An official website of the United States government.

We've made some changes to EPA.gov. If the information you are looking for is not here, you may be able to find it on the EPA Web Archive or the January 19, 2017 Web Snapshot.

Managing and Transforming Waste Streams – A Tool for Communities

Zero Waste Case Study: Seattle

On this page:
Green building in Seattle

Partnership

Seattle adopted a mandatory commercial recycling ordinance in 2003, a Zero Waste Resolution (PDF)(11 pp, 560 K, About PDF) in 2007, and a Zero Waste Strategy in 2010. In February 2013 the city council adopted revised recycling goals by adopting "Seattle’s Solid Waste Plan 2011 Revision" with the following goals:
  • Recycle 60% of municipal solid waste by the year 2015,
  • Recycle 70% of municipal solid waste by 2022, and
  • Recycle 70% of construction and demolition debris by the year 2020.

Seattle recycled 56.2% of its municipal solid waste in 2013. The city's recycling rate has risen 18% since the 2003 low of 38.2%. Two keys to their success are multiple contractors and a distant landfill. Seattle’s waste is rail hauled 257 miles south to the Columbia Ridge Landfill in Arlington, Oregon. Having an effective waste reduction and recycling program and local processors cuts the transportation costs of landfill disposal.

Mandatory Recycling Ordinance

“Although market values of the recycled commodities vary with economic conditions, the cost of collecting, processing and transporting recyclables is approximately 50% less per ton than the cost of shipping the material to the landfill in Arlington, Oregon..

The mandatory recycling ordinance included a three year phase-in to support the development of outreach, noticing and penalties. The ordinance covers single-family, multifamily and commercial generators. One full time position was allocated for enforcement. To date, hundreds of first and second warning tags have been issued to residential customers who are not recycling but few have resulted in fines and no commercial fines have been issued.

Procurement Best Practices

  • Separate disposal contracts from collection and processing contracts: This allows service providers to focus on the areas of expertise. Broad scope contracts can encourage wasting and limit access to top zero waste contractors.
  • Separate contractor compensation from customer rates: Seattle staff economists model and design rates appropriate to incentivize customers to reduce waste. Collection contractors are compensated separately from the rates, so they are not affected by customer choices.
  • Economic incentives to contractors: Contractors are rewarded $20 per ton for reduced Residential and Commercial Garbage tons compared to the prior contract year, and $10 per ton reduced residential recycling or composting tons.
  • Publicly-owned transfer stations: Seattle owns two recycling and transfer stations, the North Transfer Station and the South Transfer Station. Each facility is being upgraded after an extensive public outreach and visioning process. Public ownership of the transfer stations gives the city the flexibility to contract competitively with distant landfills.

Top of page

Contractual Arrangements

The city sets customer rates and does billing, and contractors are paid a flat monthly fee for service. Compensation rates for the contractors are based on initial cost of service proposal plus an annual compensation adjustment. Compensation adjustments are indexed for inflation through an “Inflation Adjustment Factor” based on three indices: labor, fuel and Consumer Price Index.

Performance bonuses and penalties are based on service delivery standards, and contractors are rewarded for reduction in garbage and increases in recycling and composting. In addition, the contract includes the option of reducing garbage service to every other week with reduced service fees.


Advantages

  • Transparent Rates: The straightforward rate process is based on inflation indicators and performance. Contractors are paid for costs of service and not impacted by volume-based rates.
  • No Rate Review Process: Compensation is based on initial proposal plus escalator.

Disadvantages/Omissions

  • none reported

Top of page