Evaluation Question
Data Sources & Methods
Key Findings
Key Learning


Key Learning

  • PaintCare’s preliminary reporting used paint container fullness assumptions for calculating volume of paint collected. This assumption proved to underestimate gallons collected, and PaintCare found that a weight-based measurement was more accurate and more common for HHW reporting to OR DEQ [Keane, 2011].
  • The Evaluation Team heard mixed second hand information about contractors and the amount of waste paint they generate. PPSI should further explore if they are significant contributor of paint to the management system and therefore need different and more audience-specific messaging about reducing waste paint, etc.
  • Follow-up needs to be conducted on the amount of unlabeled paint containers that consumers are attempting to turn in. Collection sites are instructed to treat unlabeled paint containers as a non-program product and to not accept it. If a significant volume of leftover paint is being excluded from the program, this may be area for reexamination of the policy for these types of items.
  • The cost of $7.03 per gallon can be used as a starting point for other states. However, the reported PaintCare system costs do not reflect the true costs of a leftover paint management system since HHW-related costs are excluded. Furthermore, as noted under Q4, the OR program had a relatively established paint recycling infrastructure in the Portland metro area prior to this pilot program. Thus, program costs per gallon for other states may be higher.
  • Non-reimbursement of collection costs continues to be a controversial issue among stakeholders [Boudouris, 2011]. This was a topic that PSI had anticipated further collaborative discussion on as part of detailed work plan for the implementation stage. [Cassell, 2011]
  • An uncompleted task of the lifecycle workgroup was to conduct a sensitivity analysis for the LCA which could have identified other assumptions with large environmental effects. For example, the initial results indicated that the virgin offset made the largest impact, but transportation could be another factor. The LCA is a tool to estimate a wide range of environmental and social impacts, and interpreters of its results will have to determine which impacts (e.g., GHGs, water usage, air toxics) are the most important when selecting a management approach. LCA can be integral to future program design and planning, and requires funding for complete development and interpretation of the model.

Related Materials

PPSI Paint Evaluation Preliminary Findings