DRAFT Report: Recycling Refund Community Engagement Study

Submitted By

44 Results

Search Type

Sort:

Sort Results By

Comment From: Glass Packaging Institute (Scott DeFife)

8/10/26 @ 5:21 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: King County Solid Waste Divisi... (Adrian Tan)

8/10/26 @ 5:11 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Clark County Solid Waste & Rec... (Bethanie Velasco)

8/10/26 @ 4:58 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Lautenbach Recycling (Carolyn Moulton)

8/10/26 @ 3:52 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Coalition for High Performance... (Allison Kustic)

8/10/26 @ 3:23 PM

Please see attached document for comments from the Coalition for High Performance Recycling (CHPR)

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Molly Pfaffenroth

8/10/26 @ 1:43 PM

August 10, 2026

Department of Ecology
recyclingreform@ecy.wa.gov

RE: Comments Preliminary Draft Report – Recycling Refund Engagement Study

Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on the Recycling Refund Community Engagement Study. The Wa...↓shington Food Industry Association (WFIA) represents independent grocers, convenience stores, distributors and suppliers throughout Washington state. We have been actively engaged in conversations regarding a deposit return system (DRS) for the last several years and appreciate the requirement to complete a more thorough analysis as future legislation is considered.

Overall, the engagement study provides a comprehensive summary of community engagement. The report is clear and attempts to carefully capture all the comments made by stakeholders while creating overarching themes and patterns. However, the study is flawed from the outset due to the decision to base the questions off the model study conducted in 2025. The questions, and therefore the responses, assume a DRS is active in Washington. If a DRS is automatically considered active, respondents have little opportunity to make the statement that a DRS system is not wanted. Additionally, our read of the engagement study request by the Legislature does not require that the model study is used to influence the engagement study.

As mentioned, the original study is flawed, which creates significant concern about its use in generating feedback for the community engagement questionnaire. The model study fails to consider the current curbside system, fails to evaluate or estimate the cost of a DRS for consumers, and does not generate a cost for drop sites. The study also proposes a network of drop sites over 5 times greater than Oregon's site network, which has operated a DRS for 40+ years.

Using the model study to inform the community engagement study creates issues in two specific categories: convenience and system integration. The study claims "convenience emerged as one of the strongest and most consistent findings across engagement activities." We believe this theme is consistent based on the assumptions in the model study. It is natural for consumers to want a convenient method of recycling and receiving their refunds. Convenience is an incentive to participate in the program. However, the most convenient way to recycle is simple: utilize a curbside recycling system. This option is not included in the study because of the hypothetical scenario outline in the model.

In the same vein, the request for system integration is well captured and repeated throughout the report but fails to address WFIA's comments. Our request for system integration is to consider what happens to the current system, rather than how drop sites complement recycling and waste management. The study does not contemplate if respondents would opt for curbside instead of a drop site, regardless of convenience. Interestingly, the study states, "Across engagement methods, participants also emphasized that financial incentives alone are unlikely to drive participation if redemption opportunities are inconvenient or difficult to use." While we wholeheartedly agree, we also argue that the most convenient method for recycling of any type is curbside recycling, but this option is omitted from the discussion.

Additionally, when addressing convenience, mobile sites and return vending machines are both listed as potential options for future drop sites. Does the waste management system in most cities and counties not count as a mobile drop site? Would local governments be expected to add a new fleet of additional trucks that provide the same function? Reverse vending machines may be appealing to customers who want instant gratification for their returns, but they have proven to be a public safety hazard for consumers and hosts. Offering either of these options as forms of convenience does not capture the challenges presented by sites like this.

Finally, the conclusion is incredibly misleading as it claims the "findings support the general direction of the model study and its recommended scenarios." Our read of this type of statement is that stakeholders are supportive of moving forward with a DRS in Washington. This could not be further from the truth. The overall analysis fails to address the very real concerns we shared about using the model study to produce the engagement study. We respectfully request an acknowledgement of these concerns in the report.

We look forward to continuing the dialogue on this topic and being a resource for critical feedback.

Sincerely,

Molly Pfaffenroth
Government Affairs Director
Washington Food Industry Association

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: WRRA (Rod Whittaker)

8/10/26 @ 1:41 PM

WRRA's Comments on DRS Study. Thank you.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Northwest Grocery Retail Assoc... (Brandon Houskeeper)

8/10/26 @ 1:28 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Barbara Seaman

8/10/26 @ 8:07 AM

Thank you for making this study. It's important. I support the idea of deposits on beverage containers, and believe that in order for it to be effective, the system needs to make it as convenient, routine and intuitive for consumers as possible. I li...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Diane Schaffer

8/09/26 @ 2:38 PM

Everything formulated in this plan makes perfect sense. I previously lived in two other states with "bottle bills", and after the initial "confusion" some residents had to the programs, everything became second nature and routine. I strongly urge y...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Snohomish County Solid Waste (Sage Schmalz)

8/07/26 @ 2:37 PM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: City of Vancouver, Washington (Matt Bucy)

8/06/26 @ 1:10 PM

Please see attached letter from the City of Vancouver Solid Waste Services. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,
Matt Bucy
matt.bucy@cityofvancouver.us

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: David Young

8/06/26 @ 6:11 AM

I support a Recycling Refund approach. Given that we've had 5+ years of inflation running well over an annual rate of 2%, many WA families are financially stressed. The final refund approach should be structured to minimize the cost to the consumer, ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Eric Thorne

8/05/26 @ 12:58 PM

The study does a good job of synthesizing the data that have been collected so far. However, I think it may be missing valuable perspectives from communities that are most affected by beverage container waste and communities that have historically op...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Green Okanogan (Carol Lanigan)

8/04/26 @ 12:23 PM

As a recycling center in North Central WA we have some concerns about the Deposit Return System. This addition to RRA makes complete sense for glass bottles in our region as glass is virtually unrecyclable here. We are, however, concerned about the r...↓

No attachments

Comment From: The Recycled Materials Associa... (Cory Bloom)

8/04/26 @ 9:38 AM

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Madeline Lyne

8/03/26 @ 8:36 PM

I am a proponent of a recycling refunds program in Washington. Research shows that regions with these programs see less beverage container litter and much higher recycling rates. The containers gathered through this system result in cleaner materia...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Sustainable Tri-Cities (Jenni Heerink)

8/02/26 @ 5:16 PM

Comments are in uploaded file.

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: Trinidad Valenzuela Sepúlveda

7/30/26 @ 10:52 PM

Recommendations on Equity, Incentive Structures, and Redemption Infrastructure for the Recycling Refund Program

1. Concern Regarding Low Recycling Rates and Upfront Costs for Low-Income Communities
I am writing to express my support for improving Wa...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Coleen Anderson

7/29/26 @ 8:20 AM

I am writing to express my strong support for the proposed 10-cent recycling refund program in Washington.

As a child, I fondly remember collecting glass bottles to redeem for candy money. That early experience taught me firsthand how powerful a fin...↓

No attachments

Comment From: steven bergman

7/28/26 @ 5:28 PM

The two Maps: Figure 4. "Geographic Scope of Engagement" and Figure B-1. "Map of Survey Respondents by County" (the latter in the appendix) both erroneously neglect to include Vashon Island, which should be colored green along with the rest of King C...↓

No attachments

Comment From: East County Citizens' Alliance (MELANIE WILSON)

7/28/26 @ 3:10 PM

My civic group, East County Citizens' Alliance, engages volunteers in community projects in east Clark County. For four years, one of those projects has involved cleaning litter from SR-14 from Washougal to E. Vancouver under the state Adopt-a-Highwa...↓

Attachments:

Download

Comment From: James Berube

7/26/26 @ 10:22 AM

The recycling proposal, bottle bill, is critical to a successful recycling program. I support presenting the proposal to the legislature in hopes a bill can be passed this next legislative session

Sincerely;
James Berube

No attachments

Comment From: Jesse Medlong

7/25/26 @ 11:10 AM

The two most critical issues for the success of a bottle-deposit program to me, as a former California resident and as someone who now lives in rural Clallam County, are that (1) exceptions to collection-site requirements be limited to avoid extensiv...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Paul Tabayoyon

7/23/26 @ 1:14 PM

In all presentations by Ecology done so far, there has been no mention of how much tax revenue the existing system of taxes has created per year. These funds should be used as the base capital for assisting the infrastructure build out, and ensure th...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Rebecca E Jewell

7/22/26 @ 2:51 PM

Indeed, I agree with many commenters with the general sentiment that "change is hard," and "people are lazy." But I don't think these are reasons not to move forward into the 21st century with legitimate EPR and bottle bill legislation.
There are d...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Miles Kuntz

7/21/26 @ 6:09 PM

I fully support conducting this study and the study's findings for going forward. What concerns me is that there will undoubtedly be naysayers to the whole concept of a recycling container refund program because whenever change is proposed, there ar...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Leslie Lutz

7/21/26 @ 10:00 AM

I'm in favor of the bottle bill, and I agree that convenience will be important to most people, because the human race is pretty lazy. I collect my recyclables that don't go into the curbside and mail them in, so that's not convenient and I still do ...↓

No attachments

Comment From: C Morton

7/20/26 @ 8:14 PM

I totally support this program. I lived in Germany back in 2005 & they already have this system in place so we are behind in this initiative compare to other countries. When I was there I was surprised to see how clean a stadium or venue after an ev...↓

No attachments

Comment From: C Morton

7/19/26 @ 11:03 AM

No attachments

Comment From: C Morton

7/19/26 @ 8:48 AM

No attachments

Comment From: C Morton

7/19/26 @ 12:38 AM

No attachments

Comment From: C Morton

7/18/26 @ 7:44 PM

No attachments

Comment From: C Morton

7/18/26 @ 7:41 PM

No attachments

Comment From: C Morton

7/18/26 @ 7:40 PM

No attachments

Comment From: C Morton

7/18/26 @ 7:38 PM

No attachments

Comment From: AmandaMae Bomar

7/17/26 @ 9:15 AM

With expanded producer responsibility (EPR) let's engage the single serve beverage producers to support this program in the form of on-site (grocery store) locations for this recycling programming. This effectively removes the friction. We have learn...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Chris Detwiler

7/17/26 @ 7:35 AM

If I am interpreting the results of the group study correctly, the consensus appears to be that this proposed bottle bill has a viable path forward. However, I do not believe the full impact on consumers is being adequately recognized.
While supporte...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Sharon Grant

7/16/26 @ 9:40 PM

Clear information on the kind of containers will be very important, having a graphic would be valuable. Graphics also on what
is acceptable and what isn't. Education is key.

Also, enroll local government and media to communicate on a regular bas...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Anne Quade

7/16/26 @ 9:20 PM

After reading summaries, it appears the decision to implement this program has been made. The 'How to's" are addressed, however I can't be alone in saying no thank you..at least not now. I foresee it adding to the financial hardships our community a...↓

No attachments

Comment From: Debbie Muller

7/16/26 @ 5:57 PM

I am pleased that this study has been done and appreciate the inclusion of the peoples' views and concerns.
I wholeheartedly support the Study's conclusions, with the adjustments suggested by the people.

Thank you!
Debbie Muller

No attachments

Comment From: Patrick O'Dell

7/16/26 @ 11:34 AM

This is a blatant tax grab, as well as an attempt to once again impose a "climate-saving" agenda not backed by evidence. I am vehemently opposed to the "bottle bill" in current or future iterations.

No attachments

Comment From: Karen Lemagie

7/16/26 @ 11:30 AM

I would love to see this come back after being gone for so long. Oregon does it. Maybe more drinks would be bottled in glass than in plastic! I try not to purchase items in plastic containers.

No attachments

Comment From: Juliana Long Corriveau

7/16/26 @ 11:02 AM

Please implement a program of this type. I was appalled when I moved to WA after living in OR and CA where recycling is de rigeur, to find that (for such a progressive state) we have nothing. The state of recycling in WA is atrocious; the state does ...↓

No attachments