2014 Rhode Island Litter Survey - · In October 2013, Environmental Resources Planning, LLC...

2014 Rhode Island Litter Survey © Environmental Resources Planning, LLC

2014 Rhode Island Litter Survey

A Survey of Litter along

94 Roadways, Beaches, Docks and Harbors in Rhode Island

Conducted for

Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce

by

Environmental Resources Planning, LLC Gaithersburg, MD

Final Report

June 2014

Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce

2014 Rhode Island Litter Survey 2 © Environmental Resources Planning, LLC

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ................................................................................... 5 Methodology Overview .................................................................... 5 Litter Survey Results ....................................................................... 6

Introduction .............................................................................................. 9 Roadways - Litter Survey ........................................................................... 9

Sampling Methodology - Roadways .................................................. 9 Roadways - Litter Survey Results ............................................................... 13

Large Litter on Roadways ............................................................... 13 Large Litter on Roadways by Material .............................................. 14 Small Litter on Roadways ............................................................... 16 Small Litter on Roadways by Material .............................................. 17

Beaches, Docks and Harbors - Litter Survey Results .................................... 19 Beaches, Docks and Harbors – Site Selection Process ....................... 19 Beaches ........................................................................................ 20 Docks ............................................................................................ 21 Harbors ......................................................................................... 22 Sampling Methodology - Beaches, Docks and Harbors ...................... 24

Survey Results - Beaches, Docks and Harbors ............................................ 24 Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors .................................... 24 Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Material ................... 25 Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Site ......................... 26 Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors ..................................... 27 Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Material ................... 28 Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Site Type ................. 29

Supplemental Landfill Sites........................................................................ 31 Introduction .................................................................................. 31 RIRRC Facility Background .............................................................. 31

Survey Results – Supplemental Landfill Sites .............................................. 32 Large Litter on Supplemental Landfill Sites ....................................... 32 Large Litter on Supplemental Landfill Sites by Material ...................... 33 Small Litter on Supplemental Landfill Sites ....................................... 34 Small Litter on Supplemental Landfill Sites by Material ...................... 36

Roadway Litter - Rhode Island and Northeast States ................................... 37 Recycling - Rhode Island and Neighboring States ....................................... 40

Introduction .................................................................................. 40 Recycling and Litter Programs in Rhode Island ................................. 41 Recycling and Litter Programs in Massachusetts ............................... 45 Recycling and Litter Programs in Connecticut ................................... 47

Packaging and Recyclables as Components of Litter .................................... 49 Packaging in Litter ......................................................................... 49 Recyclables in Litter ....................................................................... 49

Statistical Tests ........................................................................................ 50 Recommendations .................................................................................... 51 References ............................................................................................... 52


Appendices .............................................................................................. 54 Appendix A – Large Litter on Roadways (All Items) .......................... 55 Appendix B – Total Litter on Roadways (All Items) ........................... 57 Appendix C – Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors ................ 60 Appendix D – Total Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors................. 63 Appendix E – Litter in Rhode Island and Northeast States ................. 66 Appendix F – Large Litter Categories and Descriptions ...................... 67 Appendix G – List of Sites ............................................................... 69 Appendix H – Firm Qualifications ..................................................... 72

List of Tables

Table 1 – Roadway Sites – Stratification by Roadway Type ........................... 11 Table 2 – Roadway Sites – Stratification by County ...................................... 11 Table 3 – Large Litter on Roadways: Top 10 Components ............................ 13 Table 4 – Small Litter on Roadways ............................................................ 16 Table 5 – Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors ................................. 25 Table 6 – Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Site ...................... 26 Table 7 – Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Site (excluding Outlier) ............................................................. 27 Table 8 – Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors ................................. 27 Table 9 – Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Site Type .............. 29 Table 10 – Large Litter near Landfill Sites .................................................... 32 Table 11 – Small Litter near Landfill Sites .................................................... 34 Table 12 – Roadway Litter: Rhode Island and Northeast ............................... 38 Table 13 – Roadway Traffic Levels: Rhode Island and Northeast .................. .39 Table 14 – Demographic Comparison by State ............................................. 40

List of Figures

Figure 1 – Map of Roadway and Landfill Sites .............................................. 10 Figure 2 – Example of Roadway Site ........................................................... 12 Figure 3 – Large Litter on Roadways by Component ..................................... 14 Figure 4 – Large Litter on Roadways by Material .......................................... 15 Figure 5 – Small Litter on Roadways by Component ..................................... 17 Figure 6 – Small Litter on Roadways by Material .......................................... 18 Figure 7 – Barrington Beach Site ................................................................. 20 Figure 8 – Dock in Colonel Willie Cove Site .................................................. 21 Figure 9 – Bristol Harbor Site ...................................................................... 22 Figure 10 – Map of Waterway Sites ............................................................. 23 Figure 11 – Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Material ............. 26 Figure 12 – Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Component ........ 28 Figure 13 – Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Material ............. 29 Figure 14 – Central Landfill ......................................................................... 31 Figure 15 – Large Litter on Landfill Sites by Material..................................... 33 Figure 16 – Small Litter on Landfill Sites by Component ................................ 35 Figure 17 – Small Litter on Landfill Sites by Material ..................................... 36


Acknowledgments Thanks to the Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce, Rhode Island Department of Transportation (RI DOT), Department of Environmental Management (RI DEM), Department of Health (RI DOH), Division of Taxation, Rhode Island Resource Recovery Corporation (RIRRC), Keep America Beautiful, and Dianne Mailloux for their input and help.

Special thanks to Captain Tim Wright NOAA (ret.), a Licensed Master Mariner with a B.Sc. in physical oceanography and Victor Bell, president of Environmental Packaging International in Jamestown, R.I., for their review and comments.


Executive Summary

In October 2013, Environmental Resources Planning, LLC conducted a comprehensive statewide litter survey in Rhode Island to gauge the amount and composition of litter along roadways and in areas directly adjacent to beaches, docks and harbors. The methodology used to conduct these litter surveys was counting each item and making note of its material composition. This is comparable to the methodology used with most litter surveys that have been conducted throughout the U.S. and Canada. Because these surveys were conducted in October, many of the beaches, docks and harbors had limited amounts of litter collection, recycling, and related services.

Methodology Overview

The first phase of this survey consisted of selecting 70 roadway sites using a stratified random process based on the mileage of each roadway type within the state, the average daily vehicle miles driven, and a representative sampling of each county. Four additional sites adjacent to roadways near Central Landfill in Johnston, RI, were surveyed and analyzed separately to evaluate spillage and lost recyclables from collection vehicles. Results from the roadway portion of this litter survey were compared to similar survey results for sites located in northeastern states (Northeast States) from Keep America Beautiful’s 2009 National Litter Survey, which was designed and led by ER Planning’s senior staff. The second phase of this survey focused on three types of sites adjacent to beaches, docks and harbors adjacent to waterways in Rhode Island (Beaches, Docks and Harbors). The 20 sites surveyed in this phase were selected based on representation, public access and sufficient area for sampling using mapping software to visually assess each site. For both phases, litter was classified as either Large Litter (two inches or larger) or Small Litter (smaller than two inches). The optimal site length was 264 feet (1/20 of a mile) and the optimal width was 18 feet. Small Litter was counted on 3’ x 18’ transects at the beginning, middle, and end of each site and extrapolated to the length of the site. Rhode Island’s recycling and litter abatement programs were evaluated and compared to similar programs in two adjacent states: Connecticut and Massachusetts.

Daily climatological data records from the National Climatic Data Center were reviewed and indicated that no major weather events had occurred in Rhode Island within the 30 day period preceding this litter survey.


Litter Survey Results

Litter Survey Annotations

1. Misc. Paper and Misc. Plastic refer to unidentifiable items that have typically been mowed over and/or weathered so that the exact product type is uncertain.

2. Items were characterized by material composition. Items made of multiple materials (e.g., toys, auto parts and some snack packaging, etc.) were classified as Composite.

3. Items designated as packaging in the lists below are based on the classifications used by US-EPA in their MSW reports1. This classification was only applied to the components of Large Litter, since it is not always evident for the components of Small Litter.

4. Items designated as recyclables in the lists below were those materials currently accepted in Rhode Island’s single-stream recycling program or in plastic bag drop-off programs in the state.

Litter Survey Highlights

Roadways – Large Litter Top Components by Count

1. Tire & Rubber: 18.5% 2. Misc. Paper: 17.8% 3. Misc. Plastic: 12.2%

Largest Components by Material Composition 1. Paper: 28.7% 2. Composite Items: 27.1%

Packaging Comprised: 16.5% Recyclables Comprised: 28.4% Beverage Containers Comprised: 4.1%

Roadways – Small Litter

Top Component by Count: Cigarette Butts (70.4%) Largest Component by Material Composition: Tobacco (71.6%) Recyclables Comprised: 13.2%

1 Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States. Tables and Figures for 2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery. February 2014.


Beaches, Docks and Harbors – Large Litter Top Components by Count

1. Construction/Industrial: 10.7% 2. Unbranded Napkins: 8.9% 3. Cups/Lids/Straws: 8.5%

Largest Components by Material Composition 1. Composite Items: 39.1% 2. Plastic: 30.2%

Packaging Comprised: 24.6% Recyclables Comprised: 20.6% Beverage Containers Comprised: 5.7%

Beaches, Docks and Harbors – Small Litter

Top Component by Count: Cigarette Butts (52.8%) Largest Component by Material Composition: Tobacco (54.3%) Recyclables Comprised: 17.1%

Landfill Sites – Large Litter

Top Components by Count 1. Misc. Paper: 21.4% 2. Misc. Plastic: 15.2% 3. Tire/Rubber: 8.3%

Largest Components by Material Composition 1. Paper: 37.5% 2. Plastic: 28.0%

Packaging Comprised: 17.3% Recyclables Comprised: 30.8% Beverage Comprised: 3.3%

Landfill Sites – Small Litter

Top Component by Count: Cigarette Butts (39.0%)

Largest Components by Material Composition 1. Tobacco: 43.0% 2. Paper: 19.0% 3. Plastic: 19.0%

Recyclables Comprised: 28.7%


Comparison of Rhode Island Sites to Northeast States Rhode Island has the second highest population density of any U.S. state, which translates into high traffic density. Urban interstates and highways, which carry the highest traffic level of any roadway, account for 37.1 percent of Rhode Island’s traffic compared to 19.0 percent for the Northeast States. Thus more of the Rhode Island sites were on roadways with much higher traffic density. When adjusted for this factor, the amount of litter in Rhode Island was 9.5 percent lower than in the Northeast States.

Litter composition was similar for most items in the two litter surveys although the Northeast States had a higher percentage of paper fast food packaging, while the Rhode Island sites had a higher percentage of certain types of plastic packaging. Plastic bags and beverage containers were lower in Rhode Island than in the Northeast States. Rhode Island Litter Tax Rhode Island’s litter tax2 was first enacted in 1984 and originally allocated funds collected solely for litter control and recycling programs.3 The RI Senate Commission on Producer Responsibility for Paper and Packaging found that revenues generated by the state’s litter and beverage taxes are inappropriately diverted into the general fund. From fiscal year 2010 to fiscal year 2012, these revenues totaled about $5.6 million. Only a limited amount is currently allocated to recycling and litter reduction programs, limiting the state’s abilities to reach higher recycling goals and to lower litter rates more effectively.

2 Rhode Island’s litter tax is based on the following sections of Rhode Island’s General Laws: Chapter 44-44 Taxation of Beverage Containers, Hard-to-Dispose Material and Litter Control Participation Permittee; Chapter 37-15 Litter Control and Recycling; and Chapter 37-15.1 Hard-to-Dispose Material - Control and Recycling. 3 Special Legislative Commission to Study Producer Responsibility Models for Paper and Packaging. Findings and Recommendations. Report Submitted to the Rhode Island State Senate. June 2013.

http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/title44/44-44/INDEX.HTM



Introduction

In October 2013, Environmental Resources Planning, LLC conducted a statewide litter survey in Rhode Island to gauge the rate, extent and composition of litter along roadways and on three types of sites adjacent to waterways: beaches, docks and harbors. The methodology used for conducting this litter survey consisted of a physical count along with an examination of each item’s material composition.

Roadways - Litter Survey

Sampling Methodology - Roadways The first phase of this litter survey selected 70 roadway sites using a stratified random process based on the average daily vehicle miles driven for each roadway type in the state and a representative sampling of each county. A random number generator was used to identify specific sampling points. In order to accommodate a larger variety of sites, the site width was 18 feet and the site length was 264 feet (1/20 of a mile). Based on the size of Rhode Island, these parameters yielded a more representative sample than most statewide litter surveys. Field crews surveyed a total of approximately 430,000 square feet along roadways, beaches, docks and harbors. Data for both the large and small components of litter were entered directly onto field forms. Litter was classified into 95 categories of Large Litter and 17 categories of Small Litter, similar to the categories used in many recent litter surveys including Texas in 2013. A short video was taken if the site was heavily littered. Otherwise each site was photographed and documented. Items were characterized by material composition. Items made of multiple materials (e.g., toys, auto parts, etc.) were classified as Composite. Four additional roadway sites adjacent to the Rhode Island Resource Recovery Corporation (RIRRC) were also chosen in order to better understand littering rates leading up to the major disposal and recovery processing facility within the state. Since these four sites were not part of the representative sampling, the resulting data was calculated and reported separately. Figure 1 shows the location for each of the roadway and supplemental landfill sites plotted on a map of Rhode Island. Urban areas are typically represented more than rural sites in statistically based surveys because of higher traffic levels. If the site section process was determined solely by roadway mileage, the substantial mileage of areas less frequently traveled would inaccurately indicate the extent of litter. Litter correlates with population density and traffic levels. Thus, statistically based litter surveys incorporate these datasets into the site selection process.


Figure 1 – Map of Roadway and Supplemental Landfill Sites


Selection of the roadway sites was stratified based on roadway type, daily vehicle miles (DVM) and the percentage attributable to urban or rural as shown in Table 1 below.

Table 1 – Roadway Sites - Stratification by Roadway Type

Rural Road Type DVM % DVM Sites % Rep.

Interstates 398 5.0% 4 5.7%

Other Freeways 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Other Principal Arterials 133 1.7% 1 1.4%

Minor Arterials 130 1.6% 1 1.4%

Major Collector 160 2.0% 2 2.9%

Minor Collector 36 0.5% 0 0.0%

Local Roads 22 0.3% 0 0.0%

Subtotal - Rural 879 11.1% 8 11.4%

Urban Road Type DVM % DVM Sites % Rep.

Interstates 1,742 22.0% 15 21.4%

Other Freeways 1,193 15.1% 11 15.7%

Other Principal Arterials 2,028 25.7% 18 25.7%

Minor Arterials 979 12.4% 8 11.4%

Major Collector 796 10.1% 7 10.0%

Minor Collector 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Local Roads 285 3.6% 3 4.3%

Subtotal - Urban 7,023 88.9% 62 88.6%

Total - All Roads 7,902 100.0% 70 100.0%

The site selection was further stratified by county population levels as shown in Table 2. Table 2 – Roadway Sites - Stratification by County

County Population % Pop. Sites % Rep

Bristol 49,875 4.7% 3 4.3%

Kent 166,158 15.8% 11 15.7%

Newport 82,888 7.9% 6 8.6%

Providence 626,667 59.5% 42 60.0%

Washington 126,979 12.1% 8 11.4%

Total 1,052,567 100.0% 70 100.0%

Roadway sampling in Rhode Island began on October 8, 2013 and was completed on October 13, 2013. The survey results are broken down into sections addressing Large Litter and Small Litter separately. Additional details regarding the data recorded in this survey can be found in the Appendices.


Daily climatological data records from the National Climatic Data Center were reviewed and indicated that no major weather events had occurred in Rhode Island within the 30 day period preceding this litter survey. Items were characterized by material composition. Items made of multiple materials (e.g., toys, auto parts, etc.) were classified as Composite. Misc. Plastic and Misc. Paper refer to unidentifiable items that have typically been mowed over and/or weathered so that the exact product type is uncertain. Figure 2 – Example of Roadway Site

I-295 near Johnston, RI Figure 2 shows an example of a roadway site surveyed in Rhode Island.


Roadways - Litter Survey Results

Large Litter on Roadways A total of 3,069 large items of litter were counted on the 70 roadway sites, or an average of 44 items per site. Large Litter accounted for 5.5 percent of Total Litter (Large Litter and Small Litter combined) on roadways by count.

The three items most frequently found were Tire and Rubber Debris (18.5 percent), Misc. Paper4 (17.8 percent) and Misc. Plastic5 (12.2 percent). This is similar to the results of the 2013 Texas Litter Survey, which found that Tire and Rubber Debris was the most littered component of Large Litter, while Misc. Paper and Misc. Plastic were the fourth and fifth most commonly littered items in Texas in 2013.

Table 3 shows the top 10 components of Large Litter, which comprise 75.7 percent of the total.

Table 3 – Large Litter on Roadways – Top 10 Components

# Large Litter Percent

1 Tire & Rubber Debris 18.5%

2 Misc. Paper 17.8%

3 Misc. Plastic 12.2%

4 Vehicle and Metal Road Debris 6.9%

5 Cup Lids and Pieces, Straws 5.4%

6 Sweet Snack Packaging 3.9%

7 Misc. Cardboard 3.3%

8 Construction/Industrial 3.0%

9 Newspaper, Magazines, Discarded Mail 2.6%

10 Tobacco Packaging 2.1%

Large Litter – Top 10 Items 75.7%

Figure 3 shows how vehicle-related debris and unidentifiable scraps of paper and plastic account for more than half of all Large Litter.

4 Unidentifiable scraps of paper that have typically been mowed and weathered. 5 Unidentifiable scraps of plastic that have typically been mowed and weathered.


Figure 3 –Large Litter on Roadways by Component

Large Litter on Roadways by Material

In terms of composition, Large Litter was dominated by paper (28.7 percent) and Composite items (27.1 percent) as shown in Figure 4.

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%


Figure 4 – Large Litter on Roadways by Material

Based on US-EPA’s classification, Packaging comprised 16.5 percent of Large Litter on roadways, while all recyclable items comprised 28.4 percent. Beverage containers, by themselves, comprised 4.1 percent of Large Litter.

Paper, 28.7%

Composite, 27.1%

Plastic,

18.9%

Rubber,

18.5%

Glass,

2.0%

Other,

1.8% Tobacco,

1.8% Metal,

1.3%


Small Litter on Roadways Small Litter accounted for 94.5 percent of Total Litter on roadway sites. As shown in Table 4 and consistent with other recent litter surveys, Cigarette Butts comprised the largest portion of Small Litter (70.4 percent). This was followed by Paper Pieces (9.1 percent) and Hard Plastic (4.5 percent). Similar to their counterparts in Large Litter, these items may result from mowing without cleaning up trash. Table 4 – Small Litter on Roadways

Small Litter Percent

Cigarette Butts 70.4%

Paper Pieces 9.1%

Hard Plastic 4.5%

Rubber 3.9%

Candy Wrap Pieces 1.8%

Aluminum 1.7%

Plastic Film 1.7%

Polystyrene – Other 1.2%

Cigar Butts 1.1%

Bottle Caps 0.9%

Glass 0.8%

Metal 0.8%

Straws 0.7%

Tobacco Packaging 0.6%

Other Items 0.3%

Polystyrene Peanuts 0.3%

Food 0.1%

Small Litter - Total 100.0%


The impact of Cigarette Butts as a component of Small Litter is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5 –Small Litter on Roadways by Component

Small Litter on Roadways by Material Litter surveys conducted over the past 13 years have shown that Cigarette Butts comprise the largest percent of Small Litter by item count and by material composition.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Food

Other

Polystyrene Peanuts

Tobacco Packaging

Straws

Metal

Glass

Bottle Caps

Cigar Butts

Polystyrene - Other

Aluminum

Plastic - Film

Candy Wraps

Rubber

Plastic - Hard

Paper

Cigarette Butts


This was also true in Rhode Island, where Small Litter was dominated by items composed of tobacco (71.6 percent) as shown in Figure 6. Figure 6 – Small Litter on Roadways by Material

Tobacco, 71.6%

Plastic, 9.6%

Paper, 9.1%

Rubber, 3.9%

Metal, 2.4%

Composite, 2.2%

Glass, 0.8%

Other, 0.4%


Beaches, Docks and Harbors - Litter Survey Results

Beaches, Docks and Harbors – Site Selection Process The second phase of this litter survey selected 20 sites on three types of areas directly adjacent to open waterways. The sites included eight beaches, six docks and six harbors and are referenced as Beaches, Docks and Harbors sites in this report.

While roadways are selected based on detailed traffic level data consistently compiled in each U.S. state, comparable data is not available due to the nature of Waterway sites. Given this constraint, four factors were formulated to ensure that each site would provide meaningful data:

1. Representation – As much as possible, sites were distributed among the counties and selected to represent population levels based on (and in some cases, limited to) the amount of coastal area available in each county.

2. Public Access – Sites must be accessible to the public.

3. Sufficient Sampling Area – Sites should optimally have a sampling area of at least 4,500 square feet available.

4. Traffic Level – Sites should be available to facility users, pedestrian traffic and optimally adjacent to at least a moderate level of vehicular traffic.

Each of these sites has a different litter and collection system. Many of these systems were limited in October when this survey was conducted.

High-resolution maps, satellite photos and documentation from RI DOT and RI DEM were used to individually evaluate each of these factors for all potential sites.

In order to ensure appropriate representation of the Waterway sites, Captain Tim Wright NOAA (ret.), a Licensed Master Mariner with a B.Sc. in physical oceanography, assisted with the site selection process and approved each site.

The following is a list of the locations for each Waterway site with a photograph representing the distinct site type taken during this survey. The addresses shown are approximate in some cases since certain sites were not associated with specific addresses on the maps.


Beaches

1. Bristol Town Beach: 50 Asylum Road (Bristol)

2. Barrington Town Beach: 95 Bay Road (Barrington)

3. Oakland Beach: 885 Oakland Beach Avenue (Warwick)

4. Buttonwoods Beach: 315 Sea View Drive (Warwick)

5. Easton’s Beach: 175 Memorial Boulevard (Newport)

6. Sandy Point Beach: 570 Sandy Point Avenue, (Portsmouth)

7. Charlestown Breachway State Beach: Charlestown Beach Road (Charlestown)

8. Scarborough State Beach: 960 Ocean Road (Narragansett)

Figure 7 – Barrington Beach Site


Docks

1. Watch Hill Boat Yard: 13 Pasadena Avenue (Westerly) 2. Colonel Willie Cove: 155 Hope Street (Bristol)

3. Wickford Marina: 63 Esmond Avenue (North Kingstown)

4. Pawtuxet Cove: 1 Grenore Street (Warwick)

5. Melville Cove: 1 Lagoon Road (Portsmouth)

6. Jamestown Ferry: 7 East Ferry Wharf (Jamestown)

Figure 8 – Dock in Colonel Willie Cove Site


Harbors

1. Providence Harbor: 50 Henderson Street (Providence)

2. Rockwell Park/Bristol Harbor: 135 Thames Street (Bristol)

3. Newport Harbor: 39 Americas Cup Avenue (Newport)

4. Little Allen’s Harbor: 1 Patrol Road, (North Kingstown)

5. Wickford Harbor: 35 Steamboat Avenue (North Kingstown)

6. Sakonnet Harbor: 6 Bluff Head Avenue (Little Compton)

Figure 9 – Bristol Harbor Site


Figure 10 – Map of Waterway Sites


Sampling Methodology - Beaches, Docks and Harbors

Similar to the methodology used to sample both the roadway and supplemental landfill sites, littered items were classified as either Large Litter (two inches or larger) or Small Litter (smaller than two inches). All sites (unless otherwise noted) were 264 feet in length (1/20 of a mile) with a maximum width of 18 feet. Small Litter was sampled on three transects of each site (beginning, middle and end). Each of the three transects comprised a 3’ x 18’ area. The area of the three transects totaled 162 square feet and data found in those segments were extrapolated to the total site length. Beaches were sampled at the beginning of the public entrance leading from the pavement, grass or steps 18 feet into the sand by 264 feet in length. For docks, perpendicular samples were taken 18 feet from the beginning of the docks into either the parking lot or public area. Harbors were sampled beginning at the water’s edge, sampling 18 feet inwards and 264 feet in length.

Litter was classified into 95 categories of Large Litter and 17 categories of Small Litter, similar to the categories used in many recent litter surveys including Texas’ survey in 2013. However, no items were found in 38 of the Large Litter categories and in two of the Small Litter categories, thus the finally tally yielded 57 categories of Large Litter and 15 categories of Small Litter. A short video was taken if the site was heavily littered. Otherwise each site was photographed and documented.

Survey Results - Beaches, Docks and Harbors

The survey results for the 20 Waterway sites are broken down into sections addressing Large Litter, Small Litter and Total Litter. Additional details regarding Waterway site data can be found in the Appendices.

Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors

Large Litter, items more likely to be visible and targeted for cleanup, accounted for 7.3 percent of Total Litter. The highest portion of Large Litter was Construction and Industrial items, which comprised 10.7 percent of all items. Unbranded Napkins were the second highest component (8.9 percent), followed by Cup Lids, Pieces, Straws (8.5 percent). Together these items comprised 28.1 percent of all Large Litter. Table 5 shows that the top 10 components made up 58.3 percent of Large Litter. Misc. Paper and Misc. Plastic have been major components in many recent litter studies. These consist of pieces of paper and plastic that are not readily identifiable. Complete lists of Large Litter and Total Litter components can be found in the Appendices.


Table 5 – Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors (Top 10 Items)

# Large Litter Percent

1 Construction/Industrial 10.7%

2 Unbranded Napkins 8.9%

3 Cup/Lid Pieces/Straws 8.5%


5 Polystyrene Clamshells/Pieces 4.7%

6 Tobacco Packaging 4.5%

7 Misc. Paper 4.5%

8 Plastic Wrap 3.8%

9 Home Articles 3.8%

10 Plastic Drink Cups 2.5%

Large Litter – Top 10 Items 58.3%

Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Material Items found at Waterway sites were categorized based on their composition in order to form a comparison by material. For purposes of the Beaches, Docks and Harbors portion of the 2013 Rhode Island Litter Survey, Composite refers to items with mixed material composition such as Construction/Industrial Debris, Cup/Lid Pieces, Tobacco Packaging, Home Articles, etc. Figure 11 shows Large Litter in Beaches, Docks and Harbors by material dominated by Composite (39.1 percent), and followed by plastic (30.2 percent) and paper (20.8 percent).

Based on US-EPA’s classification, Packaging comprised 24.6 percent of Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors, while all recyclable items comprised 20.6 percent. Beverage containers, by themselves, comprised 5.7 percent.


Figure 11 -Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Material

Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Site

Figure 11 shows the composition of litter found on Waterway sites. Table 6 below provides a breakout of Large Litter by site type with the average number of items per site.

Table 6 – Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Site (with Outlier)

Site Type Sites Items Items/Site

Beaches 8 203 25

Harbors 6 372 62

Docks 6 210 35

Total 20 785 39

One site, Collier Park in Providence Harbor, was heavily littered and deemed an extreme outlier. Collier Park lies in the urban center of the City of Providence and appears to be insufficiently maintained. If this outlier is excluded (Table 7), the other harbors have a litter rate similar to the beaches and docks.

Glass, 1.4%

Metal, 1.9%

Paper, 20.8%

Plastic, 30.2% Tobacco,

2.7%

Composite, 39.1%

Other, 3.9%


Table 7 – Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Site (excluding Outlier)

Site Type Sites Items Items/Site

Beaches 8 203 25

Harbors 5 138 28

Docks 6 210 35

Total 19 551 29

As both tables indicate, beaches had the lowest amount of Large Litter per site. Although the beaches were technically closed when this survey was conducted, residents were observed walking, swimming and picnicking along beaches.

Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors Small Litter accounted for 92.7 percent of all litter found on Waterway sites. As shown in Table 8 and consistent with other recent litter surveys, Cigarette Butts comprised the largest portion of Small Litter (52.8 percent).

Table 8 – Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors

Small Litter Percent


Hard Plastic 10.6%

Paper Pieces 8.2%

Metal (not Aluminum) 6.1%

Bottle Caps 5.6%

Other 5.3%

Plastic Film 3.2%

Polystyrene - Other 2.1%

Glass 1.8%

Aluminum 1.2%

Rubber 1.2%

Cigar Butts 0.9%


Polystyrene Peanuts 0.3%

Straws 0.3%

Small Litter - Total 100.0%


The top five components accounted for 83.3 percent of all Small Litter on Waterway sites while the remaining items comprise 16.7 percent. Figure 12 shows this breakdown.

Figure 12 –Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Component

Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Material

Small Litter found during the Waterway sampling was also classified based on its material composition. Items that were composed of more than one type of material were classified as Composite. In terms of material, Small Litter was dominated by tobacco (54 percent), followed by plastic (16 percent) and paper (8 percent). Figure 13 details the amount of Waterway litter by material composition.


Other Items 16.7%

Hard Plastic, 10.6%

Paper, 8.2%

Metal, 6.1%

Bottle Caps, 5.6%


Figure 13 -Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Material

Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Site Type

Figure 13 shows the breakdown of Small Litter on Waterway sites by material. Table 9 shows the number and percent of Small Litter by site type. Because Collier Park was not an outlier for Small Litter, no additional separation is shown.

Table 9 – Small Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors by Site Type

Type Sites Items Items/Site

Beaches 8 3,168 396

Harbors 6 3,520 587

Docks 6 3,343 557

Total 20 10,031 502

Table 9 shows a more even distribution of Small Litter in the three site types than was found in Large Litter. This may have occurred because smaller items tend to be cleaned up less often than large items.

Glass, 2% Metal,

7% Paper, 8%

Plastic, 16%

Tobacco, 54%

Composite, 6% Other,

6%


Similar to Large Litter, beaches had the lowest amount of Small Litter per site. This may be due to a higher level of cleanups on beaches as well as the role played by tides and sand in burying Small Litter or carrying these items into waterways.

As noted earlier, although the beaches were technically closed when this survey was conducted, residents were observed walking, swimming and picnicking along beaches.


Supplemental Landfill Sites

Introduction Trash and recycling collection vehicles are not always secured sufficiently during the collection and transport processes. This can lead to spillage of trash and recyclables from these vehicles, particularly on roads leading to recycling and waste management facilities, and can help create hot spots where litter tends to accumulate.

In order to examine this dynamic in Rhode Island, four supplemental landfill sites were sampled on major and minor roadways leading to Rhode Island’s major disposal facility, Central Landfill. A background of this facility, and the results of both Large Litter and Small Litter found on these sites, is contained in this section. RI DOC sends crews to clean up litter in areas near Central Landfill.

RIRRC Facility Background Except for the town of Tiverton (which owns its own landfill) all municipal solid waste and recyclables generated within the state of Rhode Island are transported for disposal to the RIRRC’s Central Landfill and Material Recovery Facility (MRF) located in Johnston, RI. Only waste generated by municipalities within the state can be disposed of at this facility.

Each day between 350 and 450 vehicles bring waste to the landfill and up to 175 trucks deliver recyclables to the MRF for disposal and processing. The landfill manages approximately 2,500 tons of residential and commercial waste per day. The MRF serves the entire state of Rhode Island and processes approximately 380-450 tons of single-stream material per day.

Figure 14 – Central Landfill


In order to help prevent unwanted litter, RIRRC has a litter control program in place that includes both permanent and moveable litter fences surrounding the landfill. The moveable fences allow for adaptation to current wind conditions. RIRRC also has a litter crew tasked with collecting litter from the fences and surrounding areas. RIRRC reports a decrease in plastic bag litter resulting from the state’s ReStore program, which requires all grocery stores in Rhode Island who distribute plastic bags to have a recycling collection in place.

Survey Results – Supplemental Landfill Sites The survey results for the four supplemental landfill sites are broken down into sections addressing both Large Litter and Small Litter. The sampling methodology used for all items was identical to the 70 roadway sites. These four sites were chosen based on proximity to RIRRC and were not intended to be representative, but rather to provide insights as potential litter hot spots.

Large Litter on Supplemental Landfill Sites In the four supplemental landfill sites leading up to Central Landfill (located in Johnston), Large Litter accounted for 10.3 percent of the Total Litter on all sites. The biggest component of Large Litter on the supplemental landfill sites was Misc. Paper, which comprised 21.4 percent of all items. Misc. Plastic (15.2 percent) was the second largest component, followed by Tire and Rubber Debris (8.3 percent). Together these three components comprised 44.9 percent of Large Litter. Table 10 – Large Litter near Supplemental Landfill Sites – Top 10 Items

# Large Litter Items Percent

1 Misc. Paper 21.4%


3 Tire and Rubber Debris 8.3%

4 Printed Material (Newspapers, etc.) 3.9%

5 Misc. Glass 3.9%

6 Beverage Containers 3.6%

7 Cups/Lids Pieces/Straws 3.3%

8 Corrugated Boxes/Box Materials 3.3%

9 Vehicle and Metal Road Debris 3.3%

10 Construction Debris 3.3%

Large Litter - Top 10 Items 69.5%


Table 10 shows that the top 10 components comprise 69.5 percent of Large Litter on the supplemental landfill sites. Misc. Paper and Misc. Plastic have both continued to be major components of roadway litter.

Large Litter on Supplemental Landfill Sites by Material Based on material composition, Large Litter was dominated by paper (37.5 percent), followed by plastics (28.0 percent) as shown in Figure 15.

Figure 15 -Large Litter on Supplemental Landfill Sites by Material

Based on US-EPA’s classification, Packaging comprised 17.3 percent of Large Litter on roadways, while all recyclable items comprised 30.8 percent. Beverage containers, by themselves, comprised 3.3 percent of Large Litter.

Paper, 37.5%

Plastic, 28.0%

Metal, 1.8%

Glass, 3.9%

Composite, 16.7%

Rubber, 8.3%

Tobacco, 1.2%

Other, 2.7%


Small Litter on Supplemental Landfill Sites Small Litter accounted for 89.7 percent of Total Litter found on the four supplemental landfill sites sampled. As shown in Table 11 and consistent with all other litter surveys conducted in the past 30 years, Cigarette Butts were the largest component of Small Litter (39.0 percent). This was followed by Paper Pieces (19.0 percent) and Hard Plastic (10.0 percent).

Table 11 – Small Litter near Supplemental Landfill Sites

# Small Litter Percent

1 Cigarette Butts 39.0%

2 Paper Pieces 19.0%

3 Hard Plastic 10.0%

4 Glass 5.0%

5 Cigar Butts 4.0%

6 Other Items 4.0%

7 Plastic Film 4.0%

8 Polystyrene Peanuts 3.0%

9 Aluminum Pieces 2.0%

10 Metal 2.0%

11 Polystyrene - Other 2.0%

12 Rubber 2.0%

13 Straws 2.0%

14 Bottle Caps 1.0%

15 Candy Wrappers 1.0%

Small Litter - Total 100.0% Recyclable items comprised 15.5 percent of Small Litter.


The top four items of Small Litter accounted for 73.0 percent of all Small Litter found on the supplemental landfill sites. The remaining 11 items accounted for 27.0 percent of Small Litter as shown in Figure 16.

Figure 16 –Small Litter on Supplemental Landfill Sites by Component

Cigarette Butts, 39.0%

Paper, 19.0%

Hard Plastic, 10.0%

Glass, 5.0%

Other Materials, 27.0%


Small Litter on Supplemental Landfill Sites by Material Small items of litter found on the supplemental landfill sites were also categorized based on their material composition. Composite refers to items with mixed material composition. As it relates to material, Small Litter was dominated by tobacco (43.0 percent), followed by paper and plastic (19.0 percent). Figure 17 details the amount of litter on the supplemental landfill sites by material.

Figure 17 -Small Litter on Supplemental Landfill Sites by Material

Paper, 19.0%

Plastic, 19.0%

Metal, 5.0% Glass,

5.0%

Composite, 3.0%

Rubber, 2.0%

Tobacco, 43.0%

Other, 4.0%


Roadway Litter - Rhode Island and Northeast States Senior staff of ER Planning led the design and implementation of Keep America Beautiful’s 2009 National Litter Survey and Litter Costs Study. This project consisted of physically sampling litter on 243 sites within 45 states. As part of the 2013 Rhode Island Litter Survey, the results of litter found on the 70 roadway sites in Rhode Island 2013 were compared to the 42 sites sampled in the following eight Northeast States during Keep America Beautiful’s 2009 National Litter Survey:6

Connecticut

Maine

Massachusetts

Maryland

New Jersey

New York

Pennsylvania

Vermont

Due to their different roles in these two studies, Tire Pieces and Gum Litter were excluded from this analysis. Cigarette and Cigar Butts were such a large component of Small Litter that they would have distorted the comparison and resulted in misleading data. Thus, they were also excluded. Although most components of Large Litter and Small Litter were virtually the same in Rhode Island and the Northeast States, three components of Small Litter were much higher in Rhode Island: Plastic Snack Wrappers, Plastic Film Packaging and Polystyrene Peanuts/Pieces. Table 12 provides a comparison of the top 20 items by category found in Rhode Island compared to the Northeast States. A full list of all items can be found in the Appendices. Almost 99 percent of Total Litter in Rhode Island and almost 94 percent of Total Litter in Northeast States can be found in the top 20 categories. Most of the categories show similar percentages. The most significant differences between the two surveys can be found in Paper Fast Food Service (-4.9 percent); Plastic Packaging/Film (+4.7 percent); and Polystyrene Peanuts (+3.8 percent). This difference was predominantly in Small Litter.

6 2009 National Visible Litter Survey and Litter Cost Research Study. Keep America Beautiful. September 2009.


Misc. Paper and Misc. Plastic were the highest components of litter in both surveys. Other recent litter surveys have also confirmed that these two categories, which represent unidentifiable paper and plastic items that have typically been mowed and/or weathered, are significant portions of litter. Table 12 – Roadway Litter: Rhode Island and Northeast States

# All Items Rhode Island Northeast

1 Misc. Paper 34.6% 35.0%

2 Misc. Plastic 17.9% 18.5%

3 Other Metal and Foil Pieces 9.1% 8.1%

4 Plastic Snack Wrappers 6.8% 3.4%

5 Plastic Packaging – Film 5.8% 1.1%

6 Polystyrene Peanuts/Pieces 5.3% 1.5%

7 Bottle Caps 3.2% 0.3%

8 Plastic Fast Food Service Items7 3.2% 3.6%

9 Miscellaneous Glass 3.1% 5.2%

10 Tobacco Packaging 2.3% 1.3%

11 Vehicle and Metal Road Debris8 1.4% 1.6%

12 Paper Fast Food Service Items 1.4% 6.2%

13 Other Items 1.2% 1.1%

14 Miscellaneous Cardboard 0.7% 0.4%

15 Construction/Industrial Items 0.6% 1.9%

16 Printed Material (Newspapers, etc.) 0.6% 0.4%

17 Food 0.4% 0.9%

18 Polystyrene – Fast Food 0.4% 1.0%

19 Clothing and Textiles 0.3% 0.3%

20 Business and School Items 0.3% 1.9%

Total Litter – Top 20 Items 98.5% 93.6%

In addition to comparing the percentages of litter by item in both surveys, the number of items per site was also compared. Rhode Island roadways are skewed toward urban interstate roads (almost twice that of the Northeast States), while the Northeast States included almost 50 percent more urban municipal roads, which have significantly lower traffic levels compared to urban interstates (Table 13).

7 Plastic items other than Polystyrene Foam – such as Plastic Utensils. 8 Excludes Tire and Rubber Pieces.


Although Rhode Island is the smallest U.S. state in terms of area, it has a high population density (1,016 residents/square mile), second only to New Jersey (1,205 residents/square mile) and significantly higher than the U.S. average (88 residents/square mile)9. Higher population density would imply higher traffic density as well, which is precisely the case in Rhode Island. Table 13 – Roadway Traffic Levels: Rhode Island and Northeast States

Roadway Type Northeast Rhode Island

Rural Interstates/Highways 7.1% 5.7%

Rural State Roads 7.1% 1.4%

Rural County Roads 9.5% 2.9%

Rural Municipal Roads 9.5% 1.4%

Urban Interstates/Highways 19.0% 37.1%

Urban State Roads 9.5% 10.0%

Urban County Roads 14.3% 25.7%

Urban Municipal Roads 23.8% 15.7%

All Roadways 100.0% 100.0%

As shown in Table 13, a much larger percentage of Rhode Island roadways have high traffic levels compared with the Northeast States. Urban Interstates/Highways in Rhode Island comprise just 2.1 percent of the state’s roadway mileage, but handle 37.1 percent of all vehicle miles traveled 10. That is almost twice the percentage in Northeast States where Urban Interstates/Highways comprise only 19.0 percent of roadways. Since litter tends to correlate with population and traffic density, higher litter rates would be expected on Rhode Island roadways due to the high traffic density on the roadways surveyed. When the items per site in each survey were adjusted to account for population density, traffic levels and site size, Rhode Island’s litter rate was 9.5 percent lower (220 items per site) than the Northeast States( 243 items per site).

9 United States Summary: 2010. Population and Housing Unit Counts. 2010 Census of Population and Housing. Issued September 2012. 10 Highway Functional Classification System for the State of Rhode Island 2005-2015. Rhode Island Statewide Planning Program.


Recycling - Rhode Island and Neighboring States

Introduction

ER Planning was tasked with comparing the effectiveness of the following programs in Rhode Island with similar programs in Connecticut and Massachusetts:

1. Litter abatement programs such as AaH, Sponsor-a-Highway and Keep America Beautiful affiliates.

2. Recycling and diversion campaigns. A state-level benchmark was performed of existing recycling programs in all three states.

Table 14 – Demographic Comparison by State11

State Counties Municipalities 2012 Pop. Land Area (Miles2)

Pop./Mile2 MHI

RI 5 39 1,050,300 1,033.8 1,018 $55,975

MA 14 351 6,645,144 7,800.1 839.4 $65,981

CT 8 169 3,590,347 4,842.4 738.1 $69,243

Table 14 shows key demographics from all three states. Rhode Island ranks 43rd out of 50 in population. Due in part to its small geographic area, its population density is the second highest in the U.S. Rhode Island’s Median Household Income (MHI) in 2011 was $55,975, 6 percent greater than the U.S. average.

Massachusetts and Connecticut have similar population densities and are both considerably higher than the U.S. average of 87.4 people per square mile. In addition, both Massachusetts and Connecticut have MHI exceeding Rhode Island and the U.S. average of $52,762.

Each of the three states has Keep America Beautiful affiliates. Massachusetts has two, Connecticut has three and Rhode Island has one. These states should consider the value of implementing more of these or similar programs, such as New Jersey’s Clean Community Council, which operates at the state and municipal levels.

The three states also have various road adoption programs. These programs provide a good opportunity to highlight clean community messaging. Some private litter removal firms offer opportunities to relieve states of funding burdens while helping to reduce litter.

11 United States Summary: 2010. Population and Housing Unit Counts. 2010 Census of Population and Housing. Issued September 2012.


Recycling and Litter Programs in Rhode Island

The current system employed for waste diversion in Rhode Island is designed to be simple (single-stream recycling), with both enforcement and performance incentives for residents and businesses to recycle and divert materials from the waste stream.

In September 1996, the state of Rhode Island issued regulations stipulating that all municipalities must maintain recycling collection for all recyclable materials from residential, commercial and institutional sectors.

To accommodate the processing of recyclables collected and the disposal of non-recyclable materials, RIRRC operates a Material Recovery Facility (MRF), which is co-sited with Central Landfill in Johnston, RI. The MRF currently processes 450 tons per day of single-stream recyclables, about 56 percent of its capacity.

Most of the residential recyclables collected in Rhode Island (95 percent) are processed at the MRF, while the majority of commercial recyclables are processed at privately operated facilities. Because there is not a single facility processing commercial and institutional recyclables, complete data regarding commercial recycling is not accessible.

The following materials are required to be separated for recycling from the residential solid waste stream:

Glass: Food and beverage jars and bottles Metal: Aluminum cans, foil, pie pans, aerosols, steel and tin cans Paper: Newspaper, corrugated boxes, paper bags, office papers, paperback

books, egg cartons, magazines, shredded paper (in plastic bags) Plastic: All plastic containers up to two gallons

RIRRC so uses a performance-based recycling system, which rewards municipal efforts to optimize the material diverted from the waste stream. This is accomplished by reimbursing earnings from RIRRC’s sale of recycled commodities, with any profits made by RIRRC dispersed to each municipality based on the quantity of recyclable materials delivered.

All municipalities collect the same materials through single-stream curbside recycling. To encourage compliance, many municipalities require residents to set out at least one recycling bin each week in order to receive trash collection. Communities with such requirements include Providence, Coventry, Warren, Pawtucket, North Providence and Springfield.

Other communities have Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT) systems in place whereby residents pay for each unit of waste discarded rather than a fixed fee per household.


According to RI DEM, Rhode Island communities having some form of PAYT system in place include the towns of Hopkinton, Middletown, Narragansett, New Shoreham, Richmond, South Kingstown and Westerly.12

Municipally contracted haulers or municipal collection crews collect commercial and residential wastes. RIRRC also operates a composting facility adjacent to the landfill to process organic materials. As with commercial and residential solid waste, organic materials may be collected by private or public sectors.

The RI General Assembly mandated that municipalities reach a recycling rate of 35 percent and a diversion rate of 50 percent by 2012. Rhode Island municipalities use the following calculations when referring to their goals.

Mandatory Recycling Rate =

(weight of recycling bin contents + leaf and yard debris + scrap metal + clothing) (the above numerator + refuse)

Diversion Rate =

(weight of recycling bin contents + all other materials NOT sent to landfill) (the above numerator + refuse)

According to RIRRC’s the average municipal recycling rate was 32 percent in fiscal year 2012 and the average municipal diversion rate was 35 percent.13

In addition to state and municipal cleanup efforts, RI DOT oversees Adopt-a-Highway (AaH), Sponsor-a-Highway and Adopt-a-Spot programs. More than 100 roadways have been adopted by private citizens, nonprofits, businesses and other organizations. Each adoptee must clean its stretch of roadway of litter at least four times per year.

The Sponsor-A-Highway Program is similar to the AaH program, but instead of secondary roads, businesses, nonprofits, or individuals sponsor a two-mile segment of a highway. The highways currently in the programs are I-95, I-195, I-295, Routes 4, 10, 24, 78 and 146, U.S. 6, and the Airport Connector. Three companies currently assist RI DOT in this effort. The sponsor pays the company a monthly fee. In exchange, the company cleans a two-mile stretch of high-speed roadway 19 times per year.14

The Adopt-a-Spot program focuses on locations in need of beautification. Participants agree to maintain these areas by landscaping and removing litter. Adopters are asked to maintain the spot for a two-year renewable period.

12 Pay-As-You-Throw in Rhode Island.http://www.dem.ri.gov/programs/bpoladm/stratpp/payt/payt.htm. 13 Special Legislative Commission to Study Producer Responsibility Models for Paper and Packaging. Findings and Recommendations. Report Submitted to the Rhode Island State Senate. June 2013. 14 RI DOT Sponsor-A-Highway Program. http://www.dot.ri.gov/programs/highwaysponsor/index.asp

http://www.dem.ri.gov/programs/bpoladm/stratpp/payt/payt.htm


The state also has one Keep America Beautiful affiliate, Keep Blackstone Valley Beautiful (KBVB), which serves as the environmental education arm of the Blackstone Valley Tourism Council. KBVB focuses on litter prevention, waste reduction and beautifying efforts by working with government, business and civic groups within the towns of Burrillville, Central Falls, Cumberland, Gloucester, Lincoln, North Smithfield, Pawtucket, Smithfield and Woonsocket.

Beverage containers were a small component (4.1 percent) of roadway litter in Rhode Island despite the fact that the state does not have a bottle bill in place as both Connecticut and Massachusetts do.

Rhode Island’s litter tax15 was first enacted in 1984 and originally allocated funds collected solely for litter control and recycling programs.16 Rhode Island sales tax permit holders, whose sales relate in whole or in part to the taxable sales of food and/or beverages, must apply for a litter control participation permit. The annual permit fee is based on gross receipts and can range from $25 to $1,000.

Rhode Island also imposes a tax of $0.04 per case on beverage containers, which it defines as all non-alcoholic drinks for human consumption, except for milk, but including beer and other malt beverages. This tax is limited to a small percentage of overall packaging (beverage, food and fast food only).

As of 2012, 5,938 businesses were subject to this tax including convenience stores, restaurants, fast food chains and supermarkets. The tax is based on each business owner’s gross sales. The state also taxes beverage distributors and wholesalers four cents for each case of beverages sold in the state. Only 33 businesses are subject to the latter tax. Not all producers of paper and packaging are subject to either of these taxes, but for the businesses that are, the tax amounts to a cost of doing business in Rhode Island.

The RI Senate Commission on Producer Responsibility for Paper and Packaging found that revenues generated by the litter and beverage taxes are inappropriately diverted into the general fund. From fiscal year 2010 to fiscal year 2012, these revenues totaled

15 Rhode Island’s litter tax is based on the following sections of Rhode Island’s General Laws: Chapter 44-44 Taxation of Beverage Containers, Hard-to-Dispose Material and Litter Control Participation Permittee; Chapter 37-15 Litter Control and Recycling; and Chapter 37-15.1 Hard-to-Dispose Material - Control and Recycling. 16 Special Legislative Commission to Study Producer Responsibility Models for Paper and Packaging. Findings and Recommendations. Report Submitted to the Rhode Island State Senate. June 2013.




about $5.6 million. Only a limited amount is currently allocated to recycling and litter reduction programs, hindering the state’s efforts to reach higher recycling goals and to lower litter rates more effectively. RI DOT spent a total of $632,000 dollars for RI DOC’s litter crews in fiscal year 2012, with a daily cost of $400 per litter crew.17

17 Special Legislative Commission to Study Producer Responsibility Models for Paper and Packaging. Findings and Recommendations. Report Submitted to the Rhode Island State Senate. June 2013.


Recycling and Litter Programs in Massachusetts

In Massachusetts, municipalities are responsible for residential waste collection and recycling services. The state has absolutely no role in this effort. Instead, municipalities use private contractors to provide these services. Commercial and institutional waste management is a function of the generator so private subscription services are commonplace here as well.

Massachusetts has no specified state recycling goal, therefore recycling diversion goals are set by each municipality. The state reported a 42 percent recycling rate in 2009.

In 2012, the Massachusetts Legislature considered a bill that would have granted the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) the power to require that all municipalities attain a given waste reduction rate or face penalties. The bill would have established avenues through which municipalities could receive assistance from MassDEP to reach the goals. That bill was not successful.

In order to promote waste reduction, some municipalities use a PAYT program. Currently approximately one-third of the 351 municipalities have some type of PAYT

program in place.18

Similar to Rhode Island, other municipalities require that recyclables

be set out in order to have refuse collected as an incentive for separating recyclables from trash. However, since only two-thirds of municipalities have a curbside program in place, a portion of the population does not have this opportunity. Processing and disposal of waste are provided by a combination of landfills and seven in-state waste-to-energy (WTE) facilities while some trash and recyclables are shipped to other states for processing and disposal. MassDEP issued a Solid Waste Master Plan in 201319 that established a vision for how Massachusetts will manage its solid waste between 2011 and 2020. The primary goal of the plan is to reduce the amount of annual waste disposed by 30 percent from 2008-2020, or from 6.5 million tons of disposal to 4.5 million tons by 2020. This reduction would occur partly through the following five statewide diversion initiatives:

(1) Increase Residential Recycling and Composting: Use technical assistance and grant programs to increase recycling and composting through development of cost-effective municipal and regional residential recycling programs. This includes PAYT program expansion, and collection of all recyclables together

18 Garbage and Recycling in Massachusetts: The Facts, The Present, and The Future. www.toxicsaction.org/sites/default/files/tac/information/garbage-and-recycling-in-massachusetts.pdf 19 Massachusetts 2010-2020 Solid Waste Master Plan. April 2013. Pathway to Zero Waste. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection – Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs.

http://www.toxicsaction.org/sites/default/files/tac/information/garbage-and-recycling-in-massachusetts.pdf


through single-stream recycling. In addition, a focus on paper and organics as priority materials for additional diversion potential will be explored.

(2) Increase Business and Institutional Recycling and Composting: Require waste haulers to provide full recycling services to their customers, and enforce waste ban compliance by waste generators and haulers more aggressively. Focus on paper and organics as priority materials as they have the greatest potential for significant improvement in their capture and use.

(3) Strengthen Incentives Through Producer Responsibility: Work with all stakeholders to create incentives for better management of products and packaging after their use through legislation (such as an end-life producer responsibility “E-waste” bill).

(4) Build Local and Regional Recycling Markets: Drive development of new and expanded recycling markets through innovative pilot projects, state procurement, cost-effective regional programs, targeted business development assistance, and aggressive implementation of existing and new waste bans.

(5) Implement State-wide Education Campaigns: Work with municipal, non-profit, and business stakeholders, including the waste management industry, to develop and implement a series of targeted education campaigns and school educational programs to support waste reduction and increased recycling.

Massachusetts passed a bottle bill in 1982 that collects a five-cent deposit on carbonated beverage containers. Unredeemed deposits were originally paid to a Clean Environment Fund, which was eliminated by Gov. Mitt Romney in 2002. These deposits are now used to address budget shortfalls. Efforts to reinstate this fund continue. The Sierra Club’s Massachusetts chapter notes that recycling rates have dropped while litter has increased over the past four years, stressing the need to restore this fund.20 As of July 5, 2013, redemption centers are paid a handling fee of 3¼ cents per container.

Other important litter programs include the Department of Transportation’s AaH program, which utilizes volunteers to pick up litter along designated roadways. Each volunteer team cleans a two mile section of roadway and removes litter at least once a month between April 15 and November 15. A Sponsor-a-Highway program is also available for which the Adopt-a-Highway Maintenance Corporation will clean up litter on a stretch of highway a certain number of times per year. For each segment sponsored, one litter removal sign with a sponsor recognition panel is placed on the shoulder of the freeway.

20 Reinstate the Clean Environment Fund. http://www.sierraclubmass.org/issues/legislative/cef.htm


Recycling and Litter Programs in Connecticut

Through section 22a-228(b) of state code, Connecticut has adopted a hierarchy as a guiding framework for solid waste management efforts. This hierarchy emphasizes source reduction, recycling, composting, and energy recovery from solid waste, while relying on landfill disposal and incineration as last resorts.

There are 169 towns in Connecticut, 19 of which are chartered as cities and one as a borough. Refuse and recycling material collection systems are the responsibility of each town and vary in form based on the infrastructure and dynamics of each community. While some towns use municipal staff and equipment to collect trash and recyclables, the majority of towns utilize private contracts. This occurs through municipal contracts with the hauler or residential subscription services.

Connecticut's municipalities, schools, and businesses are required to implement a recycling program based on the state's mandatory recycling legislation that went into effect on January 1, 1991. The infrastructure in place to collect and process recyclables varies by municipality and by waste management region. To facilitate the collection, processing and marketing of recyclable commodities, municipalities are encouraged to join one of 10 recycling regions. Towns belonging to regions send their collected recyclables to one of five intermediate processing centers (IPCs) which are located in Stratford, Hartford, Danbury, Berlin and Groton. Working through an IPC allows communities to take advantage of the economies of scale that a larger facility offers. However, some municipalities have chosen not to join a region. These towns market their own recyclables or utilize other facilities.21 Solid waste processing and disposal is primarily managed in the state’s six WTE facilities, which serve as the focal point of the regional waste processing and disposal systems. Prior to 2009, the majority of these facilities were managed by the Connecticut Resource Recovery Authority (CRRA). However, as the debt service on the WTE facilities was paid off, the municipal leadership in each of the waste management regions was given the option of either taking control of the system, or finding other disposal alternatives. As a result, Connecticut now has a number of different systems managing the waste stream. CRRA now primarily services the Mid-Conn Waste Region where the City of Hartford is located.

21 State of Connecticut. Department of Energy & Environmental Protection. Recycling in Connecticut. http://www.ct.gov/deep/cwp/view.asp?A=2714&Q=324892

http://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_446d.htm#Sec22a-228.htm


Connecticut passed a bottle bill law in 1978 that collects a five-cent deposit on carbonated beverage containers. Non-carbonated beverages, including water bottles, are covered by the state’s bottle bill as of April 1, 2009. Unredeemed deposits are paid to the state’s General Fund. Connecticut’s bottle bill does not have a reporting requirement; therefore data regarding recovery rates are not available. Connecticut bases its 67 percent recovery rate on Massachusetts redemption rate.22 As of July 1, 2010, redemption centers are paid a handling fee of 1.5 cents for each beer container and 2 cents for each carbonated soft drink and noncarbonated beverage container. The state's source reduction and recycling goal is to achieve a 58 percent recovery rate by the year 2024. As of 2010, Connecticut was recycling and composting approximately 26 percent of its waste.

22 State of Connecticut. State Solid Waste Management Plan: Amended December 2006. Changing the Balance. State of Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection.

http://www.ct.gov/dep/cwp/view.asp?a=2714&q=324838&depNav_GID=1645


Packaging and Recyclables as Components of Litter Notations were made if littered items were a component of packaging or if they were currently accepted in either Rhode Island’s single-stream recycling program or in plastic bag drop-off programs in the state.

Packaging in Litter

Items designated as packaging in the lists below were based on the classifications used by US-EPA in their MSW reports23. This classification was only applied to the components of Large Litter since this classification is not always evident for the components of Small Litter.

Packaging comprised 24.6 percent of Large Litter along Beaches, Docks and Harbors sites, 16.5 percent of Large Litter along roadways and (similarly) 17.3 percent of Large Litter along roadway sites near Central Landfill.

Recyclables in Litter

Recyclables comprised 20.6 percent of Large Litter along Beaches, Docks and Harbors sites, 28.4 percent of Large Litter along roadways and 30.8 percent of Large Litter along roadway sites near Central Landfill.

Recyclables comprised 17.1 percent of Small Litter along Beaches, Docks and Harbors sites, 13.2 percent of Small Litter along roadways and 28.7 percent of Small Litter along roadway sites near Central Landfill.

23 Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States. Tables and Figures for 2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery. February 2014.


Statistical Tests

A correlation analysis, which included data for all 70 roadways in the survey, was performed to determine if there was a relationship between the presence of Large Litter and Small Litter on Rhode Island roadways. A coefficient of .33 was obtained. Though not remarkably large, this figure is statistically significant at the .01 level. Thus, where there is more Large Litter on the roadway, there tends to be more Small Litter as well; where there is less Large Litter, there tends to be less Small Litter.

The roadways were then separated into urban and rural designations, and a separate analysis was run for each category. The correlation for urban roads (N=62) was .32: again statistically significant. More striking, however, was the result for rural roads (N=8): a correlation of .94. Despite the small sample size, this result was significant at the .01 level, and suggested a strong relationship between the tallies for both Large Litter and Small Litter found on rural roadway sites.

Finally, a comparison was made between the amounts of litter found on urban and rural roadways. On average, the rural sites had more Large Litter, but less Small Litter, than urban sites. However, the results of statistical tests showed that neither of these differences was statistically significant.

A correlation analysis was also conducted for the 20 Waterway sites. However, the values for the Providence Harbor site, which was deemed a statistical outlier, disproportionately affected the outcome of the analysis when all 20 sites were examined. This site was removed, the analysis re-run, and a small negative correlation coefficient (-.07) was obtained. The result is not significant, which suggests that the relationship between Large Litter and Small Litter on roadways does not necessarily extend to the Waterway sites.

Recognizing that Beaches, Docks and Harbors represent a broad category, separate analyses were conducted for the three types of sites surveyed. The correlations were as follows: Beaches (N=8), -0.52; Docks (N=6), -.07; and, Harbors (minus Providence Harbor, N=5), -0.16. While each coefficient is negative, none is statistically significant. Taken as a whole they provide little or no indication of a relationship between the presence of Large Litter and that of Small Litter for Waterway sites. This suggests that other factors, such as winds and proximity to open waters, may play a significant role in the size of litter found on Beaches, Docks and Harbors.


Recommendations Rhode Island has significant recycling and waste diversion programs in place as well as different litter abatement programs. The state’s expansion to single-stream recycling should increase diversion rates and its replacement of recycling bins with carts should help reduce litter. The following recommendations can also contribute to higher diversion rates and litter abatement in Rhode Island.

In areas with lower recycling setout rates, consider incentive programs to help increase recycling rates.

Encourage communities to consider PAYT options with a monitoring component to avoid potential problems with illegal dumping.

Use educational staff to help businesses understand their role in increasing recycling and minimizing litter.

Monitor trash and recycling collection routes to evaluate the extent to which collection vehicles contribute to litter due to spillage during the collection and transportation processes.

Publicize grocery store programs accepting plastic bags for recycling to ensure that the public is aware of this opportunity.

Increase opportunities for recycling at away-from-home locations, which can also help reduce littering on roadways and in recreational areas.

Ensure that programs such as Adopt-a-Highway and Sponsor-a-Highway track relevant metrics such as the number of bags of litter collected and the most frequently found items to help direct the focus of litter abatement programs.

Designate all funds generated by Rhode Island’s Litter Tax to programs focusing solely on litter abatement and increasing recycling and diversion rates.

Expand and coordinate litter abatement infrastructure throughout the state led by a litter task force.


References 2009 National Visible Litter Survey and Litter Cost Research Study. Keep America Beautiful. September 2009. www.erplanning.com/uploads/KAB_2009_National_Litter_ Study.pdf 2010 Northeast Litter Survey. A Baseline Survey of Litter at 288 Street and Highway Locations in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont. Conducted for American Beverage Association. Environmental Resources Planning, LLC. 2010. www.erplanning.com/ uploads/2010_Northeast_Litter_Survey_-_Final_Report_-_Revised.pdf 2012 Toronto Streets Litter Audit. A Survey of Litter at 298 Street Locations in Toronto, Ontario. Conducted for City of Toronto, Solid Waste Management Services Division. Environmental Resources Planning, LLC. 2012. www.erplanning.com/uploads/2012_ Toronto_Streets_Litter_Audit_-_Final_Report.pdf 2013 Paper and Plastic Bag Litter Survey. A Baseline Survey of Paper and Plastic Bag Litter in Oakland, CA; San Francisco, CA; and Washington, D.C. Environmental Resources Planning, LLC. October 2013. www.erplanning.com/uploads/2013_Paper_ Plastic_Bag_Litter_Survey_-_October_2013.pdf 2013 Texas Litter Survey. A Survey of Litter at 253 Sites throughout the State of Texas. Conducted for Sherry Matthews Advocacy Marketing. Don’t mess with Texas. Environmental Resources Planning, LLC. August 2013. www.erplanning.com/uploads/ 2013_Texas_Litter_Survey_-_Final_Report.pdf Litter in America. The Next Steps. Environmental Resources Planning, LLC. 2010. www.erplanning.com/ uploads/Litter_in_America_Webinar.pdf Executive Summary: Litter in America. 2009 National Litter Research. Findings and Recommendations. P. Wesley Schultz, Steven R. Stein. December 2009. www.erplanning.com/uploads/KAB_National_Litter_Research_Project_-_Executive_ Summary.pdf Garbage and Recycling in Massachusetts: The Facts, The Present, and The Future. www.toxicsaction.org/sites/default/files/tac/information/garbage-and-recycling-in-massachusetts.pdf Highway Functional Classification System for the State of Rhode Island 2005-2015. Rhode Island Statewide Planning Program. Massachusetts 2010-2020 Solid Waste Master Plan. April 2013. Pathway to Zero Waste. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection – Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs.

http://www.erplanning.com/uploads

http://www.erplanning.com/uploads/KAB_National_Litter_Research_Project_-_Executive_


Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States. Tables and Figures for 2012. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery. February 2014. Pay-As-You-Throw in Rhode Island. www.dem.ri.gov/programs/bpoladm/stratpp/payt/ payt.htm Reinstate the Clean Environment Fund. www.sierraclubmass.org/issues/legislative/ cef.htm : Chapter 44-44 Taxation of Beverage Containers, Hard-to-Dispose Material and Litter Control Participation Permittee; Chapter 37-15 Litter Control and Recycling; and Chapter 37-15.1 Hard-to-Dispose Material - Control and Recycling.

RI DOT Sponsor-A-Highway Program. www.dot.ri.gov/programs/highwaysponsor/ index.asp Special Legislative Commission to Study Producer Responsibility Models for Paper and Packaging. Findings and Recommendations. Report Submitted to the Rhode Island State Senate. June 2013. State of Connecticut. Department of Energy & Environmental Protection. Recycling in Connecticut. www.ct.gov/deep/cwp/view.asp?A=2714&Q=324892 State of Connecticut. State Solid Waste Management Plan: Amended December 2006. Changing the Balance. State of Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. State of Rhode Island General Laws. Title 37 – Public Property and Works. Chapter 37-15 Litter Control and Recycling. 2013. State of Rhode Island General Laws. Title 37 – Public Property and Works. Chapter 37-15.1 Hard-to-Dispose Material – Control and Recycling. 2013. State of Rhode Island General Laws. Title 44 – Taxation. Chapter 44-44 Taxation of Beverage Containers, Hard-to-Dispose Material and Litter Control Participation Permittee United States Summary: 2010. Population and Housing Unit Counts. 2010 Census of Population and Housing. Issued September 2012.

http://www.dem.ri.gov/programs/bpoladm/stratpp/payt/

http://www.sierraclubmass.org/issues/legislative/



http://www.dot.ri.gov/programs/highwaysponsor/


Appendices

Appendix A – Large Litter on Roadways (All Items)

Appendix B – Total Litter on Roadways (All Items)

Appendix C – Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors (All Items)

Appendix D – Total Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors (All Items)

Appendix E – Litter on Rhode Island and Northeast States

Appendix F – Large Litter Categories and Descriptions

Appendix G – List of Sites

Appendix H – Firm Qualifications


Appendix A – Large Litter on Roadways (All Items)

Littered Item Percent

Tire & Rubber Debris 18.5%

Misc. Paper 17.8%

Misc. Plastic 12.2%

Vehicle and Metal Road Debris 6.9%

Cup Lids, Straws 5.4%

Sweet Snack Packaging 3.9%

Misc. Cardboard 3.3%

Construction/Industrial 3.0%

Printed Material (Newspaper) 2.6%


Polystyrene Cups (Foam) 1.4%

Gum Wrappers 1.4%

Misc. Glass 1.4%

Cigarette/Cigar Debris (>2”) 1.2%

Home Articles 1.1%

Paper/Foil Wraps (Burger Wrappers) 1.1%

Water Bottles (Plastic) 1.1%

Clothing Or Clothing Pieces 1.0%

Stationary (School, Business Etc.) 0.8%

Non-Brand Napkins 0.7%

Plastic Drink Cups 0.7%

Other Cloth 0.7%

Snack Food Packaging 0.7%

Cigar Butts/Tips 0.6%

Beer Cans 0.5%

Paper Cups (Cold) 0.5%

Condiment Package (Salt, Etc.) 0.5%

Wine/ Liquor (Plastic/Other) 0.5%

Receipts (Business, Transfers, Etc.) 0.5%

Paperboard (Cereal Type) 0.5%

Milk/Juice (Plastic) 0.4%

Plastic Retail Bags – Unbranded 0.4%

Zipper Bags/Sandwich 0.4%

Napkins - Branded 0.4%

Plastic Packaging – Film 0.4%

Utensils 0.4%

Lottery Ticket Debris 0.4%

Soft Drink (Plastic) 0.3%

Corrugated Boxes 0.3%



Beer Bottles (Glass) 0.3%

Container Lids 0.3%

Soft Drink (Cans) 0.3%

Sport/Energy Drink (Plastic) 0.3%

Poly Fast Food Plates 0.2%

Foil Materials 0.2%

Paper Cups (Hot) 0.2%

Sport/Energy Drink (Cans) 0.2%

Paper Bags - Fast Food 0.2%

Paper Clamshells 0.2%

Plastic Wrap 0.2%

Wine/Liquor (Glass) 0.1%

Plastic Bags - Not Retail (Leaf, Trash) 0.1%

Polystyrene Clamshells/Pieces 0.1%

Paper Packaging - Other 0.1%

Paper Beverage Cases 0.1%

Aerosol Cans (Paint, Oils, Etc.) 0.1%

Tea/Coffee (Can) 0.1%

Foil Pouches 0.1%

Broken Glass Container 0.1%

Six Pack Plastic Rings 0.1%

Plastic Retail Bags - Branded 0.1%

Paper Retail Bags – Unbranded 0.1%

Plastic Jars/Bottles/Lids (Non-Beverage) 0.1%

Food Items 0.1%

Composite Materials - Other 0.1%

Soft Drink (Glass) 0.0%

Milk/Juice (Glass) 0.0%

Paper Retail Bags - Branded 0.0%

Glass Jars/Bottles Misc. 0.0%

Paper Fast Food Plate 0.0%

Total Litter 100.0%


Appendix B – Total Litter on Roadways (All Items)


Cigarette Butts (<2") 66.6%

Paper Pieces (<2") 8.6%

Hard Plastic (<2") 4.3%

Rubber (<2") 3.7%

Candy Wraps (<2") 1.7%

Aluminum (<2") 1.6%

Plastic Film (<2") 1.6%

Polystyrene - Other (<2") 1.2%

Cigar Butts (<2") 1.1%


Misc. Paper 1.0%

Bottle Caps (<2") 0.9%

Glass (<2") 0.8%

Metal (<2") 0.7%

Straws (<2") 0.7%

Misc. Plastic 0.7%

Tobacco Packaging (<2") 0.5%

Vehicle & Metal Road Debris 0.4%

Other (<2") 0.3%

Poly - Peanuts (<2") 0.3%

Cup Lids, Straws 0.3%




Printed Material (Newspapers, Etc.) 0.1%


Food (<2") 0.1%


Gum Wrappers 0.1%

Misc. Glass 0.1%

Cigarette/Cigar Debris (>2") 0.1%

Home Articles 0.1%



Clothing 0.1%


Unbranded Napkins 0.0%


Other Cloth 0.0%





Beer Cans 0.0%



Wine/ Liquor (Plastic) 0.0%






Napkins – Branded 0.0%

Plastic Packaging - Film 0.0%

Utensils 0.0%



Corrugated Boxes 0.0%


Container Lids 0.0%




Foil Materials 0.0%





Plastic Wrap 0.0%

Wine/ Liquor (Glass) 0.0%







Foil Pouches 0.0%




Paper Retail Bags – Unbranded 0.0%




Food Items 0.0%





Glass Jars/ Bottles Misc. 0.0%

Paper Fast Food Plates 0.0%

Total Litter 100.0%


Appendix C – Large Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors Littered Item Percent



Misc. Plastic 6.4%

Straws/Wrappers 5.9%



Misc. Paper 4.5%

Plastic Wrap 3.8%

Home Articles 3.8%

Cup Lids, Pieces 2.7%








Utensils 1.5%

Gum Wrappers 1.5%

Boat-Related 1.5%

Cigarette/Cigar Debris (>2") 1.4%

Misc. Paperboard 1.4%

Other Cloth 1.3%






Industrial 1.1%





Misc. Glass 0.8%

Polystyrene Block Pieces 0.8%

Beer Cans 0.6%









Clothing 0.5%



Milk/Juice (Aluminum) 0.4%

Coffee Stirrer 0.4%


Plastic Beverage Labels 0.4%





Foil Materials/Foil Pieces 0.3%

Foil Pouches 0.1%

Food Items 0.1%




Tea (Plastic) 0.0%

Tea (Glass) 0.0%


Water Bottles (Glass) 0.0%




Milk/Juice (Gable Top) 0.0%

Aseptic (Box) 0.0%


Foil Containers 0.0%


Other Paper Cups 0.0%


Paper Retail Bags - No Brand Name 0.0%


Paper Bags - Not Retail 0.0%

Corrugated Boxes/ Box Material 0.0%






Other Plastic Shells/Boxes 0.0%


Cans - Steel 0.0%

Cans - Aluminum (Non Beverage) 0.0%

Container Lids 0.0%

Paper Food Wrap (Meat Wrap) 0.0%



Other Plastic FF Plates 0.0%

Plates - Other Materials 0.0%

Polystyrene Trays 0.0%

Paper Trays 0.0%

Other Material Trays 0.0%



Total Litter 100.0%


Appendix D – Total Litter on Beaches, Docks and Harbors



Hard Plastic 9.8%

Paper 7.6%

Metal 5.7%

Bottle Caps 5.2%

Other 4.9%

Plastic - Film 3.0%

Poly - Other 1.9%

Glass 1.6%

Aluminum 1.1%

Rubber 1.1%

Cigar Butts 0.8%




Misc. Plastic 0.5%

Straws/Straw Wrappers 0.4%



Misc. Paper 0.3%

Plastic Wrap 0.3%

Home Articles 0.3%

Poly - Peanuts 0.3%

Straws 0.3%

Cup Lids, Pieces 0.2%








Utensils 0.1%

Gum Wrappers 0.1%

Boat-Related 0.1%

Cigarette / Cigar Debris (>2") 0.1%

Misc. Paperboard 0.1%

Other Cloth 0.1%








Industrial 0.1%





Misc. Glass 0.1%

Polystyrene Block Pieces 0.1%

Beer Cans 0.0%







Clothing 0.0%



Milk/Juice (Aluminum) 0.0%

Coffee Stirrer 0.0%


Plastic Beverage Labels 0.0%





Foil Materials 0.0%

Foil Pouches 0.0%

Food Items 0.0%




Tea (Plastic) 0.0%

Tea (Glass) 0.0%


Water Bottles (Glass) 0.0%






Milk/Juice (Gable Top) 0.0%

Aseptic (Box) 0.0%


Foil Containers 0.0%


Other Paper Cups 0.0%


Paper Retail Bags - No Brand Name 0.0%


Paper Bags - Not Retail 0.0%

Corrugated Boxes/ Box Material 0.0%




Other Plastic Shells/Boxes 0.0%


Cans - Steel 0.0%

Cans - Aluminum (Non Beverage) 0.0%

Container Lids 0.0%

Paper Food Wrap (Meat Wrap) 0.0%



Other Plastic FF Plates 0.0%

Plates - Other Materials 0.0%

Polystyrene Trays 0.0%

Paper Trays 0.0%

Other Material Trays 0.0%



Total Litter 100.0%


Appendix E – Litter in Rhode Island and Northeast States

Littered Item Rhode Island Northeast

Misc. Paper 34.6% 35.0%

Misc. Plastic 17.9% 18.5%

Other Metal and Foil Pieces 9.1% 8.1%

Plastic Snack Wrappers 6.8% 3.4%

Plastic Packaging – Film 5.8% 1.1%

Polystyrene Peanuts/Pieces 5.3% 1.5%

Bottle Caps 3.2% 0.3%

Plastic Fast Food Service Items 3.2% 3.6%

Miscellaneous Glass 3.1% 5.2%

Tobacco Packaging 2.3% 1.3%

Vehicle and Metal Road Debris 1.4% 1.6%

Paper Fast Food Service Items 1.4% 6.2%

Other Items 1.2% 1.1%

Miscellaneous Cardboard 0.7% 0.4%

Construction/Industrial Items 0.6% 1.9%

Printed Material (Newspapers, etc.) 0.6% 0.4%

Food 0.4% 0.9%

Polystyrene – Fast Food 0.4% 1.0%

Clothing and Textiles 0.3% 0.3%

Business and School Items 0.3% 1.9%

Home Articles 0.3% 0.1%

Water Bottles (Plastic) 0.2% 0.6%

Plastic Bags 0.1% 1.2%

Beer Cans 0.1% 0.9%

Wine/Liquor (Plastic) 0.1% 0.1%

Paperboard (Cereal Type) 0.1% 0.2%

Milk/Juice (Plastic) 0.1% 0.1%

Zipper/Sandwich Bags 0.1% 0.4%

Corrugated Boxes 0.1% 0.4%

Soft Drink (Plastic) 0.1% 0.7%

Beer Bottles (Glass) 0.1% 0.2%

Paper Bags 0.1% 0.3%

Soft Drink (Cans) 0.1% 0.2%

Sport/Energy/Tea Drinks (Plastic) 0.1% 0.1%

Juice/Tea/Coffee/Energy (Can) 0.1% 0.0%

Juice/Water/Tea/Soft Drink/Wine (Glass) 0.0% 0.1%

Beverage Cases/Six-Pack Rings 0.0% 0.0%

Plastic Jars/Bottles/Lids (Non-Beverage) 0.0% 0.8%

Foil Pouches 0.0% 0.1%

Glass Jars/Bottles - Other 0.0% 0.2%

Total Litter 100.0% 100.0%


Appendix F – Large Litter Categories and Descriptions

# Large Litter Items Category Material Description

1 Beer Cans Beverage Metal Beer in aluminum cans

2 Beer Bottles (Glass) Beverage Glass Beer in glass bottles

3 Soft Drink (Glass) Beverage Glass Soft drinks in glass containers

4 Soft Drink (Cans) Beverage Metal Soft drinks in metal can containers

5 Soft Drink (Plastic) Beverage Plastic Soft drinks in plastic containers

6 Sport Drink (Glass) Beverage Glass Sport drinks in glass bottles

7 Sport Drink (Plastic) Beverage Plastic Sport drinks in plastic containers

8 Water Bottles (Glass) Beverage Glass Packaged water in glass bottles

9 Water Bottles (Plastic) Beverage Plastic Packaged water in plastic containers

10 Wine/ Liquor (Glass) Beverage Glass Wine & liquor in glass bottles

11 Wine/ Liquor (Plastic) Beverage Plastic Wine & liquor in plastic or other formats

12 Milk/Juice (Plastic) Beverage Plastic Milk or juice in plastic containers

13 Milk/Juice (Glass) Beverage Glass Milk or juice containers in glass bottles

14 Milk/Juice (Gable) Beverage Paper Milk or juice in gable top cartons

15 Foil Pouches Other Pckg Composite Packaged goods and pieces of foil pckg.

16 Aseptic (Box) Other Pckg Composite Beverages in coated paper boxes

17 Broken Cont. Glass Other Pckg Glass Glass bottle fragments

18 Six Pack Plastic Rings Other Pckg Plastic Plastic handles for carrying cans/bottles

75 Foil Containers Other Pckg Metal Ice cream foil wraps, etc.

19 Plastic Drink Cups Cups Plastic Cups, all resin types

20 Paper Cups (Cold) Cups Paper Cups, all paper types - cold drinks

21 Paper Cups (Hot) Cups Paper Cups, all paper types - hot drinks

22 Polystyrene Foam Cups Cups Plastic Cups, all polystyrene types - hot drinks

23 Other Paper Cups Cups Paper Cups, other materials

24 Cup Lids/Pieces, Straws Cups Plastic Cups, lids, straws, wrappers and pieces

25 Plastic Retail Bags Bags Plastic Whole\pieces of retail plastic bags

26 Paper Retail Bags Bags Paper Whole\pieces of retail paper bags

27 Paper Bags - Fast Food Bags Paper Whole\pieces of fast food paper bags

28 Plastic Bags - Not Retail Bags Plastic Whole\pieces of non-retail plastic bags

29 Paper Bags - Not Retail Bags Paper Paper bags & sacks (e.g., leaf debris)

30 Zipper Bags/ Sandwich Bags Plastic Plastic lunch bags and sacs

31 Cardboard Boxes Other Pckg Paper All cardboard boxes and pieces

32 Paperboard (Cereal Type) Other Pckg Paper Cereal/shoe boxes and pieces

33 Paper Beverage Cases Other Pckg Paper Outer packaging for beverage products

34 Polystyrene Clamshells Other Pckg Plastic Expanded foam food containers

35 Paper Clamshells Other Pckg Paper Paper-based food containers

36 Other Plastic Shells/Boxes Other Pckg Plastic PET, PVC, HDPE, other material shells

37 Plastic Jars/Bottles/Lids Other Containers Plastic Non-beverage (detergent bottles, etc.)

38 Glass Jars/ Bottles Misc. Other Containers Glass Glass jars/bottles not described above

39 Cans - Steel Other Containers Metal Steel food/non-food containers

40 Cans - Aluminum Other Containers Metal Aluminum food/non-food containers

41 Container Lids Other Containers

All lids, closures, and pieces

42 Aerosol Cans Other Containers Metal Paint, Hairspray spray cans, etc.

43 Paper Food Wrap Food Containers/ Wraps

Paper Commercial/Non-commercial food wrap (e.g., meat wrap)

44 Paper/Foil Composite Wrap Food Containers/

Wraps Composite Hamburger wrappers, etc.


# Large Litter Items Category Material Description

45 Plastic Wrap Food Containers/

Wraps Plastic All plastic wrap types, food, non-food

54 Condiment Package Take-Out Extras Composite Ketchup, salt, creamers, etc.

55 Utensils Take-Out Extras Plastic Forks, knives, chop sticks etc.

56 Branded Fast Food Napkins Take-Out Extras Paper Napkins with identifiable brand name

57 Paper Fast Food Plates Take-Out Extras Paper Paper Plates for serving fast food

58 Poly Fast Food Plates Take-Out Extras Plastic Polystyrene Plates for serving fast food

59 Other Plastic Fast Food Plates Take-Out Extras Plastic Plastic Materials other than Polystyrene for serving fast food

60 Plates - Other Materials Take-Out Extras

Picnic plates, etc.

46 Polystyrene Trays Trays Plastic Microwavable, display trays

47 Paper Trays Trays Paper Microwavable, display trays

48 Other Material Trays Trays Composite Microwavable, display trays

49 Gum Wrappers Confection/ Snack Composite Packaging for sealing gum products

50 Candy Bar Wraps Confection/ Snack Composite Packaging for sealing candy products

51 Candy Pouches Confection/ Snack Composite Packaging for sealing candy products

52 Sweet Packaging Confection/ Snack Composite Packaging for sealing cakes, etc.

53 Other Confectionery Confection/ Snack Composite All other packaging for confections

63 Snack Food Packaging Confection/ Snack Composite Potato chips, etc.

61 Clothing Cloth Fabric Shirts, socks, etc.

62 Other Cloth Cloth Fabric Tarps, industrial fabrics etc.

64 Plastic Packaging - Other Other Misc. Plastic Plastic packaging not otherwise described

65 Paper Packaging - Other Paper Paper Paper packaging not otherwise described

66 Composite - Other Other Misc. Composite Composite debris not otherwise described

67 Foil Materials Other Misc. Metal Aluminum food and industrial foils

68 Unbranded Napkins Paper Paper Napkins with no brand identification

69 Lottery Ticket Debris Paper Paper Tickets and gaming items

70 Printed Material Paper Paper Newspapers, magazines, flyers, etc.

71 Stationary Paper Paper School papers, business forms, etc.

72 Receipts Paper Paper Receipts, tickets, transfers, etc.

73 Cigarette/Cigar Debris Tobacco Tobacco Tobacco items larger than two inches

74 Tobacco Packaging Tobacco Composite Matches, lighters, etc.

76 Misc. Paper Other Misc. Paper Unidentifiable paper scraps

77 Misc. Plastic Other Misc. Plastic Unidentifiable plastic scraps

78 Misc. Paperboard Other Misc. Paper Unidentifiable paperboard scraps

79 Misc. Cardboard Other Misc. Paper Unidentifiable cardboard scraps

80 Misc. Glass Other Misc. Glass Unidentifiable glass items

81 Vehicle & Metal Road Debris Other Misc. Composite Auto parts, etc.

82 Construction/Industrial Debris Other Misc. Composite Discarded materials from construction and industrial activities

83 Tire & Rubber Debris Other Misc. Rubber Rubber sheets/pieces, tire pieces, etc.

84 Home Articles Other Misc. Composite Toiletries, toys, etc.


Appendix G – List of Sites

# Road Type Roadway Site Location Direction

1 Interstate I-195 Exit 6 South

2 Interstate I-195 Exit 2 West

3 Interstate I-295 Exit 1 North

4 Interstate I-295 Exit 8A North


6 Interstate I-295 Exit 6C South


8 Interstate I-295 RT. 33 North



11 Interstate I-95 Exit 9: RI 4/N. Kingston/E. Greenwich South

12 Interstate I-95 Exit 11: I-295/Woonsocket North

13 Interstate I-95 Exit 13: TF Green State Airport. North

14 Interstate I-95 Exit 15: North of Rt. 37 Intersection South





19 Interstate I-95 Exit 3B North

20 Local Buttonwoods Ave.

W Shore Rd./Rt. 117 South

21 Local Eden Park Drive

Aqueduct Rd. (near Blackamore Pond) North

22 Local Nipmuc Trail

Angell Rd. East

23 Major Collector Atwells Ave.

Carleton St.

East

24 Major Collector Ferris Ave. US 1A/Rt. 114/Pawtucket Ave. & Rt.

152/Newman Ave.

North

25 Major Collector Flat River Rd./Rt. 117

Rt. 102/Victory Hwy.

East

26 Major Collector Forbes St.

Rt. 103 (Willett Ave.)

North

27 Major Collector Gooding Ave.

Rt. 114

East

28 Major Collector High St. State St.

North

29 Major Collector Mt. Pleasant Ave.

Chalkstone Ave.

North

30 Major Collector Spring St.

Rt. 138A (Memorial Blvd.)

South

31 Minor Arterials Belvedere Blvd.

US 44 (Smith St.)

North

32 Minor Arterials Cowden St.

Rt. 114 (Broad St.)

South

33 Minor Arterials Galilee Escape Rd.

Rt. 108

West

34 Minor Arterials Grove St.

Bernon St.

South

35 Minor Arterials Maynard St.

Rt. 15 (Walcott St.)

South

36 Minor Arterials Olympia Ave.

US 44 (Smith St.)

North

37 Minor Arterials Rt. 177/Bulgarmash Rd. Rt. 81 West

38 Minor Arterials S. Pier Rd.

Gibson Ave. (Near Narragansett Pier)

West

39 Minor Arterials S. County Trail Rd./Rt. 2

Rt. 2 & Lewis Trail/Narrow Ln.

North

40 Minor Arterials Douglas Pike/Rt. 7

Pound Hill Rd.

North

41 Other Freeways

Rt. 10

Exit 4 (Cranston St.)

South

42 Other

Freeways

Rt. 10

Exit 3 (Reservoir Ave.)

North



43 Other

Freeways

Rt. 146

Rt. 15 (Mineral Spring Ave.)

North

44 Other

Freeways

Rt. 146

Rt. 123 (Jenks Hill Rd.)

South

45 Other Freeways

Rt. 146

Rt. 120 (Iron Mine Hill Rd.)

North

46 Other

Freeways

Rt. 146

Rt. 104

South

47 Other

Freeways

Rt. 4

Exit 8B (Division Rd.)

South

48 Other Freeways

Rt. 4

Exit 6

South

49 Other

Freeways

Rt. 99

Manville Road/Old River Rd. (Rt. 126)

North

50 Other

Freeways

US 6

Rt. 128 (Killingly)

East

51 Other Freeways

US 6

Rt. 5 (Atwood)

East

52 Principal

Arterials

Adams Point Rd.

Ferry Ln.

South

53 Principal

Arterials

Rt. 108

US-1

South

54 Principal Arterials

Rt. 114/W Main Rd.

Corys Ln. /Hedley St.

North

55 Principal

Arterials

Rt. 138

Rt. 108/Kingstown Rd (past URI)

East

56 Principal

Arterials

Rt. 138/E Main Rd.

Turnpike Ave.

South

57 Principal Arterials

Rt. 77/Highland/Main Rt. 24

North

58 Principal

Arterials

Rt. 81/Stafford Rd.

Hancock St.

South

59 Principal

Arterials

US-1

S County Trail/Rt. 2/Rt. 112

East

60 Prin. Urban Arterials

Alt Rt. 1A /Newport Ave. South Rt. 15 (Armistice Blvd.)

South

61 Prin. Urban

Arterials

Rt. 107 (East Ave.)

East Rt. 98 (Harrisville Main St.)

East

62 Prin. Urban

Arterials

Rt. 114/Pawtucket Ave.

Northwest ALT Rt. 1A (Newport Ave.)

Northwest


Rt. 116 (W Greenville Rd.)

East Rt. 123 (Albion Rd.)

East

64 Prin. Urban

Arterials

Rt. 117 (Broad St.)

Parkis Ave.

South


Rt. 12 (Park Ave.)

Rt. 2 (Reservoir Rd.)

West

66 Prin. Urban

Arterials

Rt. 122 (Lonsdale Ave.)

North Weeden St.

South

67 Prin. Urban

Arterials

Rt. 122 (Mendon Rd.)

Rt. 120 (Nate Whipple Highway)

North


Rt. 15 (Mineral Spring Ave.)

East Rt. 7 (Douglas Pike)

East


Rt. 51/Rt. 12 Park Ave.

East Rt. 5 (Atwood Ave.)

East

70 Prin. Urban

Arterials

US 1/Pawtucket Ave.

Rt. 122 (Main St.)

North

71 Landfill I-295 Exit 5A North

72 Landfill I-295 Exit 4 South

73 Landfill Green Hill Rd. Intersection with Buck Hill Rd. North

74 Landfill Rt.-14

Intersection with Taylor Rd. West

75 Beach Bristol Town Beach 50 Asylum Rd. N/A

76 Beach Barrington Town Beach 95 Bay Rd. N/A

77 Beach Oakland Beach Oakland Beach Ave. N/A

78 Beach Buttonwoods Beach Warwick City Park N/A

79 Beach Easton's Beach 175 Memorial Blvd. N/A

80 Beach Sandy Point Beach Sandy Point Ave. N/A

81 Beach Charlestown Breachway State Beach

Charlestown Beach Rd. N/A

82 Beach Scarborough State Beach

(North) 970 Ocean Road N/A

83 Dock 155 Hope St. Burnside St. & Hope St. N/A



84 Dock 1 Grenore St. Marina 1 Grenore St. N/A

85 Dock 1 Lagoon Road Marina 1 Lagoon Rd. N/A

86 Dock E. Ferry Wharf Jamestown N/A

87 Dock Wickford Marina 67 Esmond Ave. N/A

88 Dock Watch Hill Boat Yard 13 Pasadena Ave. N/A

89 Harbor Rockwell Park 165 Thames St. N/A

90 Harbor Sakonnet Harbor Sakonnet Point Rd. & Bluff Head Ave. N/A

91 Harbor Perotti Park 39 America's Cup Ave. N/A

92 Harbor Collier Park 50 Henderson St. N/A

93 Harbor Allen Harbor Marina 1 Patrol Rd. & Allen Harbor Rd. N/A

94 Harbor Steamboat Ave. Marina 35 Steamboat Ave. N/A


Appendix H – Firm Qualifications

Environmental Resources Planning, LLC (ER Planning) is the only private U.S. firm currently focusing exclusively on litter surveys and litter-related research. Field crews under our supervision have surveyed more than 21 million square feet of roadways and recreational areas in a number of states and cities throughout North America and for Keep America Beautiful (KAB), including the following litter surveys:

Rhode Island Statewide Litter Survey (2014)

Texas Statewide Litter Survey (2013) Toronto, ON Citywide Litter Survey (2012)

Oakland, CA Citywide Bag Litter Survey (2011-12)

San Francisco, CA Citywide Bag Litter Survey (2011-12)

Washington, DC Citywide Bag Litter Survey (2011-12)

Maine Statewide Litter Survey (2010)

New Hampshire Statewide Litter Survey (2010)

Vermont Statewide Litter Survey (2010)

KAB National Litter Survey and Cost Study (2008-09)

KAB Community Appearance Index (2007-08)

KAB Litter – Literature Review (2007)

Georgia Statewide Litter Survey (2006)

Tennessee Statewide Litter Survey (2006)

Santa Monica, CA Citywide Beach Litter Surveys (2005)

Malibu, CA Citywide Beach Litter Surveys (2005)

New Jersey Statewide Litter Survey (2004)

The firm’s roots date back more than 100 years when Mr. Stein’s family opened their first recycling facility. His litter-related work began with a KAB affiliate project in 1986.

Mr. Stein’s litter studies and research have been featured in National Geographic Magazine, the New York Times and Time Magazine as well as on ABC’s Good Morning America and NPR.

He was invited, as a subject-matter expert, to participate in a study on community resilience and resource optimization conducted for the President.

Mr. Stein earned his B.Sc. Cum Laude in Environmental Studies from Syracuse University and SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry studying Waste Management and Environmental Law while interning with the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation. He also earned his M.Sc. in Natural Resource Policy and Management there. He was awarded a scholarship by New York SWANA for his Master’s thesis research, examining the impacts of public policy intervention on maintaining


sustainable recycling markets. He also began a doctorate-level program that focused on identifying underlying cultural influences on littering rates.

In addition, Mr. Stein has been active in numerous activities and writing related to litter and marine debris including, most recently: California State Water Board – Technical Assessment of Statewide Water Quality

Plans to Control Stormwater Trash (2014)

San Francisco Water Board – Presentation on Measuring Trash TMDL Compliance and Load Reductions (2013)

Johnson Foundation – Sustainable Consumption Expert Roundtable (2012)

Ocean Conservancy – Beach Litter Survey Methodology Enhancements (2011)

National Litter Forum – Restoring Our Communities, organizer (2011)

Keep America Beautiful – International Litter Research Forum (2007)

Keep America Beautiful – Litter: Literature Review, lead author (2007)

Potomac Watershed Initiative Trash Monitoring Protocol Subcommittee – survey design advisor, pro bono (2006-2007)

Ocean Conservancy’s National Marine Debris Monitoring Program – survey director

for Chincoteague Island Site, pro bono (2006-2007)

Most recently, Mr. Stein was asked to serve as an advisor for Florida’s 2014 Litter Prevention Program. Other senior staff on this project include:

Kristian Ferguson, Senior Consultant, has managed field surveys and assisted with analysis and cost studies for litter projects throughout the U.S. and Canada. While receiving his Master’s Degree, he presented a capstone seminar focusing on the relationship between litter and solid waste management.

Emilie Knapp, Assistant Project Manager, has helped plan all aspects of field survey work, supervised field crews, conducted data management and coordinated site development on eight litter surveys’ nationwide. In this role, she has surveyed 10 million square feet of roadways.

Ron Visco, Project Statistician, holds a Ph.D. in Research Design and Statistics. Dr. Visco conducted the statistical analysis for the firm's litter-related projects in Maine, New Hampshire, Oakland, Rhode Island, San Francisco, Texas, Toronto, Vermont and Washington, DC.


For further information, contact:

Steven R. Stein, Principal Environmental Resources Planning, LLC

624 Main Street, Suite B Gaithersburg, MD 20878

Office: (240) 631-6532

Email: [email protected]

www.erplanning.com

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.erplanning.com/

2014 Rhode Island Litter Survey - · In October 2013, Environmental Resources Planning, LLC...

Documents

Transcript of 2014 Rhode Island Litter Survey - · In October 2013, Environmental Resources Planning, LLC...