2014 SPI Plastics Industry Recycling Report

www.plasticsindustry.org/recycle 2014 SPI Plastics Industry Recycling Report

2014 SPI Plastics Industry Recycling Report SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association www.plasticsindustry.org 2015 SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association 1425 K Street, NW, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20005-3686

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION... 4 II. SURVEY METHODOLOGY AND RESPONSE RATE... 4 III. REPORT FINDINGS... 6 A. 2013 Scrap Generation at U.S. Facilities... 6 B. Scrap Material Sold Outside of the U.S.... 8 C. Independent Recyclers Capacity Utilization... 8 D. Landfilled or Incinerated Material... 9 1. Makeup of Scrap Material that was Landfilled or Incinerated... 10 2. Obstacles for Recycling the Scrap Material that is Currently Being Landfilled or Incinerated... 11 E. Detailed Treatment of Scrap Generated at U.S. Facilities... 12 1. Post-Industrial... 12 2. Post-Consumer Recycle... 17 F. Operation Clean Sweep (OCS)... 19 IV. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS... 20

I. INTRODUCTION SPI launched its second annual Recycle Survey in the spring of 2014. The survey s goal was to gather data on how SPI members are managing post-industrial plastic waste generated in the manufacturing process as well as post-consumer scrap generated through the normal course of business activities and collected by recyclers. The post-consumer scrap information is a new addition to this year s survey. These results will help SPI communicate the work the industry is currently doing to recover plastic scrap materials and identify areas where programs and education may be needed to further drive recovery. This year s Recycle Survey captured information from 2012 and 2013. Future years will continue to build upon previous data sets and provide the industry with trending information on recovery efforts by company type, material, and method of recovery. For the purposes of this survey, SPI used the UL definition of post-industrial material, which reads as follows: Material diverted from the waste stream during a manufacturing process that has never reached the end user. Excluded is the reutilization of materials generated in a process and capable of being reused as a substitute for a raw material without being modified in any way. According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Green Guidelines, spilled raw material or scraps that can be fed directly back into the manufacturing process cannot be claimed as post-industrial material and was not included in the data provided for this survey. Examples of post-industrial material do include: purge pieces, offspec material, overruns, and defective products. Any material that requires physical transformation, such as size reduction, or other reprocessing methods should qualify as post-industrial material. Post-consumer material is defined as any plastic material that has served its useful life or intended purpose. Business-generated, post-consumer material is defined as plastic materials that have served their intended purpose in a business environment, and which are generated through the normal course of business, and not through manufacturing and production. Examples of this type of material include pallet wrap, parts trays, shipping containers, etc. The post-consumer section of the study explores the recycling patterns for these kinds of materials. This study was conducted for SPI by Veris Consulting, Inc. All company information was kept confidential and only aggregate industry results were published in this report. II. SURVEY METHODOLOGY AND RESPONSE RATE Veris Consulting, Inc. (Veris) sent customized emails to approximately 418 companies containing a URL to SPI s web-based survey instrument. Separate surveys were sent to two categories of respondents: Independent Recyclers and generators such as Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners. Population size and response rates are listed below. SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 4

Figure 1 Survey Response Rates Survey Population Responses Response Rate Independent Recyclers 208 26 12.5% Material Suppliers, Processors, and 210 27 12.9% Brand Owners Lots of opportunities remain to grow participation in this report. While participation amongst generators was lower than hoped, readers will see that significant volumes were accounted for in this survey, and these numbers are likely just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. SPI will continue to work to unveil the billions of pounds of scrap plastics being generated and diverted in the product manufacturing process. In terms of the recycler responses, which more than doubled from the previous year, the data suggests the sheer enormity of the domestic plastics recycling industry. The scrap generation from the prime industry supports a significant sub-industry, which together enables for a very clean and efficient manufacturing environment for the plastics industry. This year s surveys included sections that requested detailed information for both post-industrial and post-consumer materials. Figure 2, below, displays the completion rate for these sections by respondent type. Overall, Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners were more likely to contribute detailed data than Independent Recyclers and companies in both categories were more likely to report detailed information for post-industrial material than for post-consumer material. Figure 2 Share of Respondents Providing Detailed Materials Data Of the 27 companies that completed the Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners survey, 1 was an OEM/Brand Owner, 6 were Material Suppliers, and the remaining 20 companies were Processors. All results from this survey are for the entire population unless indicated otherwise. Due to low response rates, the results by company type are not displayed separately. SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 5

The number of responses for the 2014 SPI Recycle Survey compares favorably to the 2013 version, particularly among Independent Recyclers. Of the 2013 SPI Recycle Survey participants, 43 percent of the Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners, along with 33 percent of the Independent Recyclers also participated this year. SPI hopes to build on this momentum in future years and continue to expand the reach of this study. Figure 3 Survey Response Breakdown Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners Independent Recyclers 2013 2014 Survey Responses 28 27 Detailed Materials Data 10 12 Survey Responses 9 26 Detailed Materials Data 4 9 The SPI Recycle Survey officially launched on April 1, 2014 and company information was collected through September 30, 2014. Prior to the survey close date, Veris and SPI leadership sent multiple notifications encouraging participation. A hard copy of the survey was sent via FedEx to a select group of participants. Both surveys asked participants to detail their recovery efforts in pounds by material type and method of recovery. The Independent Recycler survey also captured the amount of scrap material sold outside of the U.S. and annual recycling capacity of each company. Copies of the surveys as well as reporting definitions can be found in Appendices A, B, and C. III. REPORT FINDINGS A. 2013 Scrap Generation at U.S. Facilities Amount of Scrap Handled per Facility Participants in both surveys provided information on the amount of post-industrial scrap generated in the U.S. that was handled at their facility in 2013. Among Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners, respondents reported generating and handling a total of 2.3 billion pounds of post-industrial material, of which 2.0 billion pounds were recycled domestically.independent recyclers reported handling 95.3 billion pounds of post-industrial scrap plastics in 2013 although this category is broadly defined, comprised of brokers, toll service providers, compounders of recycled material and other companies offering value-added services for these materials. Multiple service providers might touch the same material in order to get it into a state where it can be used by manufacturers, but nonetheless, the size of this figure allows us to get an idea of just how vast the North American recycling industry is. SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 6

The median 1 response and breakout by millions of pounds is provided below. Figure 4 Post-Industrial Scrap Handled per Facility (in Millions of Pounds) Median Under 1 mm lbs 1 mm lbs - 5mm > 5 mm lbs - 10mm lbs > 10 mm lbs Material Suppliers, 6.300 22% 19% 22% 37% Processors, and Brand Owners Independent Recyclers 7.000 30% 10% 20% 40% Independent Recyclers also provided information on how much U.S., business-generated, post-consumer scrap they handled at their facility, which added up to 936 million pounds in total. Figure 5 Post-Consumer Scrap Handled per Facility (in Millions of Pounds) Median Under 1 mm lbs 1 mm lbs - 5mm > 5 mm lbs - 10mm lbs > 10 mm lbs Independent Recyclers 0.350 59% 14% 5% 23% Of the responding Independent Recyclers, a much larger share reported handling at least some post-industrial scrap as opposed to post-consumer scrap. While 91 percent reported handling post-industrial scrap, only 59 percent reported handling post-consumer scrap in 2013. Of those recyclers who handled both post-industrial and post-consumer material, the difference in volume between the two types was very low, with the average breakdown being 48 percent post-industrial and 52 percent post-consumer. Figure 6 Independent Recycler Processing Habits by Material Type Post-Industrial Only Post-Consumer Only Both Count 9 2 11 Percentage 40.9% 9.1% 50.0% 1 2,049,536,878 lbs. of scrap plastics recycled was calculated by taking the full PIR-generation number minus scrap sold internationally minus landfill/incineration. SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 7

This information suggests there are three distinct categories of recyclers: those that handle only PIR, those than are equipped to handle a split of PIR and PCR (likely business-generated PCR), and those recyclers that only handle PCR (likely largely PCR packaging from residential collections). Research on the recycling industry to date has largely focused on the third category of recyclers. The information in Fig. 6 suggests this survey may be reaching a unique universe of recyclers participating in this survey that have not been previously captured in surveys that focus primarily on post-consumer materials. It is important that we more thoroughly identify this segment of the industry and account for their activities in the larger picture of recovery of scrap plastic materials in national recover figures. B. Scrap Material Sold Outside of the U.S. Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners that deal in post-industrial materials rely primarily on domestic outlets for moving PIR. Only two companies that participated in the survey sell scrap material directly outside of the U.S. These two companies sell an average of 11 percent of their scrap material outside of the U.S.; however, the industry average when all companies are factored in is less than 1 percent. Independent Recyclers Post-industrial recyclers rely on both domestic and foreign outlets for moving PIR. On average, the responding recyclers estimated that they sold 24 percent of scrap material outside of the U.S. in 2013. Fourteen recyclers (52 percent) that participated in the survey sell scrap material outside of the U.S. Recyclers reported varying percentages of material being exported, ranging from zero percent all the way to 100 percent of total volumes. This range in numbers shows the diversity in business models for post-industrial recyclers. Some recyclers are acting more in the capacity of material aggregators and exporters, while others are undertaking full processing at facilities in the U.S. and supplying domestic manufacturing industries. Getting a better understanding of what material is exported, versus reprocessed in the U.S. could help increase awareness about the type of PIR materials available to converters, and brand owners with manufacturing capabilities in different parts of the world and lead to increased demand of PIR, particularly in higher-end products. Recyclers also provided information on business-generated, post-consumer scrap sold outside of the U.S. The companies that handled post-consumer scrap estimated that they sold an average of 12 percent of scrap material outside of the U.S. in 2013. Recyclers reported varying percentages of material being exported, ranging from 0 percent all the way to 95 percent of total volumes. Nine of the recyclers (27 percent) that participated in the survey indicated that they sell post-consumer scrap outside of the U.S. C. Independent Recyclers Capacity Utilization A few of the responding recyclers were able to offer very detailed information on capacity utilization of their facilities. On average, responding recyclers were running at 78 percent capacity in 2013. The utilization rates* for individual companies ranged widely from 15 percent to 95 percent, indicating there is ample capacity to continue to grow the volume of material being recycled without significant capital investment. While there might be capacity to absorb extra volumes otherwise bound for export, some of that material might require manual processing, or other processing techniques not widely used here in the U.S. SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 8

*Utilization rate = (Post-Industrial Scrap handled + Business-Generated, Post-Consumer Scrap handled) / Annual Recycling Capacity D. Landfilled or Incinerated Material Despite efforts to maximize recovered value of material, it is not always possible to find a market for certain materials, or reach certain quality standards if materials are highly contaminated or filled. In these cases, incineration or landfill may be the only viable disposal option. This survey sought to learn about the percentage and nature of material headed to landfills. Material Suppliers, Processors and Brand Owners The information received from Material Suppliers, Processors and Brand Owners suggests that the amount of post-industrial material that cannot be recycled is quite low. 37 percent of respondents reported sending some amount of material to landfilling or incineration. The average rate of landfilling/incinerating of post-industrial materials was 12 percent, although the median was 5 percent. Overall, rates for individual companies ranged from one percent to 40 percent, which combine to account for 235mmlbs, or 10.2% of all plastic scrap generated in the manufacturing process being sent for disposal in 2013. While companies that send high percentages of scrap generated to landfill represent the extreme outliers, it demonstrates that there is an opportunity to provide education and assistance to some in the industry to help drive them toward maximum diversion of materials from landfill. However, it should be noted that the rate of landfill disposal can change due to a number of factors, such as fluctuations in material demand and pricing in the recycling marketplace. The higher pricing goes up for scrap, the more material that can be economically diverted for recycling, and vice versa. Independent Recyclers The information received from post-industrial recyclers suggests that the amount of material that cannot be recycled is also quite low and is in fact, lower than the rate at which Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners are sending material for disposal. Presumably by the time a recycler has agreed to purchase material, they have a good understanding of what that material is and has the capability to market the material in a profitable way. Thirty-two percent of respondents reported sending some amount of post-industrial material to landfilling or incineration. That material, however, amounted to less than 3 percent of total material handled by recyclers. Recyclers also provided information on business-generated post-consumer scrap that is sent for landfilling or incineration. Twenty-seven percent of respondents reported sending some amount of post-consumer material to landfilling or incineration. That material, however, amounted to only 3 percent of total post-consumer material handled by recyclers. For both kinds of material, no Independent Recycler exceeded a 5 percent landfill/incineration share. SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 9

Figure 7 Landfill/Incineration Frequency and Landfill/Incineration Rate Post-Industrial Only Post-Consumer Only Respondents that landfill/incinerate material Average landfill/ incineration rate by volume Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners Independent Recyclers Independent Recyclers 37.0% 31.8% 27.3% 11.6% 2.8% 3.4% 1. Makeup of Scrap Material That Was Landfilled or Incinerated Independent Recyclers offered the following descriptions of the type of material, both post-industrial and post-consumer, being sent for disposal rather than being recycled: Comingled plastics, such as plastic automotive parts (i.e. interior consoles or door pads) Comingled scraps Filled PP Paper PET Polystyrene labels from the bottles PVC PIR tends to have high value in the recycling market place, so it is presumed that only those materials for which markets are lacking, or not consistent, are sent for landfill or incineration. The material that is not being recovered by respondents is largely contaminated, either by non-resin material, fillers, or dust. Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners reported landfilling the following post-industrial materials: Fluted polycarbonate Fluted polyethylene Glass-filled PTFE High impact polystyrene Pigmented ETFE Multi-layer composites with non-plastic materials including foil and paper Multi-layer films Off-spec resin Purgings PVC SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 10

The nature of the compounded materials destined for disposal should be further investigated in future data collection efforts so end-of-life alternatives for this PIR can be explored. It should be noted that in some cases where recycling PIR is more expensive than landfilling, some companies are still choosing to divert this material from the landfill in order to meet corporate landfill diversion goals. The decision to landfill or recycle is not always purely economically driven. SPI is also working to develop a voluntary, recognition program for members who adopt best practices that will drive members toward maximizing diversion of materials. 2. Obstacles for Recycling the Scrap Material that is Currently Being Landfilled or Incinerated For mechanical recycling to be successful, the process for recycling has to be both technically and economically feasible. If those thresholds are not met, either due to contamination or multiple incompatible resins present in the product, alternatives to mechanical recycling must be sought. Independent Recyclers and Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners were asked to list some of the obstacles for mechanically recycling the materials headed for disposal. Comingled, mixed polymers were often cited as the challenge, as well as: Cross-contamination, Multi-layer films have many different polymers, Not able to be recycled due to specifications, Polymerically unusable, Separation from the non-plastic materials, Resin separation challenges and lack of market, Specific characteristics make the material undesirable, (i.e., too light or wet) In addition to some of the recycling challenges brought on by contamination or mixed plastics, sometimes low volumes of material can lead to resins being landfill than recycled. Most often, a certain critical mass of volume has to be reached in order for it to be sold and efficiently delivered. Some highly specific, engineering grades that tend to make up lower sales volumes can be challenging to find markets for. The reasons include: The material might have niche specs which are not in high demand relative to the cost of the resin. The converter may need high-spec material for certain applications where spec certification and/or warranties are needed that only a prime resin manufacturer can offer. A specific resin is used in small runs and the scrap volumes generated in the production process in less than full truckload quantities, is not optimal for shipping. However, if scrap generators get turned down by one recycler, there is value in continuing to pursue landfill alternatives by checking with other recyclers. Because each recycler handles a unique set of materials, what one recycler may not be able to find value in, another might. This was the experience of one participant who wrote, We were using a recycler that did not want and would not pick up these products. I did some research for other recyclers, and after five we months found a company that would pick up these products for recycling. We do not get paid but we keep the scrap from going into our dumpster. Every recycler has a unique set of capabilities. It is the goal of SPI to further connect the plastics industry with the diverse capabilities of recyclers through development of tools such as the recycling plastics marketplace, www.recycleplastics365.org. SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 11

Effective sortation technologies do exist, however the added expense of sorting may outweigh the value of the material, depending on the resin types that can be recovered. Higher-value resins, such as engineering grade thermoplastics, often have higher values that may justify the added expense of shredding and optical sorting. For those streams of scrap material for which sorting, or de-mingling a mix of resins is needed, an economic evaluation should be performed to see if further processing and separation could be justified and disposal ultimately avoided. E. Detailed Treatment of Scrap Generated at U.S. Facilities The information in the following section is based on the 12 Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners and the 9 Independent Recyclers that contributed detailed volume and resin type data for the post-industrial and/or post-consumer scrap managed or recycled at their facilities in 2012 and 2013. Companies that were only able to provide detailed information for one year have been excluded. Figure 8 below details how many of the participating companies provided detailed data for post-industrial and post-consumer scrap. Please note that the sum of both categories does not equal the total number of companies indicated above because some companies provided detailed data for both post-industrial and post-consumer scrap, while others only provided data for one category. Figure 8 Detailed Data Responses by Scrap Category Survey Post-Industrial Post-Consumer Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners 10 7 Independent Recyclers 8 4 1. Post-Industrial Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners Mechanical Recycle was the most common method of handling post-industrial scrap generated at U.S. facilities among the 10 Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners that were able to provide detailed volume data. οο Based on total volume alone, more material was mechanically recycled internally than by third-party recyclers in 2013 (93 percent vs. 7 percent). In terms of frequency, more companies indicated that they mechanically recycled at least some scrap internally (7 companies) compared to those that sent at least some scrap to third party recyclers(4 companies). This suggests that companies have found advantages to some level of vertical integration that allows them the capability of performing some pre-processing of PIR so it can be reworked into the manufacturing process on site. However, the data suggests that some economic advantage remains to using external, third-parties for the recycling of some streams of ma- SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 12

οο οο terial; this includes more complicated material like over molded plastic parts, plastic parts with metals, painted plastics, and plated plastics. The options for internally recycling these plastics are reduced due to the high cost of equipment. Seven companies mechanically recycled over 90 percent of the scrap generated at their U.S. facilities internally, while only 3 companies recycled over 90 percent of their scrap externally. These numbers tell us that diversification of methods was minimal perhaps non-existent among the responding companies. When examined together, the average company recycles nearly 70 percent of their post-industrial material internally versus externally. It should be noted that in last year s Recycle Survey, respondents reported a greater diversification between internal and external recycling, with nearly 86 percent of companies reporting that they utilized both internal and external recycling methods, compared to only 10 percent in this year s survey. This information suggests that the integration of PIR into manufacturing at some percentage is a very common business practice and again confirms that very little material is being wasted in the manufacturing process of plastic products. Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners There were steady rates of internal and external recycling of post-industrial scrap between 2012 and 2013 for Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners. Figure 9 Total Percentage by Category of Recovery for Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners (by volume) *note: companies that did not provide data for both 2012 and 2013 were excluded from this chart. Specific resins seemed to be recycled either internally or externally at higher rates, depending on what the resin type is. For example, 11 materials were recycled internally as a rate of over 90 percent, while 5 materials were recycled externally at a rate of over 90 percent. The two exceptions to this trend are HDPE rigids and LDPE rigids, both of which had a more balanced SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 13

distribution between internal and external recycling opportunities. HDPE rigids were recycled internally at a rate of 24 percent and externally at 76 percent, while LDPE rigids were recycled internally at a rate of 61 percent and externally at 39 percent. The materials that were recycled internally at a rate of over 90 percent include: EPS, HDPE film, LLDPE film, Nylon 6, Nylon 66, Nylon (all others), PET/PETE, PP films, PS, PVC rigid, PVC flexible The materials that were recycled externally at a rate of over 90 percent include: ABS, Co-Polymer Blends, PC, PP rigid, and Others The breakdown of resin by percentage reported can be seen in Figure 10. In terms of the types of scrap resins being recycled, LLDPE film, EPS, and PET/PETE were the top resin categories. Overall, there was little change in the volume breakdown in 2013 compared to 2012. Figure 10 Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners Mechanical Recycle % of PIR Reported Total Mechanical Recycle - material by percent share 2012 2013 High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) (density above 0.940 g/cm3) rigids High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) (density above 0.940 g/cm3) film Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE) (density below 0.940 g/cm3) rigids Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE) (density below 0.940 g/cm3) film 0.7% 0.7% 5.8% 5.1% 0.5% 0.5% - - Linear Low Density Polyethylene (LLDPE) film 57.3% 59.8% Nylon (PA), 6 0.4% 0.4% Nylon (PA), 66 0.4% 0.4% Nylon (PA), all other (not PA6 or PA66).01%.01% Polycarbonate (PC).02% 0.2% Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET/PETE) 5.9% 5.8% Polypropylene (PP) rigids 6.3% 5.6% Polypropylene (PP) films 1.6% 1.7% SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 14

Mechanical Recycle - material by percent share 2012 2013 Polystyrene (PS) 0.3% 0.3% Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) 11.5% 10.6% Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) rigid 4.4% 4.1% Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) flexible 4.7% 4.4% Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS).04% 0.1% Co-Polymer Blends.02%.01% Others 0.2% 0.2% The data received from materials suppliers and processors does suggest some differences in how certain resin types are handled, whether they are reprocessed internally and reworked into product onsite, or sent to a third party recycler. Independent Recyclers 2013 Post-Industrial Scrap Generation at U.S. Facilities Post-industrial recycled materials tend to be of the highest quality and value. Because they tend to have lower amounts of contamination, PIR can often be reworked back into most manufacturing processes with little trouble. To take advantage of this feed stream, a strong post-industrial recycler presence can often be found around prime resin manufacturing sites. Many of those recyclers and PIR compounders deal exclusively in post-industrial material; however some do deal in clean streams from business customers that may qualify as post-consumer. Post-industrial recyclers often do not deal in the reprocessing of post-consumer packaging materials, but may handle a portion of business-generated materials that fits the definition of post-consumer recycle. In terms of the distribution of resin types handled by recyclers: Eight Independent Recyclers were able to provide detailed volume data for post-industrial materials. Among them, PET/PETE was the largest category of Mechanical Recycle by a wide margin in both 2012 and 2013. Its share increased during the one year span as well, rising from 62 percent to 81 percent of the reported volume. The next largest category in 2013 was EPS. This is different than reports of internal mechanical recycle, where EPS and PET/PETE was recycled internally at the highest rates. This suggests that the reporting recyclers may not be those serving the generators participants of this survey. HDPE rigids and films both saw a notable decline from 2012, when they represented 8 percent and 7 percent of the reported volume, to 2013 when both represented only 1 percent. SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 15

Figure 11 Percent of Total Mechanical Recycle by Material for Independent Recyclers Materials 2012 2013 High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) (density above 0.940 g/cm3) rigids High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) (density above 0.940 g/cm3) film Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE) (density below 0.940 g/cm3) rigids Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE) (density below 0.940 g/cm3) film 8.1% 1.4% 6.9% 0.5% 1.7% 0.9% 2.0% 1.5% Linear Low Density Polyethylene (LLDPE) film 0.1% 0.1% Nylon (PA), 6 - - Nylon (PA), 66 - - Nylon (PA), all other (not PA6 or PA66) - - Polycarbonate (PC) 0.2% 0.2% Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET/PETE) 61.8% 80.7% Polypropylene (PP) rigids 2.0% 1.9% Polypropylene (PP) films 0.8% 0.8% Polystyrene (PS) 0.1% 0.2% Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) 13.1% 9.7% Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) rigid 1.4% 0.8% Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) flexible 1.4% 1.1% Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) - - Co-Polymer Blends - - Others 0.2% 0.1% Although PET/PETE was the largest material in volume by a wide margin, Independent Recyclers processed a wide range of post-industrial materials at their facilities in 2013. Although HDPE rigids accounted for only 1 percent of total volume in 2013, 69 percent of respondents reported recycling this SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 16

material, either in small or large volumes. The most common categories of material were HDPE rigids, PP rigids, HDPE films, and PP films. See Figure 12 below for a complete breakdown of material type by frequency. Figure 12 Frequency of Recyclers Reporting Management of Specific Scrap Resin Types This information demonstrates the capability of recyclers to handle a broad range of materials, either reprocessing the material themselves, or selling the material to other recyclers that have specific capabilities. 2. Post-Consumer Recycle Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners Seven Material Suppliers, Processors and Brand Owners were able to provide detailed volume data for the post-consumer materials that they recycle. It is important to note that the sample size for this section of this survey is limited and the results do not necessarily reflect the entire industry. This cursory look at business-generated PCR should be considered a suggestion of what the landscape of opportunity may be for the collection and recovery of PCR materials from the plastics supply chain. In terms of the distribution of post-consumer material types handled by Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners: LLDPE film was the largest category of Mechanical Recycle by a wide margin in both 2012 and 2013. Other material types that were reported include LDPE film, ABS, and a collection of other miscellaneous materials. SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 17

Figure 13 Percent of Total Mechanical Recycle by Material for Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners Materials 2012 2013 High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) (density above 0.940 g/cm3) rigids High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) (density above 0.940 g/cm3) film Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE) (density below 0940 g/cm3) rigids Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE) (density below 0940 g/cm3) film - - - - - - 0.1% 0.1% Linear Low Density Polyethylene (LLDPE) film 99.0% 98.7% Nylon (PA), 6 - - Nylon (PA), 66 - - Nylon (PA), all other (not PA6 or PA66) - - Polycarbonate (PC) - - Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET/PETE) - - Polypropylene (PP) rigids - - Polypropylene (PP) films - - Polystyrene (PS) - - Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) - - Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) rigid - - Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) flexible - - Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) 0.1% 0.1% Co-Polymer Blends - - Others 0.8% 1.1% Independent Recyclers Only four Independent Recyclers were able to provide detailed volume data for the post-consumer materials that they recycle. Given the resulting limited sample size, the breakout of this material is not included in this report. SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 18

Although only four survey respondents were able to provide detailed volume data for the materials they recycle, every respondent indicated the types of materials that they recycle. The largest material categories by frequency were LLDPE films, HDPE rigids, and PP rigids, meaning that companies reported that they recycled these materials more than any others in the survey. Figure 14 Frequency of Post-Consumer Recycle by Independent Recyclers F. Operation Clean Sweep (OCS) Environmental stewardship, particularly with regard to marine debris, is of high importance to the plastics industry. One effort to control pellet loss at the facility level is OCS, a joint effort between SPI and the American Chemistry Council (ACC). This voluntary pledge program aims to help every plastic resin handling operation implement good housekeeping and pellet containment practices to work towards achieving zero pellet loss. OCS practices are being implemented in thousands of plants around the world, all adding to the effort to reduce plastics in the environment. Respondents were asked if they had taken the Operation Clean Sweep pledge and 69 percent of responding Material Suppliers, Processors, and Brand Owners reported having taken the pledge to be an OCS partner. However, only 15 percent of Independent Recyclers surveyed have taken the pledge to be an OCS partner. For cost reasons, many recyclers do not take plastic flake to pelletization, as many plastics converters can use reprocessed flake directly in the manufacturing process. The lack of participation in OCS on the part of recyclers may be a result of those handling primarily flake materials not being a target audience of OCS, despite the fact that the loss of flake into the marine environment is also very real scenario. Participation in OCS might increase amongst the recycling segment of the industry if plastic in flake form were also targeted as part of the OCS pledge program. SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 19

IV. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. 2013 Scrap Generation at U.S. Facilities The responses received in this year s data collection effort on the management of post-industrial and post-consumer plastic scrap were insightful in terms of how material is current being managed and what types of challenges exist. Below are some key points that summarize the major findings from this survey: Participants in both surveys provided information on the amount of post-industrial scrap generated in the U.S. that was handled at their facility in 2013. Among materials suppliers, processors and brand owners, respondents reported generating and handling a total of 2.3 billion pounds of post-industrial material, with 2.0 billion pounds of materials being recycled, while Independent Recyclers reported handling a total of 95.3 billion pounds. This category is broadly defined, however, and is comprised of brokers, toll service providers, compounders of recycled material and other companies offering value-added services for these materials, meaning this figure could be inflated as multiple service providers touch the same material in order to get it into a state where it can be used by manufacturers. Nonetheless, the size of this figure provides an idea of just how vast the North American recycling industry is. As the Recycling Report garners greater industry buy-in and participation from all recyclers, we ll be better able to break apart this number and understand what s actually being done to different recycled materials at different stages in the recycling value chain. Only a small portion of post-industrial scrap material is being landfilled, at less than 1 percent of the scrap material being generated in the manufacturing processes. This portion of non-recycled material is largely contaminated, either by non-resin material, fillers, or dust. The nature of the compounded materials should be investigated in further data collection efforts so end-of-life alternative for the PIR can be explored. Higher-value resins may justify the added expense of separation and further treatment (ie. shredding and optical sorting). Companies should conduct an economic evaluation to see if further processing and separation could be justified and disposal ultimately avoided. For those materials that cannot be either technically or economically mechanically recycled, emerging technologies that convert scrap plastics to oils and fuels could present an alternative for landfilling these non-recycled materials. The export market has historically been a key outlet of material for the plastics recycling industry. Post-industrial recyclers rely on both domestic and foreign outlets for moving PIR. U.S. recyclers reported varying percentages of material being exported, showing the diversity in business models for post-industrial recyclers. On average, responding recyclers were running at seventy-eight percent capacity in 2013, suggesting there is domestic opportunity to absorb some of the some of the volumes of post-industrial scrap that may not be making to the export market as a result of the Green fence enforcement activity. However, some of these materials might require manual processing, or other processing techniques not widely used here in the U.S. and retooling or investments may need to be made to absorb that material domestically. The information received from post-industrial recyclers suggests that the amount of material that cannot be recycled is quite low and was described as mixed resin and/or non-resin contaminated. This suggests the plastics manufacturing supply chain is a very efficient and clean industry from a waste-generation perspective. SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 20

Greater opportunities appear to exist to work with companies to capture material that can be classified as post-consumer recycle out of operations. The results of this survey demonstrate much of the post-industrial scrap being generated is of high-quality and value and is being diverted from landfills at a rate of almost 90%. This confirms the plastics industry is an efficient one from the perspective of waste generation in the manufacturing process. Gains however can be made to further drive the industry toward Zero Net Waste, ensuring all scrap materials go to a higher, and better use than landfill disposition. Due to the reported nature of some post-industrial materials headed to the landfill, energy recovery in some form will be required to reach the Zero Net Waste goal. For those materials that cannot be technically or economically recycled, energy conversion to fuels an chemicals, and/or incineration options should be consider. SPI will work to develop programs, tools and resources that further drive the industry toward the most efficient materials management models, minimizing waste to landfill. SPI will continue efforts to collect data on post-industrial scrap, and post-consumer scrap generated by businesses in an effort to measure progress toward the pursuit of zero waste heading to landfills from the plastics industry. ### SPI: The Plastics Industry Trade Association PAGE 21

1425 K Street, NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20005 www.plasticsindustry.org