carpet
0.0%
0.0%
Carpet Padding
0.4%
0.7%
Remainder/Composite C&D
4.0%
3.4%
Household Hazardous Waste
0.8%
Ballasts, CFLs
0.0%
0.0%
Batteries – Lead Acid
0.0%
0.0%
Other Batteries
0.0%
0.0%
Paint
0.0%
0.0%
Sharps
0.0%
0.0%
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
0.0%
0.0%
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers 0.2%
0.1%
Pesticides and Fertilizers
0.0%
0.0%
Other Hazardous Waste
0.5%
0.7%
Electronics
0.9%
Computer-related Electronics
0.1%
0.2%
Other Small Consumer Electronics
0.8%
1.0%
Televisions and Computer Monitors
0.0%
0.0%
Other Larger Electronics
0.0%
0.0%
Other Wastes
9.8%
Bulky Items
7.2%
8.0%
Textiles
0.4%
0.4%
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
0.0%
0.0%
Bottom Fines and Dirt
1.4%
0.2%
Other Miscellaneous
0.7%
0.4%
Grand Total
100%
No. of Samples
8

 5. ICI GENERATOR RESULTS

 

This page intentionally left blank.

5-14 CT - DEEP

6.

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 CONCLUSIONS
 Comparability: The disposed waste composition found in the 2015 Study can be closely compared
to the results of the 2010 Study. With the exception of a difference in seasonality of data collection,
the sampling plan and field data collection methods remain largely unchanged.
 Dwindling Incidence of Curbside Recyclables: The results of this study (as well as other studies
that have been performed nationally) show that the incidence of recyclable fibers and containers
continues to diminish in the disposed waste stream. In the case of fibers, this is probably due to a
combination of factors beyond just an increase in recycling (i.e., reductions in paper production).
Regardless of the cause, it appears that the incidence of recyclable fiber and containers in disposed
waste continues to decrease, and that the expansion of curbside recycling program (especially single
stream) contributes to this.
 Food Waste in Packaging: This study made a first attempt at determining the fraction of food that
is still contained in packaging when disposed. Although this study found that only 12.4 percent of all
disposed food was still in its factory or retail packaging, the proportion of food waste that was wrapped
in plastic films is significantly higher (although was not measured in this study).
 Opportunity for Diversion of Organics: The data are clear in identifying food waste, green waste
and low grade compostable papers as being a significant fraction in the disposed waste stream. While
this will entice many to push for aggressive diversion of these materials, is should be noted that the
food waste and compostable papers may be more difficult to separate and recover than these results
might suggest. Mechanical and optical sorting capabilities are not able to achieve the level of accuracy
of the manual sorting that occurred in this study.
 Flexible Film Packaging: This study found that the weight of flexible film packaging in the disposed
waste stream is negligible.
 Single Stream Recyclables Composition: This study provides a first comprehensive look at the
composition of inbound single stream recyclables. Given that this data has not been in the public
domain previously, it will be important for recycling industry stakeholders – especially other MRF
operators – to review and comment on the reasonableness of the data. Furthermore, it should be
cautioned that the results shown here are very specifically for residential curbside single stream
recyclables; any MRF that is also processing residential drop-off, multi-family, or commercial materials
together with residential single stream may not find the same incidence of targeted recyclables and
contamination.
 Demographic Influence: The assignment of samples as being urban, suburban and rural confirms that
the statewide aggregate results presented in this report (and in the 2010 Study) are heavily weighted
toward urban areas of the state. Relatively few suburban or rural samples were captured.
 ICI Generator Data: The ICI generator-specific data were captured to test the differences in ICI
waste from several well-known, easily defined generator types. As expected, disposed wastes varied
dramatically across ICI generators. This confirms that diversion programs need to be customized for
individual industries (and, extending that logic) to individual businesses and institutions in order to
maximize diversion from such entities.
6.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
 Continue Performing Statewide Studies: Statewide studies both inform about the overall disposed
waste stream for state-level planners, and also provide data to municipal and private solid waste and
recycling stakeholders for a variety of uses. The CT DEEP joins state agencies from roughly a dozen

CT - DEEP

6-1

 6.

















CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
other states at conducting statewide waste characterization analyses on a regular basis, and should
continue to perform a similar project over five to seven year intervals.
Consider Statewide Disposal Facility Gate Survey: Although the use of the same five host disposal
facilities is believed to assure consistency in the results of the 2015 Study compared to the 2010 Study,
expanding waste characterization research to other facilities may be valuable. In particular, it may be
highly informative to conduct hauler surveys at other disposal facilities to build a better understanding
of the breakdown of residential and ICI waste. (Of course, this can only be completed with
cooperation from facility owners, many of which are private and may opt not to participate in such
research if it risks divulging sensitive customer data.)
Expand Analysis of Recycling Characterization: No tonnage data was included in this study, nor
was any attempt to calculate the capture rate (or recovery rate) for commonly targeted single stream
recyclables. While it may be difficult to compile the underlying data needed to make this calculation
(which includes container redemptions as well as estimates of the quantity of single stream materials
collected in the state), the results would be extremely useful to stakeholders attempting to understand
the success of current programs. This could be accomplished by funding recovery rate analyses in
representative communities and routes in between the waste characterization studies.
Perform a Mass-Balance MRF Audit: The single stream analysis performed in this study followed
conventional grab sampling methods. Should the results of this method encounter criticism, it may
be worthwhile for DEEP to engage a MRF owner as a partner and to conduct a mass-balance test of
inbound composition. Under this alternative MRF auditing approach, the MRF operator makes
arrangements to shut down the MRF and clean/empty all bunkers and hoppers; accumulate 50 to 100
tons of single stream material over a period of several days or a week; and then run the accumulated
material through the process line to be sorted via normal processes. Once the accumulated recyclables
are processed, the MRF must be shut down again to analyze the composition of each sorted
commodity and residue, such that inbound material composition can be calculated.
Investigate Stakeholder Interest to Expand ICI Generator Sampling: The six ICI generator types
were selected based on input from DEEP and other stakeholders. However, with additional lead time,
it may be possible to recruit support from other industries or institutions (e.g., public schools) to
participate in generator-specific sampling and sorting in future studies.
Expand Analysis of State Reported Disposal: In future studies, it may be worth expanding the
analysis of facility-level disposal reports to see if any changes to the sampling plan are identified.
Although this exercise may suggest enhancements for getting more representative results, doing so
may reduce comparability with prior studies insofar as different facilities could be hosting field data
collection.
Add More Host Facilities: The 2015 Study included single stream recyclables for the first time. It
duplicated the same five host disposal facilities as the 2010 Study, which are weighted toward Urban
areas of the state. Consider expanding the study to other disposal and recycling facilities, especially to
capture more samples from suburban and rural areas of the state.
Expand Analysis to Capture Higher Heating Value: Given that Connecticut relies so heavily on
RRFs, it may be worthwhile to begin estimating Btu value of the disposed waste stream. If fiber and
plastics are being light weighted and diverted, and if organics (especially food waste) is what remains,
what impact does this have on the Btu value of the waste stream?
Consider More Detailed Analysis of Organic Wastes: Because of the interest in capturing energy
from organic wastes and/or increasing composting of organics it would be useful to expand the
categories of sampling to specifically address what percent of food waste (especially) is contaminated
by packaging. This can be critical to the success of organics processing facilities.

6-2

CT - DEEP

  

APPENDIX A

DEMOGRAPHIC CLASSIFICATION OF CONNECTICUT
MUNICIPALITIES

 

CT - DEEP BONSULTFINTS

This page intentionally left blank.

ECDNSULTFINTS CT - DEEP

Appendix A Designation of Connecticut Municipalities
Town
Andover
Ansonia
Ashford
Avon
Barkhamsted
Beacon Falls
Berlin
Bethany
Bethel
Bethlehem
Bloomfield
Bolton
Bozrah
Branford
Bridgeport
Bridgewater
Bristol
Brookfield
Brooklyn
Burlington
Canaan
Canterbury
Canton
Chaplin
Cheshire
Chester
Clinton
Colchester
Colebrook
Columbia
Cornwall
Coventry
Cromwell
Danbury
Darien
Deep River
Derby
Durham
Eastford
East Granby
East Haddam
East Hampton
East Hartford
East Haven
East Lyme
Easton
East Windsor
Ellington

Population
Area (sq.
(2013)
mi.)
15.5
3,273.0
6.0
19,020.0
38.8
4,281.0
23.1
18,386.0
36.2
3,745.0
9.8
6,052.0
26.4
20,590.0
21.0
5,540.0
16.8
19,264.0
19.4
3,553.0
26.0
20,673.0
14.4
4,948.0
20.0
2,639.0
22.0
27,988.0
16.0
147,216.0
16.2
1,696.0
26.5
60,568.0
19.8
16,860.0
29.0
8,280.0
29.8
9,494.0
33.0
1,214.0
39.9
5,096.0
24.6
10,357.0
19.4
2,276.0
32.9
29,150.0
16.0
4,343.0
16.3
13,180.0
49.1
16,210.0
31.5
1,457.0
21.4
5,460.0
46.0
1,412.0
37.7
12,411.0
12.4
14,178.0
42.1
83,684.0
12.9
21,330.0
13.6
4,589.0
5.0
12,801.0
23.6
7,361.0
28.9
1,736.0
17.5
5,212.0
54.3
9,147.0
35.6
12,912.0
18.0
51,199.0
12.3
29,121.0
34.0
18,937.0
27.4
7,616.0
26.3
11,406.0
34.1
15,786.0

Population
Density
211.16
3,170.00
110.34
795.93
103.45
617.55
779.92
263.81
1,146.67
183.14
795.12
343.61
131.95
1,272.18
9,201.00
104.69
2,285.58
851.52
285.52
318.59
36.79
127.72
421.02
117.32
886.02
271.44
808.59
330.14
46.25
255.14
30.70
329.20
1,143.39
1,987.74
1,653.49
337.43
2,560.20
311.91
60.07
297.83
168.45
362.70
2,844.39
2,367.56
556.97
277.96
433.69
462.93

Page 1 of 4

Designation
Rural
Urban
Rural
Suburban
Rural
Suburban
Suburban
Rural
Urban
Rural
Suburban
Rural
Rural
Urban
Urban
Rural
Urban
Suburban
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Suburban
Rural
Suburban
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Urban
Urban
Urban
Rural
Urban
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Urban
Urban
Suburban
Rural
Rural
Rural

County
Tolland
New Haven
Windham
Hartford
Litchfield
New Haven
Hartford
New Haven
Fairfield
Litchfield
Hartford
Tolland
New London
New Haven
Fairfield
Litchfield
Hartford
Fairfield
Windham
Hartford
Litchfield
Windham
Hartford
Windham
New Haven
Middlesex
Middlesex
New London
Litchfield
Tolland
Litchfield
Tolland
Middlesex
Fairfield
Fairfield
Middlesex
New Haven
Middlesex
Windham
Hartford
Middlesex
Middlesex
Hartford
New Haven
New London
Fairfield
Hartford
Tolland

Service
Agreement

MIRA
MIRA
MIRA
BRRFOC
GBRSWIC
HRRA
MIRA
MIRA

BRRFOC
GBRSWIC
HRRA
BRRFOC
HRRA
BRRFOC
MIRA
MIRA

MIRA
MIRA
MIRA
MIRA

HRRA
MIRA
MIRA
MIRA
MIRA

SCRRRA
GBRSWIC
MIRA

 Appendix A Designation of Connecticut Municipalities
Town
Enfield
Essex
Fairfield
Farmington
Franklin
Glastonbury
Goshen
Granby
Greenwich
Griswold
Groton
Guilford
Haddam
Hamden
Hampton
Hartford
Hartland
Harwinton
Hebron
Kent
Killingly
Killingworth
Lebanon
Ledyard
Lisbon
Litchfield
Lyme
Madison
Manchester
Mansfield
Marlborough
Meriden
Middlebury
Middlefield
Middletown
Milford
Monroe
Montville
Morris
Naugatuck
New Britain
New Canaan
New Fairfield
New Hartford
New Haven
Newington
New London
New Milford

Population
Area (sq.
(2013)
mi.)
33.4
44,748.0
10.4
6,633.0
30.0
60,855.0
28.1
25,613.0
19.5
1,987.0
51.4
34,768.0
43.7
2,945.0
40.7
11,323.0
47.9
62,396.0
35.0
11,959.0
31.3
40,176.0
47.2
22,417.0
44.0
8,363.0
32.8
61,607.0
25.0
1,868.0
17.3
125,017.0
33.0
2,131.0
30.8
5,593.0
36.9
9,588.0
48.5
2,939.0
48.5
17,233.0
35.3
6,490.0
54.1
7,319.0
38.1
15,094.0
16.3
4,348.0
56.1
8,333.0
31.9
2,401.0
36.2
18,297.0
27.3
58,211.0
44.5
25,774.0
23.3
6,431.0
23.7
60,456.0
17.8
7,571.0
12.7
4,425.0
40.9
47,333.0
22.6
53,137.0
26.1
19,834.0
42.0
19,713.0
17.2
2,345.0
16.4
31,707.0
13.3
72,939.0
22.1
20,194.0
20.5
14,145.0
37.0
6,886.0
18.9
130,660.0
13.2
30,756.0
5.5
27,545.0
61.6
27,767.0

Population
Density
1,339.76
637.79
2,028.50
911.49
101.90
676.42
67.39
278.21
1,302.63
341.69
1,283.58
474.94
190.07
1,878.26
74.72
7,226.42
64.58
181.59
259.84
60.60
355.32
183.85
135.29
396.17
266.75
148.54
75.27
505.44
2,132.27
579.19
276.01
2,550.89
425.34
348.43
1,157.29
2,351.19
759.92
469.36
136.34
1,933.35
5,484.14
913.76
690.00
186.11
6,913.23
2,330.00
5,008.18
450.76

Page 2 of 4

Designation
Urban
Suburban
Urban
Suburban
Rural
Suburban
Rural
Rural
Urban
Rural
Urban
Rural
Rural
Urban
Rural
Urban
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Suburban
Urban
Suburban
Rural
Urban
Rural
Rural
Urban
Urban
Suburban
Rural
Rural
Urban
Urban
Suburban
Suburban
Rural
Urban
Urban
Urban
Rural

County
Hartford
Middlesex
Fairfield
Hartford
New London
Hartford
Litchfield
Hartford
Fairfield
New London
New London
New Haven
Middlesex
New Haven
Windham
Hartford
Hartford
Litchfield
Tolland
Kent
Windham
Middlesex
New London
New London
New London
Litchfield
New London
New Haven
Hartford
Tolland
Hartford
New Haven
New Haven
Middlesex
Middlesex
New Haven
Fairfield
New London
Litchfield
New Haven
Hartford
Fairfield
Fairfield
Litchfield
New Haven
Hartford
New London
Litchfield

Service
Agreement
MIRA
GBRSWIC
MIRA
MIRA
MIRA
MIRA
SCRRRA
SCRRRA
MIRA

MIRA
BRRFOC
MIRA
HRRA
MIRA
SCRRRA
MIRA
MIRA
MIRA
MIRA
BRRFOC
MIRA
MIRA
ECRRA
GBRSWIC
GBRSWIC
SCRRRA
MIRA
BRRFOC
HRRA
MIRA

SCRRRA
HRRA

 Appendix A Designation of Connecticut Municipalities
Town
Newtown
Norfolk
North Branford
North Canaan
North Haven
North Stonington
Norwalk
Norwich
Old Lyme
Old Saybrook
Orange
Oxford
Plainfield
Plainville
Plymouth
Pomfret
Portland
Preston
Prospect
Putnam
Redding
Ridgefield
Rocky Hill
Roxbury
Salem
Salisbury
Scotland
Seymour
Sharon
Shelton
Sherman
Simsbury
Somers
Southbury
Southington
South Windsor
Sprague
Stafford
Stamford
Sterling
Stonington
Stratford
Suffield
Thomaston
Thompson
Tolland
Torrington
Trumbull

Population
Area (sq.
(2013)
mi.)
57.8
28,113.0
45.3
1,678.0
24.9
14,353.0
19.5
3,241.0
20.8
23,939.0
54.3
5,291.0
22.8
87,776.0
28.3
40,347.0
23.1
7,592.0
15.0
10,246.0
17.2
13,953.0
32.9
12,874.0
42.3
15,228.0
9.7
17,820.0
21.7
12,047.0
40.3
4,198.0
23.4
9,456.0
30.9
4,755.0
14.3
9,671.0
20.3
9,465.0
31.5
9,312.0
34.4
25,164.0
13.5
19,915.0
26.2
2,229.0
29.0
4,201.0
57.3
3,693.0
18.6
1,699.0
14.6
16,571.0
58.7
2,743.0
30.6
40,999.0
21.8
3,670.0
33.9
23,824.0
28.3
11,320.0
39.1
19,859.0
36.0
43,661.0
28.0
25,846.0
13.2
2,979.0
58.0
11,928.0
37.7
126,456.0
27.2
3,780.0
38.7
18,541.0
17.6
52,112.0
42.2
15,788.0
12.0
7,761.0
47.0
9,354.0
39.7
14,915.0
39.8
35,611.0
23.3
36,571.0

Population
Density
486.38
37.04
576.43
166.21
1,150.91
97.44
3,849.82
1,425.69
328.66
683.07
811.22
391.31
360.00
1,837.11
555.16
104.17
404.10
153.88
676.29
466.26
295.62
731.51
1,475.19
85.08
144.86
64.45
91.34
1,135.00
46.73
1,339.84
168.35
702.77
400.00
507.90
1,212.81
923.07
225.68
205.66
3,354.27
138.97
479.10
2,960.91
374.12
646.75
199.02
375.69
894.75
1,569.57

Page 3 of 4

Designation
Rural
Rural
Suburban
Rural
Urban
Rural
Urban
Urban
Rural
Suburban
Suburban
Rural
Rural
Urban
Suburban
Rural
Rural
Rural
Suburban
Rural
Rural
Suburban
Urban
Rural
Rural
Rural
Rural
Urban
Rural
Urban
Rural
Suburban
Rural
Suburban
Urban
Suburban
Rural
Rural
Urban
Rural
Rural
Urban
Rural
Suburban
Rural
Rural
Suburban
Urban

County
Fairfield
Litchfield
New Haven
Fairfield
New Haven
New London
Fairfield
New London
New London
Middlesex
New Haven
New Haven
Windham
Hartford
Litchfield
Windham
Middlesex
New London
New Haven
Windham
Fairfield
Fairfield
Hartford
Litchfield
New London
Litchfield
Windham
New Haven
Litchfield
Fairfield
Fairfield
Hartford
Tolland
New Haven
Hartford
Hartford
New London
Tolland
Fairfield
Windham
New London
Fairfield
Hartford
Litchfield
Windham
Tolland
Litchfield
Fairfield

Service
Agreement
HRRA
MIRA
MIRA
SCRRRA
SCRRRA
MIRA
MIRA
MIRA
BRRFOC
BRRFOC
MIRA
SCRRRA
BRRFOC
HRRA
HRRA
MIRA
MIRA
MIRA
BRRFOC
MIRA
HRRA
MIRA

BRRFOC
MIRA
SCRRRA

SCRRRA
GBRSWIC
MIRA

MIRA
GBRSWIC

 Appendix A Designation of Connecticut Municipalities
Town
Union
Vernon
Voluntown
Wallingford
Warren
Washington
Waterbury
Waterford
Watertown
Westbrook
West Hartford
West Haven
Weston
Westport
Wethersfield
Willington
Wilton
Winchester
Windham
Windsor
Windsor Locks
Wolcott
Woodbridge
Woodbury
Woodstock

Population
Area (sq.
(2013)
mi.)
28.7
848.0
17.7
29,161.0
39.0
2,611.0
39.0
45,141.0
26.3
1,447.0
38.2
3,526.0
28.6
109,676.0
32.8
19,505.0
29.2
22,228.0
15.7
6,906.0
22.0
63,371.0
10.8
55,046.0
19.8
10,372.0
20.0
27,308.0
12.4
26,510.0
33.3
5,965.0
27.0
18,657.0
32.3
11,013.0
27.1
25,213.0
29.6
29,142.0
9.0
12,573.0
20.4
16,725.0
18.8
8,955.0
36.5
9,822.0
60.5
7,897.0

Population
Density
29.55
1,647.51
66.95
1,157.46
55.02
92.30
3,834.83
594.66
761.23
439.87
2,880.50
5,096.85
523.84
1,365.40
2,137.90
179.13
691.00
340.96
930.37
984.53
1,397.00
819.85
476.33
269.10
130.53

Designation
Rural
Urban
Rural
Urban
Rural
Rural
Urban
Suburban
Suburban
Rural
Urban
Urban
Suburban
Urban
Urban
Rural
Suburban
Rural
Suburban
Suburban
Urban
Suburban
Rural
Rural
Rural

County
Tolland
Tolland
New London
New Haven
Litchfield
Litchfield
New Haven
New London
Litchfield
Middlesex
Hartford
New Haven
Fairfield
Fairfield
Hartford
Tolland
Fairfield
Litchfield
Windham
Hartford
Hartford
New Haven
New Haven
Litchfield
Windham

Service
Agreement

BRRFOC
BRRFOC
SCRRRA
MIRA

GBRSWIC
MIRA

MIRA

BRRFOC
GBRSWIC
MIRA

The U.S. Census Bureau classifies as Urban all territory, population, and housing units located within
urbanized areas (UAs) and urban clusters (UCs). It delineates UA and UC boundaries to encompass
densely settled territory, which generally consists of:
w A cluster of one or more block groups or census blocks each of which has a population density of at
least 1,000 people per square mile at the time, and
w Surrounding block groups and census blocks each of which has a population density of at least 500
people per square mile at the time, and
w Less densely settled blocks that form enclaves or indentations, or are used to connect discontiguous
areas with qualifying densities.
Rural consists of all territory, population, and housing units located outside of UAs and UCs.
Geographic entities, such as metropolitan areas, counties, minor civil divisions (MCDs), and places, often
contain both Urban and Rural territory, population, and housing units.

Page 4 of 4

  

APPENDIX 
MATERIAL CATEGORY DEFINITIONS

 

CT - DEEP BONSULTFINTS

This page intentionally left blank.

ECDNSULTFINTS CT - DEEP

2015 Connecticut Statewide Waste Characterization Study
Material Definitions - Refuse
PAPER

1

UNCOATED CORRUGATED CARDBOARD/KRAFT PAPER: Corrugated boxes or paper bags made from Kraft
paper. Wavy center layer sandwiched between two outer layers without wax coating on the inside or outside. Examples
include cardboard shipping containers and moving boxes, computer packaging cartons, and sheets and pieces of boxes and
cartons. Does not include chipboard. Examples of Kraft paper include paper grocery bags, un-soiled fast food bags,
department store bags, and heavyweight sheets of Kraft packing paper.

2

HIGH GRADE OFFICE PAPER: Paper that is free of ground wood fibers; usually sulfite or sulphate paper; includes office
printing and writing papers such as white ledger, color ledger, envelopes, and computer printout paper, bond, rag, or
stationary grade paper. This subtype does not include fluorescent-dyed paper or deep-tone dyed paper such a goldenrod
colored paper.

3
4

MAGAZINES/CATALOGS: Glossy-coated paper products. This paper is usually slick, smooth to the touch, and reflects
light. Examples include glossy magazines, catalogs, brochures, and pamphlets.
NEWSPRINT: Paper used chiefly for printing newspapers – uncoated ground wood paper.

5

PHONE BOOKS AND DIRECTORIES: Thin paper between coated covers. These items are bound along the spine with
glue. Examples include telephone books, “yellow pages,” real estate listings, and some non-glossy mail order catalogs.

6

ASEPTIC BOXES & GABLE TOP CARTONS: Aseptic containers (multi-layered packaging that contains shelf-stable food
products such as apple juice, soup, soy/rice milk, etc.) and "gable top" cartons (non-refrigerated items such as granola and
crackers; refrigerated items such as milk, juice, egg substitutes, etc.). Rigid food and beverage cartons are usually paper-based,
may be any shape, and may include a plastic pour spout as part of the carton.

7

OTHER RECYCLABLE PAPER: Recyclable paper other than the paper mentioned above. Examples include manila
folders, manila envelopes, index cards, white envelopes, white window envelopes, notebook paper, carbonless forms, junk
mail, chipboard and uncoated paperboard, groundwood paper, and deep-toned or fluorescent dyed paper.

8

COMPOSTABLE PAPER: Low-grade, biodegradable paper that cannot be recycled, as well as food contaminated paper.
Examples include paper towels, paper plates, waxed papers and waxed cardboard , and tissues.

9

REMAINDER/COMPOSITE PAPER: Products made mostly of paper but combined with large amounts of other
materials such as plastic, metal, glues, foil, and moisture. Examples include corrugated cardboard coated with plastic,
cellulose insulation, blueprints, sepia, onion skin, foiled lined fast food wrappers, frozen juice containers, carbon paper, selfadhesive notes, softcover and hardcover books, and photographs.

PLASTICS

10

PET BOTTLES/JARS : Clear or colored PET bottles other than CT deposit containers. When marked for identification, it
bears the number “1”in the center of the triangular recycling symbol and may also bear the letters “PETE” or “PET”. The
color is usually transparent green or clear. A PET container usually has a small dot left from the manufacturing process, not
a seam. It does not turn white when bent. This category only includes PET bottles or jars that did not previously contain
hazardous materials.

11

PET CONTAINERS OTHER THAN BOTTLES : Types of containers such as PET jars, rectangular PET containers used
for produce; etc. - This category only includes PET containers that did not previously contain hazardous materials.

12

PLASTIC CT DEPOSIT BEVERAGE CONTAINERS: Plastic beverage containers subject to CT’s bottle bill and marked
as deposit containers in Connecticut.

13

HDPE BOTTLES, COLORED AND NATURAL: Natural and colored HDPE containers. This plastic is usually either
cloudy white, allowing light to pass through it (natural) or a solid color, preventing light from passing through it (colored).
When marked for identification, it bears the number “2” in the triangular recycling symbol and may also bear the letters
“HDPE. This category only includes HDPE bottles that did not previously contain hazardous materials.

Page 1 of 5

 2015 Connecticut Statewide Waste Characterization Study
Material Definitions - Refuse

14

HDPE CONTAINERS OTHER THAN BOTTLES: Colored and natural buckets, pails or paint cans made of HDPE and
designed to hold 5 gallons or less of material. This category includes buckets regardless of whether they are attached to metal
handles. Examples include large paint buckets and commercial buckets used to contain food for commercial use (restaurants,
etc.). These objects are packages containing material for sale, and are not sold as buckets themselves.

15

PLASTIC CONTAINERS #3-#7 : Containers made of types of plastic other than HDPE or PET. Items may be made of
PVC, PP, or PS. When marked for identification, these items may bear the number 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7 in the triangular recycling
symbol. This subtype also includes unmarked plastic containers. This category only includes plastic #3-#7 containers that
did not previously contain hazardous materials.

16
17
18
19

EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE NON-FOOD GRADE: Non-food packaging and finished products made of expanded
polystyrene. Excludes "Styrofoam" products such as cups, plates, and bowls.
EXPANDED FOOD-GRADE POLYSTYRENE: "Styrofoam" products used to contain food such as "clamshells," cups,
plates, and bowls.
DURABLE PLASTIC ITEMS: Plastic objects other than disposable package items. These items are usually made to last for
a few months up to many years and include children toys, furniture, plastic landscape ties; plastic railroad ties, mop buckets,
sporting goods, etc.
FILM (NON-BAG): Non-bag clean commercial and industrial packaging film used for large-scale packaging or transport
packaging. Examples include shrink-wrap, mattress bags, furniture wrap, and film bubble wrap.

20

GROCERY AND OTHER MERCHANDISE BAGS: Plastic shopping bags used to contain merchandise to transport from
the place of purchase, given out by the store with the purchase. Includes dry-cleaning plastic bags intended for one-time use.

21

OTHER FILM: Plastic film that is contaminated or otherwise non-recyclable. Examples include garbage bags and other
types of plastic bags (sandwich bags, zip (recloseable) bags, produce bags, frozen vegetable bags), painting tarps, food
wrappers such as candy-bar wrappers, mailing pouches, bank bags, X-ray film, and plastic food wrap.

22

FLEXIBLE PLASTIC POUCHES AND PACKAGING: Flexible film packaging that is muli-layered (laminated) with
multiple resins: may contain non-plastic foil layers and "tie-layers" that bond or fuse different layers together. Mostly used
for preserving food. Includes film pouches made of multi-layers, sometimes with flat bottoms allowing pouch to stand on
its own; coffee bags, Capri Sun pouches; wine pouches; baby food, meals, soap refill and laundry deteregent pouches

23

PALLETS – PLASTIC : Plastic pallets and crating materials commonly used for industrial and commercial packaging and
shipping.

24

REMAINDER/COMPOSITE PLASTIC: Plastic that cannot be put in any other type or subtype. Includes items made
mostly of plastic but combined with other materials. Examples include auto parts made of plastic attached to metal, plastic
drinking straws, produce trays, foam packing blocks (not including expanded polystyrene blocks), plastic strapping, new
plastic laminate (e.g. Formica), vinyl, linoleum, plastic lumber, imitation ceramics, handles and knobs, plastic lids, some
kitchen ware, toys, plastic string (as used for hay bales), and plastic rigid bubble/foil packaging (as for medications); durable
plastic such as plastic outdoor furniture, plastic toys and sporting goods, CDs, and rigid plastic housewares (such as mop
buckets), dishes, cups, and cutlery.

METALS
25
26
27
28

29

ALUMINUM BEVERAGE CONTAINERS: Beverage containers made from aluminum other than CT deposit containers.
Also includes cat food containers.
ALUMINUM CT DEPOSIT BEVERAGE CONTAINERS: Metal beverage containers subject to CT’s bottle bill and
marked with CT deposit label.
ALUMINUM PLATES & FOILS: Aluminum pie plates and non-rigid baking pans; and Aluminum Foils.
TIN/STEEL CONTAINERS : Rigid containers made mainly of steel, such as food and beverage containers. These items
will stick to a magnet and may be tin-coated.
OTHER FERROUS: Any other iron or steel that is magnetic. This subtype does not include "tin/steel containers".
Examples include empty or dry paint cans, structural steel beams, boilers, metal clothes hangers, metal pipes, some
cookware, security bars, and scrap ferrous items and galvanized items such as nails and flashing.

Page 2 of 5

 2015 Connecticut Statewide Waste Characterization Study
Material Definitions - Refuse
30
31
32

33

OTHER NON-FERROUS: Any metal item that is not magnetic, as well as stainless steel. These items may be made of
copper, brass, bronze, lead, zinc, or other metals. Examples include copper wire, shell casings, and brass pipe.
APPLIANCES : Major appliances that are primarily encased in metal, such as refrigerators, stoves, water heaters, dryers and
microwaves; white goods.
COMPRESSED FUEL CONTAINERS/PROPANE TANKS: Includes large compressed fuel containers/propane tanks
and small one-pound propane tanks used for lanterns, camp stoves etc. as well as larger tanks such as those used in home gas
grills, RVs.
REMAINDER/COMPOSITE METAL : Metal that cannot be put in any other type. This type includes items made mostly
of metal but combined with other materials and items made of both ferrous metal and non-ferrous metal combined.
Examples include small non-electronic appliances such as toasters and hair dryers, motors, insulated wire, and finished
products that contain a mixture of metals, or metals and other materials, whose weight is derived significantly from the metal
portion of its construction.

GLASS
34
35
36

CLEAR/AMBER GLASS PACKAGING CONTAINERS (NON-DEPOSIT) : Includes clear or amber colored wine
bottles, nonalcoholic beverage containers, malt beverage containers, mayonnaise jars, and jam jars.
GREEN/OTHER COLORED GLASS PACKAGING CONTAINERS (NON-DEPOSIT): Includes green or other
colored beer bottles and other nonalcoholic beverage containers.
GLASS CT DEPOSIT BEVERAGE CONTAINERS: Glass beverage containers subject to CT’s bottle bill and marked
with CT deposit label.

37

FLAT GLASS : Uncoated plate glass - includes window and door glass, table-tops, and some auto glass (side windows).

38

REMAINDER/COMPOSITE GLASS : Glass that cannot be put in any other type. It includes items made mostly of glass
but combined with other materials. Examples include Pyrex, Corningware, crystal and other glass tableware, mirrors, nonfluorescent light bulbs, auto windshields, laminated glass, or any curved glass.

ORGANICS

39

40
41

42

43
44

45

FOOD WASTE, LOOSE: Food material, either loose or not in original packaging, resulting from the processing, storage,
preparation, cooking, handling, or consumption of food. This type includes material from industrial, commercial, or
residential sources. Examples include discarded meat scraps, dairy products, eggshells, fruit or vegetable peels, and other
food items from homes, stores and restaurants. May include the bag or other container holding the food if the
bag/container weight is insignificant compared to the contained food.
FOOD WASTE, EMPTIED FROM PACKAGING: Unconsumed packaged food products still in retail or factory
packaging. Food should be emptied out of packaginng into this bin; the packaging should then be sorted in its appropriate
category.
BRANCHES AND STUMPS : Trees, stumps, branches, or other wood generated from clearing land for commercial or
residential development, road construction, agricultural land clearing, storms, or natural disasters.
PRUNINGS AND TRIMMINGS: Woody plant material up to 4 inches in diameter from any public or private landscape.
Examples include prunings, shrubs, and small branches with branch diameters that do not exceed 4 inches. This subtype
does not include stumps, tree trunks, or branches exceeding 4 inches in diameter. This subtype does not include material
from agricultural sources.
LEAVES AND GRASS: Plant material, except woody material, from any public or private landscapes. Examples include
leaves, grass clippings, and plants.
MANURES: Manure and soiled bedding materials from domestic, farm, wild, or ranch animals. Examples include manure
and soiled bedding from animal production operations, racetracks, riding stables, animal hospitals, laboratories, zoos, nature
centers, and other sources.
REMAINDER/COMPOSITE ORGANIC: Organic material that cannot be put in any other type or subtype. This type
includes items made mostly of organic materials but combined with other materials. Examples include cork, hemp rope, hair,
cigarette butts, full vacuum bags, sawdust, and animal feces. Does NOT include Kitty Litter.

C&D MATERIALS
Page 3 of 5

 2015 Connecticut Statewide Waste Characterization Study
Material Definitions - Refuse
46
47
48

49
50

ASPHALT, BRICK, AND CONCRETE: Includes asphalt paving, a black or brown, tar-like material mixed with aggregate
used as a paving material. Concrete means a hard material made from sand, gravel, aggregate, cement mix, and water.
Examples include pieces of building foundations, concrete paving, and cinder blocks.
WOOD – TREATED: Wood that contains an adhesive, paint, stain, fire retardant, pesticide or preservative.
WOOD – UNTREATED : Refers to any wood which does not contain an adhesive, paint, stain, fire retardant, pesticide or
preservative; includes such items as pallets, skids, spools, packaging materials, bulky wood waste or scraps from newly built
wood products. (CT) Under this definition, does not including land clearing debris or yard waste prunings and trimmings
ASPHALT ROOFING: Composite shingles and other roofing material made with asphalt. Examples include asphalt
shingles and attached roofing tar and tar paper.
DRYWALL/GYPSUM BOARD: Interior wall covering made of a sheet of gypsum sandwiched between paper layers.
Examples include used or unused, broken or whole sheets of sheetrock, drywall, gypsum board, plasterboard, gypsum board,
gyproc, and wallboard.

51

CARPET: Flooring applications consisting of various natural or synthetic fibers bonded to some type of backing material.

52

CARPET PADDING : Plastic, foam, felt, or other material used under carpet to provide insulation and padding.

53

REMAINDER/COMPOSITE CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION : Construction and demolition material that
cannot be put in any other type or subtype. This type may include items from different types combined, which would be
very hard to separate.

HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE
54

BALLASTS, CFLS: Other fluorescents including ballasts, which are devices that electrically control fluorescent light fixtures
and that include a capacitor, CFLs, which are compact fluorescent bulbs, and other fluorescent lighting, which includes
tubular fluorescent lamps.

55

BATTERIES – LEAD ACID: Lead acid storage batteries most commonly used in vehicles such as cars, trucks, boats, etc.

56
57
58
59
60
61
62

OTHER BATTERIES: Any type of battery other than lead acid (automotive) batteries. Examples include household
batteries such as AA, AAA, D, button cell, 9-volt, and rechargeable batteries used for flashlights, small appliances, tools,
watches, and hearing aids.
PAINT : Includes containers with paint in them. Examples include latex paint, oil based paint, and tubes of pigment or fine
art paint. This type does not include dried paint, empty paint cans, or empty aerosol containers.
SHARPS : Discarded needles that have been used in animal or human patient care or treatment or in medical, research or
industrial laboratories.
VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT FLUIDS : Containers and filters with fluids used in vehicles or engines. Examples include
antifreeze, oil, and brake fluid. Does not include empty vehicle and equipment fluid containers. Oil filters include vehicle
engine oil filters.
EMPTY METAL, GLASS, AND PLASTIC HHW CONTAINERS: Empty containers that originally held toxic materials,
hazardous fluids or other materials. Examples include empty antifreeze, oil, or lye containers.
PESTICIDES AND FERTILIZERS : Household and commercial products used to destroy or control organisms, pests or
enhance plant growth.
OTHER HAZARDOUS OR HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE: Al household or commercial products
characterized as “toxic”, “corrosive”, “flammable”, “ignitable”, “radioactive”, “poisonous”, and “reactive”.

ELECTRONICS
63
64
65

COMPUTER-RELATED ELECTRONICS: Includes personal computers, laptop computers, notebook computers,
processors, keyboards, etc. This category does not include automated typewriters or typesetters, portable handheld
calculators, portable digital assistants or other similar devices.
OTHER SMALL CONSUMER ELECTRONICS : Includes cell phones, iPODs,iPads, PDAs.
TELEVISIONS AND COMPUTER MONITORS: Stand-alone display systems containing a CRT or any other type of
display primarily intended to receive video programming via broadcast. Examples also include non-CRT units such as plasma
and LCD monitors.

Page 4 of 5

 2015 Connecticut Statewide Waste Characterization Study
Material Definitions - Refuse
66

OTHER LARGER ELECTRONICS: Includes stereos, VCRs, DVD players, etc.

OTHER MATERIALS

69

BULKY ITEMS: Large, hard-to-handle items that are not defined separately. Examples include all sizes and types of
furniture, mattresses, box springs, and base components.
TEXTILES: Includes clothing, fabrics, curtains, blankets, stuffed animals, and other cloth material. Does not include
carpeting.
DIAPERS & SANITARY PRODUCTS: Adult and baby diapers, and feminine hygiene products.

70

RESTAURANT FATS, OILS AND GREASE : Any fats, oils and grease generated from the food preparation process.

71

BOTTOM FINES AND DIRT: Small fragments that pass through the 1/2" sort screen, and includes miscellaneous fines
(paper, plastic, glass, etc.) and dirt.

72

OTHER MISCELLANEOUS : Any other type of waste material not listed in any other sort category. Includes kitty litter.

67
68

Page 5 of 5

 This page intentionally left blank.

ECDNSULTFINTS CT - DEEP

 2015 Connecticut Statewide Waste Characterization Study
Material Definitions - Recyclables

PAPER

1

2

3
4
5

UNCOATED CORRUGATED CARDBOARD/KRAFT PAPER: Corrugated boxes or paper bags made
from Kraft paper. Wavy center layer sandwiched between two outer layers without wax coating on the inside or
outside. Examples include cardboard shipping containers and moving boxes, computer packaging cartons, and
sheets and pieces of boxes and cartons. Does not include chipboard. Examples of Kraft paper include paper
grocery bags, un-soiled fast food bags, department store bags, and heavyweight sheets of Kraft packing paper.
HIGH GRADE OFFICE PAPER: Paper that is free of ground wood fibers; usually sulfite or sulphate paper;
includes office printing and writing papers such as white ledger, color ledger, envelopes, and computer printout
paper, bond, rag, or stationary grade paper. This subtype does not include fluorescent-dyed paper or deep-tone
dyed paper such a goldenrod colored paper.
MAGAZINES/CATALOGS: Glossy-coated paper products. This paper is usually slick, smooth to the touch,
and reflects light. Examples include glossy magazines, catalogs, brochures, and pamphlets.
NEWSPRINT: Paper used chiefly for printing newspapers – uncoated ground wood paper.
PHONE BOOKS AND DIRECTORIES: Thin paper between coated covers. These items are bound along the
spine with glue. Examples include telephone books, “yellow pages,” real estate listings, and some non-glossy
mail order catalogs.

6

ASEPTIC BOXES & GABLE TOP CARTONS: Aseptic containers (multi-layered packaging that contains
shelf-stable food products such as apple juice, soup, soy/rice milk, etc.) and "gable top" cartons (nonrefrigerated items such as granola and crackers; refrigerated items such as milk, juice, egg substitutes, etc.). Rigid
food and beverage cartons are usually paper-based, may be any shape, and may include a plastic pour spout as
part of the carton.

7

OTHER RECYCLABLE PAPER: Recyclable paper other than the paper mentioned above. Examples include
manila folders, manila envelopes, index cards, white envelopes, white window envelopes, notebook paper,
carbonless forms, junk mail, chipboard and uncoated paperboard, groundwood paper, and deep-toned or
fluorescent dyed paper.

8R

NON-RECYCLABLE PAPER: Low-grade, biodegradable paper that cannot be recycled, as well as food
contaminated paper. Examples include paper towels, paper plates, waxed papers and waxed cardboard , and
tissues. Products made mostly of paper but combined with large amounts of other materials such as plastic,
metal, glues, foil, and moisture. Examples include corrugated cardboard coated with plastic, cellulose insulation,
blueprints, sepia, onion skin, foiled lined fast food wrappers, frozen juice containers, carbon paper, self-adhesive
notes, softcover and hardcover books, and photographs.

9R

NEWSPAPER, BAGGED: Newspapers that have not been removed from the bag or sleeve.

PLASTICS

10

PET BOTTLES/JARS : Clear or colored PET bottles other than CT deposit containers. When marked for
identification, it bears the number “1”in the center of the triangular recycling symbol and may also bear the
letters “PETE” or “PET”. The color is usually transparent green or clear. A PET container usually has a small
dot left from the manufacturing process, not a seam. It does not turn white when bent. This category only
includes PET bottles or jars that did not previously contain hazardous materials.

11

PET CONTAINERS OTHER THAN BOTTLES : Types of containers such as PET jars, rectangular PET
containers used for produce; etc. - This category only includes PET containers that did not previously contain
hazardous materials.

Page 1 of 4

  2015 Connecticut Statewide Waste Characterization Study
Material Definitions - Recyclables
12

PLASTIC CT DEPOSIT BEVERAGE CONTAINERS: Plastic beverage containers subject to CT’s bottle bill
and marked as deposit containers in Connecticut.

13

HDPE BOTTLES, COLORED AND NATURAL: Natural and colored HDPE containers. This plastic is
usually either cloudy white, allowing light to pass through it (natural) or a solid color, preventing light from
passing through it (colored). When marked for identification, it bears the number “2” in the triangular recycling
symbol and may also bear the letters “HDPE. This category only includes HDPE bottles that did not
previously contain hazardous materials.

14

HDPE CONTAINERS OTHER THAN BOTTLES: Colored and natural buckets, pails or paint cans made of
HDPE and designed to hold 5 gallons or less of material. This category includes buckets regardless of whether
they are attached to metal handles. Examples include large paint buckets and commercial buckets used to
contain food for commercial use (restaurants, etc.). These objects are packages containing material for sale, and
are not sold as buckets themselves.

PLASTIC BOTTLES #3-#7 : Bottles made of types of plastic other than HDPE or PET. Items may be made
of PVC, PP, or PS. When marked for identification, these items may bear the number 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7 in the
15R
triangular recycling symbol. This subtype also includes unmarked plastic bottles. This category only includes
plastic #3-#7 containers that did not previously contain hazardous materials.
PLASTIC NON-BOTTLE CONTAINERS #3-#7: Non-bottle containers made of types of plastic other than
HDPE or PET. Items may be made of PVC, PP, or PS. When marked for identification, these items may bear
16R the number 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7 in the triangular recycling symbol. This subtype also includes unmarked plastic
containers. This category only includes plastic #3-#7 containers that did not previously contain hazardous
materials.
EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE: "Styrofoam" products used to contain food such as "clamshells," cups,
plates, and bowls. Styrofoam packaging and peanuts. All expanded polystyrene labeled #6.
BULKY PLASTIC ITEMS: Bulky rigid plastics such as plastic drums, crates, buckets, baskets,toys, refuse
totes, and lawn furniture, flowerpots, laundry baskets, and other large plastic items made predominantly of PE
18R
and PP. May include small steel items such as fasteners and bails on buckets and minor amounts of other nonfoam plastics.
17R

PLASTIC FILM: Plastic shopping bags used to contain merchandise to transport from the place of purchase,
19R given out by the store with the purchase. Includes dry-cleaning plastic bags intended for one-time use. Other
plastic films and flexible film packaging.

24

REMAINDER/COMPOSITE PLASTIC: Plastic that cannot be put in any other type or subtype. Includes
items made mostly of plastic but combined with other materials. Examples include auto parts made of plastic
attached to metal, plastic drinking straws, produce trays, foam packing blocks (not including expanded
polystyrene blocks), plastic strapping, new plastic laminate (e.g. Formica), vinyl, linoleum, plastic lumber,
imitation ceramics, handles and knobs, plastic lids, some kitchen ware, toys, plastic string (as used for hay bales),
and plastic rigid bubble/foil packaging (as for medications); durable plastic such as plastic outdoor furniture,
plastic toys and sporting goods, CDs, and rigid plastic housewares (such as mop buckets), dishes, cups, and
cutlery.

METALS
25
26
27

ALUMINUM BEVERAGE CONTAINERS: Beverage containers made from aluminum other than CT deposit
containers. Also includes cat food containers.
ALUMINUM CT DEPOSIT BEVERAGE CONTAINERS: Metal beverage containers subject to CT’s bottle
bill and marked with CT deposit label.
ALUMINUM PLATES & FOILS: Aluminum pie plates and non-rigid baking pans; and Aluminum Foils.

Page 2 of 4

  2015 Connecticut Statewide Waste Characterization Study
Material Definitions - Recyclables
28

29

30
31
32

33

TIN/STEEL CONTAINERS : Rigid containers made mainly of steel, such as food and beverage containers.
These items will stick to a magnet and may be tin-coated.
OTHER FERROUS: Any other iron or steel that is magnetic. This subtype does not include "tin/steel
containers". Examples include empty or dry paint cans, structural steel beams, boilers, metal clothes hangers,
metal pipes, some cookware, security bars, and scrap ferrous items and galvanized items such as nails and
flashing.
OTHER NON-FERROUS: Any metal item that is not magnetic, as well as stainless steel. These items may be
made of copper, brass, bronze, lead, zinc, or other metals. Examples include copper wire, shell casings, and
brass pipe.
APPLIANCES : Major appliances that are primarily encased in metal, such as refrigerators, stoves, water
heaters, dryers and microwaves; white goods.
COMPRESSED FUEL CONTAINERS/PROPANE TANKS: Includes large compressed fuel
containers/propane tanks and small one-pound propane tanks used for lanterns, camp stoves etc. as well as
larger tanks such as those used in home gas grills, RVs.
REMAINDER/COMPOSITE METAL : Metal that cannot be put in any other type. This type includes items
made mostly of metal but combined with other materials and items made of both ferrous metal and non-ferrous
metal combined. Examples include small non-electronic appliances such as toasters and hair dryers, motors,
insulated wire, and finished products that contain a mixture of metals, or metals and other materials, whose
weight is derived significantly from the metal portion of its construction.

GLASS
34
35
36

CLEAR/AMBER GLASS PACKAGING CONTAINERS (NON-DEPOSIT) : Includes clear or amber
colored wine bottles, nonalcoholic beverage containers, malt beverage containers, mayonnaise jars, and jam jars.
GREEN/OTHER COLORED GLASS PACKAGING CONTAINERS (NON-DEPOSIT): Includes green or
other colored beer bottles and other nonalcoholic beverage containers.
GLASS CT DEPOSIT BEVERAGE CONTAINERS: Glass beverage containers subject to CT’s bottle bill and
marked with CT deposit label.

OTHER GLASS: Uncoated plate glass - includes window and door glass, table-tops, and some auto glass (side
37R windows). Glass that cannot be put in any other type. Examples include Pyrex, Corningware, crystal and other
glass tableware, mirrors, non-fluorescent light bulbs, auto windshields, laminated glass, or any curved glass.
38R

BROKEN GLASS/FINES: Broken glass of any type. Includes fines that would be removed via MRF screening
system that is primarily removing glass.

ORGANICS
FOOD WASTE: Food material resulting from the processing, storage, preparation, cooking, handling, or
consumption of food. Examples include discarded meat scraps, dairy products, eggshells, fruit or vegetable
39R
peels, and other food items from homes, stores and restaurants. May include the bag or other container holding
the food if the bag/container weight is insignificant compared to the contained food.
41R YARD WASTE: Trees, stumps, branches, grass clippings, leaves, trimmings, prunings.

C&D MATERIALS

Page 3 of 4

  2015 Connecticut Statewide Waste Characterization Study
Material Definitions - Recyclables
C&D DEBRIS: Products used in construction, renovation and demolition projects. Examples include asphalt
46R roofing, drywall/gypsum, insulation, carpet/padding, caulk containers, and other materials generated on
construction projects.
WOOD: Clean, painted, stained or treated wood of any type. Dimensional lumber, furniture, household items
47R
made of wood.

HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE
HHW: Household hazardous wastes including ballasts, CFLs and mercury-containing devices, batteries (dry cell
54R and lead acid), paints, poisons, flammables, corrosives, vehicle fluids, medical wastes, sharps, pesticides,
fertilizers, reactives.
EMPTY HHW CONTAINERS: Empty containers that originally held toxic materials, hazardous fluids or other
60
materials. Examples include empty antifreeze, oil, or lye containers.

ELECTRONICS
ELECTRONICS: All electronic items. Includes personal computers, laptop computers, notebook computers,
63R processors, keyboards, monitors, cell phone, iPads, VCR/DVD players, stereos and other items containing
circuit boards.

OTHER MATERIALS
67
68
69

BULKY ITEMS: Large, hard-to-handle items that are not defined separately. Examples include all sizes and
types of furniture, mattresses, box springs, and base components.
TEXTILES: Includes clothing, fabrics, curtains, blankets, stuffed animals, and other cloth material. Does not
include carpeting.
DIAPERS & SANITARY PRODUCTS: Adult and baby diapers, and feminine hygiene products.

70R

OTHER MISCELLANEOUS: Any other type of waste material not listed in any other sort category. Includes
manures, kitty litter, other organics materials not elsewhere classified, inert wastes not elsewhere classified.

71R

BAGGED WASTES: Bags containing trash or a mix of trash and recyclables that should not have been placed
in the recycling bin

Page 4 of 4

 Material Category Mapping ‐ Waste Sort vs Recycling Sort
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37

Material Category - Waste Sort
Uncoated Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit beverage containers
HDPE Bottles, colored and natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit beverage containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Clear/amber glass packaging containers (non-deposit)
Green/other colored glass packaging containers (non-deposit)
Glass CT Deposit beverage containers
Flat glass

No.
1
2
3
4
9R
5
6
7
8R

Single Stream Sort
Uncoated Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Bagged Newspaper/Wrapped OCC
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Non-Recyclable Paper

Waste Reference #
1
2
3
4
new
5
6
7
8, 9

10
11
12
13
14
15R
16R
17R
18R
19R

PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit beverage containers
HDPE Bottles, colored and natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene
Bulky Plastic Items
Plastic Film

10
11
12
13
14
New (15)
New (15)
16, 17
new, 18, 23
19, 20, 21, 22

24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37R

Remainder/Composite Plastic
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit beverage containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Clear/amber glass packaging containers (non-deposit)
Green/other colored glass packaging containers (non-deposit)
Glass CT Deposit beverage containers
Other Glass

24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37, 38

Page 1 of 2

 Material Category Mapping ‐ Waste Sort vs Recycling Sort
No.
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72

Material Category - Waste Sort
Remainder/Composite Glass
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Remainder/Composite Organic
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite Construction and Demolition
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and equipment fluids
Empty Metal, Glass, and Plastic containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous or Household Hazardous Waste
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Bulky Items
Textiles
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous

No. Single Stream Sort
38R Broken Glass/Fines 2" minus
39R Food Waste

Waste Reference #
new, 71
39, 40

41R Yard Waste

41, 42, 43

46R C&D Debris
47R Wood

46, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53
47, 48

54R HHW

54-62

60 Empty Metal, Glass, and Plastic containers

63R Electronics

67 Bulky Items
68 Textiles
69 Diapers & Sanitary Products

70R Other Miscellaneous
71R Bagged Wastes & Recyclables

Page 2 of 2

60

63-66

67
68
69

44, 45, 70, 72
new

  

APPENDIX 
FIELD FORMS

 

CT-DEEP BONSULTFINTS

This page intentionally left blank.

CT-DEEP

2015 Connecticut Statewide Waste Composition and Characterization Study ‐ Refuse

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45

Sample ID:___________________
Crew Chief:  
Time:  _______________________________
Date:  ______________________
Weight (Circle if net weight)
Material Group
Uncoated Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
PET Bottles/Jars 
PET Containers other than Bottles 
 Plastic CT Deposit beverage containers
HDPE Bottles, colored and natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3‐#7 
Expanded Polystyrene Non‐food Grade
Expanded Food‐grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non‐bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – plastic 
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit beverage containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers 
Other Ferrous
Other Non‐Ferrous
Appliances 
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal 
Clear/Amber glass packaging containers (non‐deposit) 
Green/Other colored glass packaging containers (non‐deposit)
Glass CT Deposit beverage containers
Flat glass 
Remainder/Composite Glass 
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Branches and Stumps 
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Remainder/Composite Organic

1

Pre‐Wt

 2015 Connecticut Statewide Waste Composition and Characterization Study ‐ Refuse

46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72

Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated 
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding 
Remainder/Composite Construction and Demolition 
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint 
Sharps 
Vehicle and equipment fluids 
Empty Metal, Glass, and Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers 
Other Hazardous or Household Hazardous Waste
Computer‐related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics 
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Bulky Items
Textiles
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease 
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous 

2

 2015 Connecticut Statewide Waste Composition and Characterization Study ‐ Recyclables

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8R
9R
10
11
12
13
14
15
15R
16R
17R
18R
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37R
38R
39R
41R
46R
47R
54R
60
63R
67
68
69
70R
71R

Sample ID:___________________
Crew Chief:  
Time:  _______________________________
Date:  ______________________
Weight (Circle if net weight)
Material Group
Uncoated Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Non‐Recyclable Paper
Newspaper, Bagged
PET Bottles/Jars 
PET Containers other than Bottles 
 Plastic CT Deposit beverage containers
HDPE Bottles, colored and natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Bottles #3‐#7 
Plastic Non‐Bottle Containers #3‐#7
Expanded Polystyrene
Bulky Plastic Items
Plastic Film
19R Remainder/Composite Plastic
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit beverage containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers 
Other Ferrous
Other Non‐Ferrous
Appliances 
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal 
Clear/Amber glass packaging containers (non‐deposit) 
Green/Other colored glass packaging containers (non‐deposit)
Glass CT Deposit beverage containers
Other Glass
Broken Glass/Fines
Food Waste
Yard Waste
C&D Debris
Wood
HHW
Empty HHW Containers
Electronics
Bulky Items
Textiles
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Other Miscellaneous
Bagged Wastes

Pre‐Wt

 This page intentionally left blank.

ECDNSULTFINTS CT - DEEP

Physical Sort Field Supervisor Daily Targeted Samples
Day
Sample
Type

RES
ICI
SS
GEN

Location

Date

Generator Sector

Total
Needed

Total
Sampled

Residential
Commercial
Single Stream
Special Generator

Supervisor Initials

Total
Sample
#

Gen Sector

Date

Time

Truck
Type

Hauler

Load
Weight

Ticket Number

Notes

Special Generator:  REST=Restaurant; GROC=Grocery; RET‐L=Retail Large; RET‐S=Retail Small; HOT=Hotel; OFF=Office

Truck #

Special
Generator

 Connecticut Statewide Waste Composition Study 2015
Vehicle Selection Form

Site:
Date:

Goal:

Samples Taken

Each number represents an expected vehicle based on the available data.
Cross off one number for each category of vehicle entering the landfill.
When you reach the number circled, ask this vehicle to go to the sorting area.
Residential Packer Trucks 

NEED

* Must be at least 80% single‐family residential waste.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42

9
26
43

10
27
44

11
28
45

Residential Dropbox
* Must be at least 80% commercial waste.
1
2
3
4
5
6
18
19
20
21
22
23
35
36
37
38
39
40

7
24
41

8
25
42

9
26
43

10
27
44

11
28
45

14
31
48

15
32
49

12
29
46

7
24
41

8
25
42

9
26
43

10
27
44

11
28
45

12
29
46

13
30
47

14
31
48

15
32
49

8
25
42

9
26
43

10
27
44

11
28
45

12
29
46

17
34
51

16
33
50

17
34
51

TOTAL
13
30
47

14
31
48

15
32
49

NEED
7
24
41

16
33
50

TOTAL

NEED

ICI Roll‐off
* Must be at least 80% commercial waste.
1
2
3
4
5
6
18
19
20
21
22
23
35
36
37
38
39
40

13
30
47

NEED

ICI Packer Trucks 
* Must be at least 80% commercial waste.
1
2
3
4
5
6
18
19
20
21
22
23
35
36
37
38
39
40

12
29
46

TOTAL

16
33
50

17
34
51

TOTAL
13
30
47

14
31
48

15
32
49

16
33
50

17
34
51

  

APPENDIX 
DISPOSED WASTE COMPOSITION BY HOST FACILITY

 

CT - DEEP BONSULTFINTS

This page intentionally left blank.

ECDNSULTFINTS CT - DEEP

Bristol RRF
Overall Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
22.7%
2.5%
0.8%
1.4%
0.7%
0.7%
0.3%
1.2%
0.5%
0.1%
0.1%
0.3%
0.3%
4.1%
0.9%
11.6%
2.4%
0.8%
0.4%
10.6%
0.7%
0.2%
0.3%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.6%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.6%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.4%
0.2%
1.1%
0.3%
1.0%
0.3%
0.6%
0.1%
3.3%
0.6%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
1.6%
0.5%
3.7%
0.1%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.4%
0.2%
0.5%
0.3%
0.5%
0.3%
0.3%
0.2%
0.3%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
1.7%
0.8%
2.1%
0.7%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
1.0%
0.8%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
18.7%
17.0%
3.2%
1.8%
0.8%
14.7%
1.2%
1.0%
1.8%
1.1%
5.7%
2.0%
0.0%
0.0%
4.8%
2.3%
1.2%
0.8%
11.3%
0.6%
0.7%
3.8%
1.7%
2.5%
1.1%
0.2%
0.3%
0.5%
0.4%
1.7%
1.0%
0.2%
0.2%
1.9%
1.2%
0.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.2%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
15.0%
2.7%
2.5%
5.2%
1.3%
0.0%
0.0%
4.0%
1.7%
3.1%
1.5%
100%
48

 Bristol RRF
Residential Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
20.5%
1.5%
0.5%
1.0%
0.4%
0.9%
0.3%
1.4%
0.7%
0.1%
0.2%
0.3%
0.3%
4.6%
1.2%
9.7%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
9.7%
0.5%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.6%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.2%
1.1%
0.4%
0.8%
0.2%
0.7%
0.1%
2.6%
0.7%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
1.5%
0.4%
3.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.6%
0.4%
0.2%
0.1%
0.3%
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
1.3%
0.5%
2.5%
0.8%
0.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
1.3%
1.1%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
16.6%
14.7%
3.2%
1.9%
1.0%
15.3%
1.6%
1.3%
2.3%
1.5%
7.2%
2.6%
0.0%
0.0%
3.1%
0.7%
1.2%
0.8%
13.4%
0.7%
0.9%
4.9%
2.2%
2.2%
1.3%
0.2%
0.3%
0.6%
0.5%
2.2%
1.3%
0.3%
0.3%
2.3%
1.5%
0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4%
0.2%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
17.8%
3.2%
3.3%
6.1%
1.5%
0.0%
0.0%
4.8%
2.2%
3.7%
2.0%
100%
36

 Bristol RRF
ICI Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
29.8%
5.9%
3.0%
2.6%
2.5%
0.1%
0.1%
0.6%
0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.2%
2.4%
1.1%
17.6%
8.7%
0.4%
0.4%
13.4%
1.2%
0.8%
0.2%
0.1%
0.4%
0.3%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.9%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.3%
1.0%
0.5%
1.4%
0.9%
0.3%
0.2%
5.2%
1.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
1.8%
1.4%
5.4%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.9%
0.8%
0.8%
1.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.5%
0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2.8%
2.8%
1.0%
0.4%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4%
0.6%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
25.4%
24.0%
8.2%
1.4%
0.8%
12.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.4%
1.2%
1.7%
0.0%
0.0%
10.2%
9.1%
1.3%
1.9%
4.7%
0.0%
0.1%
0.5%
0.5%
3.4%
2.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.7%
0.5%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
0.2%
0.2%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
6.6%
1.4%
1.6%
2.6%
2.4%
0.0%
0.0%
1.6%
0.5%
1.0%
0.8%
100%
12

 MIRA Hartford RRF
Overall Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
21.2%
4.3%
0.9%
0.7%
0.3%
0.9%
0.4%
1.4%
0.9%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
2.5%
0.6%
10.1%
1.4%
1.0%
0.3%
12.6%
0.5%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
0.5%
0.1%
0.5%
0.3%
0.8%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.9%
0.5%
0.4%
0.3%
0.6%
0.1%
3.9%
0.5%
0.1%
0.0%
0.2%
0.3%
3.3%
1.0%
3.4%
0.1%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.3%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.3%
0.3%
0.4%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.2%
1.7%
0.6%
2.9%
1.3%
0.4%
0.3%
0.2%
0.3%
0.1%
0.2%
0.2%
0.9%
0.7%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
22.9%
21.2%
3.7%
1.7%
0.4%
10.7%
0.4%
0.4%
2.8%
1.6%
4.2%
1.8%
0.2%
0.3%
2.8%
1.1%
0.2%
0.1%
13.1%
0.0%
0.0%
6.2%
1.8%
2.0%
1.2%
0.4%
0.4%
1.0%
0.9%
1.1%
1.0%
0.5%
0.6%
1.9%
1.3%
0.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.2%
0.4%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.5%
0.2%
0.3%
0.3%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
11.9%
0.9%
0.8%
6.4%
1.4%
0.0%
0.0%
2.7%
0.4%
2.0%
0.8%
100%
51

 MIRA Hartford RRF
Residential Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
18.2%
2.4%
1.1%
0.6%
0.3%
0.8%
0.4%
2.0%
1.7%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
2.4%
0.6%
9.0%
1.7%
0.7%
0.2%
10.0%
0.6%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.7%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.4%
0.1%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.7%
0.1%
3.1%
0.5%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
3.1%
1.4%
2.9%
0.2%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
0.5%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.7%
1.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.1%
0.6%
3.8%
1.6%
0.7%
0.4%
0.4%
0.2%
0.1%
0.3%
0.3%
1.4%
1.4%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
20.9%
19.5%
4.8%
1.4%
0.5%
16.3%
0.8%
0.9%
4.5%
2.7%
6.0%
2.9%
0.3%
0.5%
4.3%
2.1%
0.3%
0.2%
13.1%
0.0%
0.0%
7.3%
2.4%
1.6%
1.6%
0.4%
0.6%
0.7%
0.6%
1.4%
1.7%
1.0%
1.2%
0.8%
0.7%
1.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.4%
0.4%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
13.5%
0.4%
0.7%
8.7%
2.2%
0.0%
0.0%
2.7%
0.6%
1.7%
0.7%
100%
22

 MIRA Hartford RRF
ICI Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
24.4%
6.4%
1.5%
0.8%
0.4%
1.0%
0.6%
0.6%
0.4%
0.2%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
2.6%
1.0%
11.4%
2.4%
1.2%
0.5%
15.3%
0.5%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.5%
0.2%
0.8%
0.7%
0.9%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
1.6%
1.1%
0.8%
0.6%
0.5%
0.2%
4.7%
0.8%
0.1%
0.0%
0.4%
0.6%
3.5%
1.5%
4.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
0.5%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.5%
2.5%
1.2%
1.9%
0.9%
0.4%
0.2%
0.2%
0.5%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.2%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
25.2%
23.0%
5.6%
2.1%
0.7%
4.6%
0.1%
0.1%
1.0%
1.5%
2.3%
2.1%
0.0%
0.0%
1.2%
0.7%
0.1%
0.0%
13.1%
0.0%
0.0%
5.1%
2.6%
2.4%
1.8%
0.4%
0.6%
1.3%
1.6%
0.8%
0.7%
0.0%
0.0%
3.1%
2.6%
0.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.6%
0.4%
0.6%
0.3%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
10.2%
1.4%
1.4%
4.0%
1.8%
0.0%
0.0%
2.7%
0.4%
2.2%
1.4%
100%
29

 New Haven Municipal Transfer Station
Overall Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
21.6%
6.1%
2.1%
1.2%
0.6%
0.5%
0.2%
1.3%
0.8%
0.1%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
2.2%
0.5%
9.0%
1.3%
0.8%
0.3%
11.1%
0.6%
0.2%
0.4%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
0.6%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.6%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.7%
0.1%
0.5%
0.2%
1.1%
0.2%
0.9%
0.1%
3.0%
0.5%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
2.1%
0.8%
2.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.6%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.7%
0.3%
1.9%
0.9%
0.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.3%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.6%
0.2%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
25.9%
22.2%
3.2%
3.7%
1.3%
16.6%
0.2%
0.3%
0.9%
0.7%
7.6%
2.8%
1.8%
2.2%
4.2%
1.2%
1.9%
1.6%
5.5%
0.1%
0.0%
2.1%
0.9%
0.5%
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.2%
1.7%
1.2%
0.0%
0.0%
1.0%
1.0%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.2%
1.1%
0.4%
0.6%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.5%
0.6%
13.6%
1.6%
1.9%
6.4%
1.4%
0.0%
0.0%
3.8%
0.9%
1.8%
0.9%
100%
48

 New Haven Municipal Transfer Station
Residential Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
17.1%
2.4%
1.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.5%
0.3%
1.7%
1.3%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
2.6%
0.7%
8.4%
1.5%
0.6%
0.3%
11.6%
0.9%
0.3%
0.3%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.9%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.9%
0.2%
0.3%
0.2%
1.0%
0.2%
1.4%
0.2%
3.1%
0.5%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
1.7%
0.4%
2.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.6%
0.2%
0.7%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.2%
2.2%
1.1%
0.5%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.6%
0.3%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
27.6%
24.6%
3.9%
3.0%
1.1%
18.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.7%
0.5%
11.1%
4.5%
0.0%
0.0%
5.4%
1.3%
1.1%
0.8%
3.4%
0.0%
0.0%
1.0%
0.7%
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.8%
1.3%
0.0%
0.0%
1.4%
1.6%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.5%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
16.7%
2.5%
3.3%
8.1%
1.7%
0.0%
0.0%
4.4%
1.0%
1.7%
0.6%
100%
21

 New Haven Municipal Transfer Station
ICI Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
28.1%
11.5%
4.7%
2.3%
1.4%
0.5%
0.3%
0.7%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.6%
0.3%
1.6%
0.6%
9.9%
2.4%
1.0%
0.6%
10.3%
0.3%
0.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.6%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.4%
0.2%
0.7%
0.4%
1.3%
0.4%
0.3%
0.1%
2.9%
0.8%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
2.7%
1.9%
1.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.5%
0.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.0%
0.7%
1.5%
0.6%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.3%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
23.5%
18.8%
5.3%
4.7%
2.7%
14.3%
0.4%
0.6%
1.3%
1.4%
2.7%
2.6%
4.3%
5.4%
2.5%
2.3%
3.2%
3.7%
8.5%
0.1%
0.1%
3.7%
1.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.4%
2.9%
2.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.8%
0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.6%
0.6%
2.0%
0.9%
1.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.1%
1.4%
9.2%
0.3%
0.4%
4.0%
2.4%
0.0%
0.0%
2.9%
1.7%
1.9%
1.9%
100%
27

 Covanta-Preston RRF
Overall Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
24.8%
6.3%
2.1%
1.4%
0.7%
0.7%
0.2%
1.8%
0.9%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
2.9%
1.0%
10.4%
1.9%
0.9%
0.4%
10.9%
0.5%
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
0.3%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.7%
0.1%
0.2%
0.2%
0.5%
0.1%
0.7%
0.5%
0.8%
0.2%
0.7%
0.1%
3.7%
0.6%
0.2%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
1.9%
0.4%
4.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.3%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
1.1%
1.5%
0.5%
0.8%
1.5%
0.8%
2.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
1.0%
0.7%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
18.3%
16.4%
3.0%
2.0%
0.7%
9.4%
0.1%
0.2%
1.8%
1.0%
3.7%
1.8%
0.1%
0.1%
2.9%
0.8%
0.7%
0.5%
17.0%
0.5%
0.9%
10.3%
4.0%
1.3%
0.9%
0.5%
0.6%
0.5%
0.5%
1.6%
1.1%
0.3%
0.2%
2.0%
1.2%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.3%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
12.0%
2.6%
1.4%
4.5%
1.2%
0.0%
0.0%
2.7%
0.4%
2.3%
0.9%
100%
52

 Covanta-Preston RRF
Residential Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
19.3%
1.8%
0.6%
0.9%
0.6%
1.0%
0.4%
2.9%
1.7%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
3.3%
1.4%
8.2%
1.7%
0.9%
0.3%
9.8%
0.5%
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
0.3%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.7%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.5%
0.1%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.2%
0.9%
0.2%
3.3%
0.9%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.9%
0.6%
2.7%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.5%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.7%
1.2%
2.0%
0.7%
0.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.8%
0.7%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
16.1%
14.8%
3.2%
1.4%
0.5%
12.3%
0.3%
0.4%
3.3%
1.8%
4.0%
1.8%
0.1%
0.2%
4.2%
1.4%
0.4%
0.2%
20.0%
1.0%
1.6%
12.5%
6.0%
1.1%
1.2%
0.4%
0.6%
0.6%
0.8%
2.5%
1.9%
0.4%
0.3%
1.6%
1.5%
0.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.4%
0.3%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
16.6%
4.8%
2.6%
6.2%
1.9%
0.0%
0.0%
3.0%
0.6%
2.5%
1.0%
100%
26

 Covanta-Preston RRF
ICI Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
31.3%
11.7%
4.4%
2.0%
1.4%
0.4%
0.2%
0.5%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.1%
2.4%
1.4%
13.1%
3.6%
0.9%
0.7%
12.3%
0.5%
0.2%
0.2%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.7%
0.2%
0.4%
0.4%
0.6%
0.3%
0.9%
0.9%
1.1%
0.5%
0.5%
0.2%
4.2%
0.9%
0.5%
0.7%
0.0%
0.0%
1.9%
0.5%
5.8%
0.1%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
2.5%
3.2%
1.1%
1.7%
1.2%
1.0%
3.2%
1.4%
1.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
1.2%
1.2%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
21.0%
18.2%
5.2%
2.7%
1.4%
6.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
3.3%
3.2%
0.1%
0.2%
1.4%
0.9%
1.1%
1.0%
13.4%
0.0%
0.0%
7.7%
4.9%
1.6%
1.4%
0.7%
1.2%
0.4%
0.7%
0.4%
0.5%
0.2%
0.3%
2.5%
2.0%
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
6.5%
0.0%
0.0%
2.4%
1.2%
0.0%
0.0%
2.2%
0.7%
1.9%
1.6%
100%
26

 Wheelabrator-Bridgeport RRF
Overall Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
26.5%
5.2%
1.4%
1.5%
0.7%
1.0%
0.3%
1.1%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
4.0%
0.5%
12.2%
1.6%
1.2%
0.7%
13.2%
0.6%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.8%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
1.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.7%
0.2%
0.9%
0.3%
1.2%
0.3%
1.1%
0.1%
4.0%
0.5%
0.3%
0.1%
0.0%
0.1%
1.6%
0.4%
3.4%
0.1%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.7%
0.3%
0.8%
0.2%
0.6%
0.4%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.8%
0.4%
2.4%
1.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.5%
0.1%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
29.1%
22.0%
3.3%
7.1%
4.7%
7.5%
0.5%
0.6%
0.6%
0.3%
2.1%
1.2%
0.0%
0.0%
3.7%
0.6%
0.6%
0.2%
5.2%
0.7%
0.8%
1.6%
0.9%
1.3%
1.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.2%
0.4%
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
1.0%
0.5%
0.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.6%
0.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.2%
0.2%
0.3%
0.2%
0.3%
11.0%
0.7%
0.6%
5.7%
1.2%
0.1%
0.2%
2.8%
0.4%
1.6%
0.5%
100%
48

 Wheelabrator-Bridgeport RRF
Residential Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
25.7%
2.7%
1.0%
0.9%
0.5%
1.0%
0.3%
1.3%
0.4%
0.3%
0.2%
0.3%
0.1%
5.2%
0.6%
13.2%
1.5%
0.8%
0.2%
14.7%
0.7%
0.1%
0.3%
0.2%
0.4%
0.1%
1.0%
0.2%
0.2%
0.1%
1.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.9%
0.2%
0.9%
0.4%
1.0%
0.4%
1.5%
0.2%
4.2%
0.5%
0.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
2.0%
0.6%
3.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
1.0%
0.5%
0.9%
0.2%
0.4%
0.2%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.2%
2.8%
1.6%
0.4%
0.2%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.5%
0.2%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
25.3%
20.1%
2.1%
5.2%
1.2%
10.6%
0.4%
0.5%
0.7%
0.4%
3.2%
1.9%
0.0%
0.0%
5.6%
1.0%
0.8%
0.3%
2.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.9%
0.6%
0.3%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.4%
0.6%
0.7%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.5%
0.6%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.5%
14.1%
0.5%
0.8%
8.4%
1.9%
0.1%
0.1%
3.1%
0.4%
2.0%
0.7%
100%
31

 Wheelabrator-Bridgeport RRF
ICI Waste Composition

Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Compostable Paper
Remainder/Composite Paper
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers Other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene Non-food Grade
Expanded Food-grade Polystyrene
Durable Plastic Items
Film (non-bag)
Grocery and other Merchandise Bags
Other Film
Flexible Plastic Pouches and Packaging
Pallets – Plastic
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
Deposit Glass
Flat Glass
Remainder/Composite Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
27.8%
8.8%
2.9%
2.3%
1.7%
0.9%
0.5%
0.9%
0.5%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.3%
2.3%
0.6%
10.7%
3.3%
1.7%
1.7%
11.2%
0.4%
0.2%
0.5%
0.2%
0.3%
0.1%
0.5%
0.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.9%
0.4%
0.1%
0.1%
0.5%
0.3%
0.8%
0.5%
1.6%
0.6%
0.5%
0.2%
3.7%
1.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.9%
0.3%
3.5%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.8%
0.4%
0.9%
0.8%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.2%
0.8%
1.7%
0.9%
0.4%
0.3%
0.2%
0.2%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.4%
0.2%

Material Category
Food Waste
Food Waste, Loose
Food Waste, Emptied from Packaging
Other Organics
Branches and Stumps
Prunings and Trimmings
Leaves and Grass
Manures
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Remainder/Composite Organic
C&D Debris
Asphalt, Brick, and Concrete
Wood – Treated
Wood – Untreated
Asphalt Roofing
Drywall/Gypsum Board
Carpet
Carpet Padding
Remainder/Composite C&D
Household Hazardous Waste
Ballasts, CFLs
Batteries – Lead Acid
Other Batteries
Paint
Sharps
Vehicle and Equipment Fluids
Empty Metal/Glass/Plastic HHW Containers
Pesticides and Fertilizers
Other Hazardous Waste
Electronics
Computer-related Electronics
Other Small Consumer Electronics
Televisions and Computer Monitors
Other Larger Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Restaurant Fats, Oils and Grease
Bottom Fines and Dirt
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
34.6%
24.8%
7.4%
9.8%
11.2%
3.0%
0.8%
1.2%
0.4%
0.4%
0.6%
0.6%
0.0%
0.0%
1.0%
0.5%
0.3%
0.3%
9.0%
1.8%
2.0%
2.6%
1.9%
2.7%
3.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
1.7%
1.1%
1.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.9%
1.4%
1.1%
0.0%
0.1%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.8%
0.1%
0.2%
6.6%
0.9%
1.0%
2.0%
0.9%
0.3%
0.4%
2.4%
0.7%
1.1%
0.6%
100%
17

 This page intentionally left blank.

ECDNSULTFINTS CT - DEEP

 

APPENDIX 

SINGLE STREAM RECYCLING COMPOSITION DETAIL
BY MRF

 

CT - DEEP BONSULTFINTS

This page intentionally left blank.

ECDNSULTFINTS CT - DEEP

MIRA Hartford Recycling Center
Residential Single Stream Composition (by Material Group)
Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Non-Recyclable Paper
Newspaper, Bagged
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene
Bulky Plastic Items
Plastic Films
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
CT Deposit Glass Beverage Containers
Flat Glass
Broken Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
56.7%
19.0%
3.9%
2.3%
0.9%
7.4%
1.7%
11.9%
2.1%
0.6%
0.7%
0.5%
0.1%
11.4%
1.3%
2.7%
1.0%
0.9%
0.5%
9.5%
1.9%
0.3%
0.5%
0.1%
0.8%
0.1%
1.6%
0.3%
0.3%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.6%
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
0.4%
0.3%
1.4%
0.4%
1.6%
0.4%
19.1%
4.6%
1.3%
1.6%
0.8%
1.4%
0.5%
0.2%
0.1%
11.3%
2.8%

Material Category
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Organics
Food Waste
Yard Waste
Construction & Demolition Materials
C&D Debris
Wood
Household Hazardous Waste (HHW)
HHW
Empty HHW Containers
Electronics
Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Other Miscellaneous
Bagged Wastes
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
4.4%
0.2%
0.0%
0.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
1.3%
0.2%
1.0%
0.7%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
1.3%
0.8%
2.3%
1.0%
0.5%
1.3%
1.3%
1.7%
0.7%
0.7%
1.0%
1.2%
0.5%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
5.6%
0.0%
0.1%
1.5%
1.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
3.8%
1.5%
100%
38

 MIRA Hartford Recycling Center
Single Stream Recycling Composition (Recyclable and Non-recyclable)

Material Category
Recyclable Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Other Recyclable Paper
Aseptic Boxes & Cartons
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Non-Recyclable Paper
Non-Recyclable Paper
Newspaper, Bagged
Plastic Bottles
PET Bottles/Jars
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
Rigid Plastic - Recyclable
PET Containers other than Bottles
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
Bulky Plastic Items
Non-Recyclable Plastic
Expanded Polystyrene
Plastic Films
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Glass Bottles
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
CT Deposit Glass Beverage Containers
Broken Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
52.7%
19.0%
3.9%
2.3%
0.9%
7.4%
1.7%
11.9%
2.1%
0.6%
0.7%
11.4%
1.3%
0.5%
0.5%
0.1%
3.6%
2.7%
1.0%
0.9%
0.5%
4.5%
1.9%
0.3%
0.8%
0.1%
1.6%
0.3%
0.2%
0.1%
1.8%
0.5%
0.1%
0.3%
0.1%
0.6%
0.1%
0.4%
0.3%
3.1%
0.2%
0.0%
1.4%
0.4%
1.6%
0.4%
18.9%
4.6%
1.3%
1.6%
0.8%
1.4%
0.5%
11.3%
2.8%

Material Category
Non-Recyclable Glass
Flat Glass
Metal - Aluminum Cans
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Metal - Steel Cans
Tin/Steel Containers
Metal - Other
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Contaminants - Compostable Organics
Food Waste
Yard Waste
Contaminants - Other
C&D Debris
Wood
HHW
Empty HHW Containers
Electronics
Bulky Items
Textiles
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Other Miscellaneous
Bagged Wastes
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
0.2%
0.2%
0.1%
0.5%
0.2%
0.0%
0.3%
0.1%
1.3%
1.3%
0.2%
2.6%
0.1%
0.0%
1.0%
0.7%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
1.3%
0.8%
2.3%
1.0%
0.5%
1.3%
1.3%
8.1%
0.7%
0.7%
1.0%
1.2%
0.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.0%
0.1%
1.5%
1.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
3.8%
1.5%
100%
38

 MIRA Hartford Recycling Center
Single Stream Recycling Composition, Bagged Wastes Distributed (by Material Group)
Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Non-Recyclable Paper
Newspaper, Bagged
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene
Bulky Plastic Items
Plastic Films
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
CT Deposit Glass Beverage Containers
Flat Glass
Broken Glass

Est.
Percent
58.4%
19.1%
2.4%
7.4%
12.4%
0.6%
0.5%
12.1%
2.9%
0.9%
10.1%
2.0%
0.6%
0.8%
1.7%
0.3%
0.2%
0.6%
0.2%
0.4%
1.6%
1.8%
19.5%
4.8%
1.6%
1.4%
0.2%
11.5%

Material Category
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Organics
Food Waste
Yard Waste
Construction & Demolition Materials
C&D Debris
Wood
Household Hazardous Waste (HHW)
HHW
Empty HHW Containers
Electronics
Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Percent
4.5%
0.2%
0.3%
0.1%
1.4%
1.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
1.3%
2.6%
1.3%
1.3%
1.8%
0.7%
1.1%
0.5%
0.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.2%
2.4%
0.2%
1.6%
0.3%
0.3%
100%
38

 MIRA Hartford Recycling Center
Single Stream Recycling Composition, Bagged Waste Distributed (Recyclable and Non-recyclable)
Material Category
Recyclable Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Other Recyclable Paper
Aseptic Boxes & Cartons
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Non-Recyclable Paper
Non-Recyclable Paper
Newspaper, Bagged
Plastic Bottles
PET Bottles/Jars
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
Rigid Plastic - Recyclable
PET Containers other than Bottles
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
Bulky Plastic Items
Non-Recyclable Plastic
Expanded Polystyrene
Plastic Films
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Glass Bottles
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
CT Deposit Glass Beverage Containers
Broken Glass

Est.
Percent
54.1%
19.1%
2.4%
7.4%
12.4%
0.6%
12.1%
0.5%
0.5%
3.8%
2.9%
0.9%
4.7%
2.0%
0.8%
1.7%
0.2%
1.9%
0.6%
0.3%
0.6%
0.4%
3.5%
0.2%
1.6%
1.8%
19.3%
4.8%
1.6%
1.4%
11.5%

Material Category
Non-Recyclable Glass
Flat Glass
Metal - Aluminum Cans
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Metal - Steel Cans
Tin/Steel Containers
Metal - Other
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Contaminants - Compostable Organics
Food Waste
Yard Waste
Contaminants - Other
C&D Debris
Wood
HHW
Empty HHW Containers
Electronics
Bulky Items
Textiles
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Percent
0.2%
0.2%
0.5%
0.2%
0.3%
1.4%
1.4%
2.6%
0.1%
1.0%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
1.3%
2.6%
1.3%
1.3%
4.9%
0.7%
1.1%
0.1%
0.4%
0.2%
0.2%
1.6%
0.3%
0.3%
100%
38

 Willimantic MRF
Single Stream Recycling Composition (by Material Group)
Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Non-Recyclable Paper
Newspaper, Bagged
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene
Bulky Plastic Items
Plastic Films
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
CT Deposit Glass Beverage Containers
Flat Glass
Broken Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
62.4%
17.6%
3.0%
1.3%
0.4%
6.8%
1.2%
17.2%
2.4%
0.7%
0.5%
0.4%
0.1%
12.7%
1.2%
3.6%
0.8%
2.1%
1.0%
10.8%
2.1%
0.2%
0.5%
0.1%
0.7%
0.1%
2.1%
0.2%
0.2%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.6%
0.1%
0.1%
0.0%
1.4%
0.7%
1.4%
0.9%
1.3%
0.2%
16.0%
5.7%
1.2%
2.6%
0.8%
2.5%
0.6%
0.2%
0.1%
4.9%
1.1%

Material Category
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Organics
Food Waste
Yard Waste
Construction & Demolition Materials
C&D Debris
Wood
Household Hazardous Waste (HHW)
HHW
Empty HHW Containers
Electronics
Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Other Miscellaneous
Bagged Wastes
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
4.6%
0.3%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
2.1%
0.3%
1.0%
0.5%
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.2%
0.4%
0.3%
0.8%
0.7%
0.3%
0.1%
0.1%
0.6%
0.3%
0.3%
0.4%
0.2%
0.7%
0.0%
0.0%
0.6%
0.2%
0.7%
0.7%
0.4%
3.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.6%
0.3%
0.1%
0.0%
0.7%
0.4%
2.1%
1.2%
100%
43

 Willimantic MRF
Single Stream Recycling Composition (by Recyclable and Non-Recyclable)

Material Category
Recyclable Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Other Recyclable Paper
Aseptic Boxes & Cartons
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Non-Recyclable Paper
Non-Recyclable Paper
Newspaper, Bagged
Plastic Bottles
PET Bottles/Jars
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
Rigid Plastic - Recyclable
PET Containers other than Bottles
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
Bulky Plastic Items
Non-Recyclable Plastic
Expanded Polystyrene
Plastic Films
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Glass Bottles
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
CT Deposit Glass Beverage Containers
Broken Glass

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
56.3%
17.6%
3.0%
1.3%
0.4%
6.8%
1.2%
17.2%
2.4%
0.7%
0.5%
12.7%
1.2%
0.4%
0.4%
0.1%
5.7%
3.6%
0.8%
2.1%
1.0%
5.2%
2.1%
0.2%
0.7%
0.1%
2.1%
0.2%
0.2%
0.1%
2.7%
0.5%
0.1%
0.2%
0.1%
0.6%
0.1%
1.4%
0.7%
2.9%
0.1%
0.0%
1.4%
0.9%
1.3%
0.2%
15.7%
5.7%
1.2%
2.6%
0.8%
2.5%
0.6%
4.9%
1.1%

Material Category
Non-Recyclable Glass
Flat Glass
Metal - Aluminum Cans
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Metal - Steel Cans
Tin/Steel Containers
Metal - Other
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Contaminants - Compostable Organics
Food Waste
Yard Waste
Contaminants - Other
C&D Debris
Wood
HHW
Empty HHW Containers
Electronics
Bulky Items
Textiles
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Other Miscellaneous
Bagged Wastes
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Conf.
Percent Int (+/-)
0.2%
0.2%
0.1%
0.7%
0.3%
0.1%
0.4%
0.1%
2.1%
2.1%
0.3%
1.8%
0.1%
0.1%
1.0%
0.5%
0.1%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.2%
0.4%
0.3%
0.8%
0.7%
0.3%
0.1%
0.1%
5.4%
0.3%
0.3%
0.4%
0.2%
0.0%
0.0%
0.6%
0.2%
0.7%
0.4%
0.0%
0.0%
0.6%
0.3%
0.1%
0.0%
0.7%
0.4%
2.1%
1.2%
100%
43

 Willimantic MRF
Single Stream Recycling Composition, Bagged Waste Distributed (by Material Group)
Material Category
Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Other Recyclable Paper
Non-Recyclable Paper
Newspaper, Bagged
Plastic
PET Bottles/Jars
PET Containers other than Bottles
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
Expanded Polystyrene
Bulky Plastic Items
Plastic Films
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Glass
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
CT Deposit Glass Beverage Containers
Flat Glass
Broken Glass

Est.
Percent
63.4%
17.6%
1.4%
6.9%
17.4%
0.7%
0.4%
13.2%
3.8%
2.1%
11.1%
2.2%
0.5%
0.7%
2.2%
0.2%
0.3%
0.6%
0.2%
1.4%
1.5%
1.4%
16.2%
5.8%
2.6%
2.5%
0.2%
5.0%

Material Category
Metal
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Tin/Steel Containers
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Organics
Food Waste
Yard Waste
Construction & Demolition Materials
C&D Debris
Wood
Household Hazardous Waste (HHW)
HHW
Empty HHW Containers
Electronics
Electronics
Other Wastes
Bulky Items
Textiles
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Percent
4.6%
0.3%
0.4%
0.1%
2.1%
1.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.1%
0.4%
1.0%
0.9%
0.1%
0.7%
0.3%
0.4%
0.7%
0.0%
0.6%
0.7%
0.7%
1.6%
0.1%
0.6%
0.2%
0.7%
100%
43

 Willimantic MRF
Single Stream Recycling Composition, Bagged Waste Distributed (Recyclable vs Non-recyclable)
Material Category
Recyclable Paper
Corrugated Cardboard/Kraft Paper
High Grade Office Paper
Magazines/Catalogs
Newsprint
Phone Books and Directories
Other Recyclable Paper
Aseptic Boxes & Cartons
Aseptic Boxes & Gable Top Cartons
Non-Recyclable Paper
Non-Recyclable Paper
Newspaper, Bagged
Plastic Bottles
PET Bottles/Jars
Plastic CT Deposit Beverage Containers
HDPE Bottles, Colored and Natural
Plastic Bottles #3-#7
Rigid Plastic - Recyclable
PET Containers other than Bottles
HDPE Containers other than Bottles
Plastic Non-Bottle Containers #3-#7
Bulky Plastic Items
Non-Recyclable Plastic
Expanded Polystyrene
Plastic Films
Remainder/Composite Plastic
Glass Bottles
Non-deposit Clear/Amber Glass
Non-deposit Green/Other Colored Glass
CT Deposit Glass Beverage Containers
Broken Glass

Est.
Percent
57.1%
17.6%
1.4%
6.9%
17.4%
0.7%
13.2%
0.4%
0.4%
5.9%
3.8%
2.1%
5.3%
2.2%
0.7%
2.2%
0.3%
2.7%
0.5%
0.2%
0.6%
1.4%
3.1%
0.2%
1.5%
1.4%
15.9%
5.8%
2.6%
2.5%
5.0%

Material Category
Non-Recyclable Glass
Flat Glass
Metal - Aluminum Cans
Aluminum Beverage Containers
Aluminum CT Deposit Beverage Containers
Metal - Steel Cans
Tin/Steel Containers
Metal - Other
Aluminum Plates & Foils
Other Ferrous
Other Non-Ferrous
Appliances
Compressed Fuel Containers/Propane Tanks
Remainder/Composite Metal
Contaminants - Compostable Organics
Food Waste
Yard Waste
Contaminants - Other
C&D Debris
Wood
HHW
Empty HHW Containers
Electronics
Bulky Items
Textiles
Diapers & Sanitary Products
Other Miscellaneous
Grand Total
No. of Samples

Est.
Percent
0.2%
0.2%
0.7%
0.3%
0.4%
2.1%
2.1%
1.8%
0.1%
1.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.1%
0.4%
1.0%
0.9%
0.1%
3.7%
0.3%
0.4%
0.0%
0.6%
0.7%
0.1%
0.6%
0.2%
0.7%
100%
43