INFORM

Delivering the Goods

Benefits of Reusable Shipping Containers

David Saphire
INFORM, Inc.
120 Wall Street
New York, NY 10005-4001
Tel 212 361-2400
Fax 212 361-2412
E-mail [email protected]

1994 by INFORM, Inc. All rights reserved

Printed in the United States of America

ISSN #1050-8953 Volume 3, Number 1

Printed on 50% recycled paper, with 15% post-consumer waste content

INFORM Special Reports cover the full range of environmental issues INFORM studies. This special report examines
the opportunities and obstacles involved in implementing one specific strategy for preventing the generation of
packaging waste: reusing shipping containers. Prepared by David Saphire, research associate in INFORM'S Sustain-
able Products and Practices Program, and edited by Sharene Azimi, it is being issued as part of INFORM'S ongoing re-
search and public education on the problems of solid waste generation and opportunities for businesses to reduce at
the source the amounts of waste they generate.

INFORM, Inc., is a nonprofit environmental research organization that examines business and municipal practices that
threaten our environment and public health; assesses changes business and government are making to improve their
performance; and identifies new business strategies and technologies moving the United States toward an environ-
mentally sustainable economy. INFORM's research currently focuses on strategies to reduce industrial and municipal
wastes and to preserve air and water quality.
Contents

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

I. Introduction: Why a Report on Reusable Shipping Containers ........................................... 1

Figure 1A: Categories of Products and Packaging in the 1990 US Municipal
Solid Waste Stream.. ............................................................................................................... 3
Figure 1B: Leading Categories of Packaging in the 1990 US Municipal Solid
Waste Stream .......................................................................................................................... 3
Figure 2: Shipments of Corrugated Boxes by End Use Industry, 1993 ................................. 4
Table 1: Comparison of the Number and Weight of One-Way and Reusable
Boxes Used to Make One Million Shipments ........................................................................ 5

II. Distribution Packaging Systems in the United States ............................................................ 5

Table 2: Lifetime Cost Comparison of One-Way and Reusable
2-cubic Foot Shipping Containers, by Material.. .................................................................... 6

III. Reusable Shipping Containers in Manufacturing Industries .................................................. 9

Case Study: Xerox Corporation ............................................................................................ 10
Case Study: Toyota USA ...................................................................................................... 13

IV. Case Studies in the Grocery and Supermarket Industry ....................................................... 16

Figure 3: IFCOs Deposit System.. ....................................................................................... 21

V. Policy Options that Promote Reuse ...................................................................................... 22

Table 3: Expanding Reuse of Shipping Containers .............................................................. 23

Notes ...................................................................... ....................................................................... 25

Company Contacts.. ...................................................................................................................... 27

Acknowledgments

This report has benefited from the insights and observations of a number of people. I would like to thank the individu-
als at Xerox Corp., Toyota USA, Wakefern Food Corp., Doms Empty Package Supply, Pepsi-Cola, Perstorp Xytec,
and Schoeller International who personally met with me, as well as all the other people mentioned in this report who
supplied INFORM with information about their companies operations.
A special note of thanks to John Okun of Long Island City Business Development Corp., Peter Larkin of the Food
Marketing Institute, Tom Kacandes of the New York State Department of Economic Development, and Michael Reilly
of Wakefern for reviewing the pre-publication manuscript and providing thoughtful comments.
At INFORM I wish to thank Joanna D. Underwood, president, for her support, and Dr. Warren R. Muir, senior fellow, for
reviewing the manuscript. Thanks also to researchers John Winter, Bette Fishbein, Jeff Hargrave, and Carolyn Nunley
for their insightful discussions on solid waste issues. Special thanks to Sharene Azimi for her precise editing and to
Mimi Bluestone, director of publications, for her editorial guidance. Thanks to Elisa Last, production coordinator, for
creating the graphics. Thanks also to former INFORM researcher Caroline Gelb for researching parts of this report.
INFORM thanks the many individuals and organizations without whose support our work would not be possible. In
particular, INFORM thanks the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory of the Office of Research and Development of
the US Environmental Protection Agency. Although the gathering of information in this document has been funded by
the US EPA, this report does not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency, and no official endorsement should be
inferred.
While this report benefited from the help of these and many other individuals, the contents and analysis are the sole
responsibility of INFORM.
I. Introduction: Why a Report on cent if it ships its products in reusable corrugated boxes
Reusable Shipping Containers that can be used five times; and by 98.5 percent if it
switches from single-use corrugated boxes to plastic con-
tainers that can be used 250 times (see Table 1 on page
5). As the total weight of container material represents

A nyone who has ever moved from one home to

another has probably picked up some empty boxes
from the supermarket or liquor store for packing. Why
the amount of material that, ultimately, must be recycled
or disposed of, these reductions can be quite significant.

does there always seem to be a surplus of these boxes? Through a series of case studies, this report describes
Because most corrugated containers are used commer- settings in which companies currently reuse shipping
cially only once. containers, obstacles to reuse, and options available to
both industry and government for expanding the use of
These boxes form a significant portion of the US mu- reusable containers.
nicipal solid waste stream. Of the total 196 million tons
By reviewing trade journals that cover the distribution
of municipal solid waste generated in 1990, packaging
and packaging materials industries, INFORM identified a
represents nearly one-third, and packaging materials used
number of companies that manufacture reusable ship-
to transport goods make up nearly half of packaging
ping containers, both in the United States and abroad,
waste.
and ultimately identified many US users of reusable ship-
In 1990, US producers of corrugated boxes made 25 bil- ping containers, including the 10 companies described
lion of them - almost 100 boxes for every person. Cor- in this study. Manufacturers, especially in the automo-
rugated boxes accounted for 12.2 percent of the national bile and the electrical and electronics industries, have
municipal solid waste stream in 1990, contributing 24 reused shipping containers since the mid-1980s. Food
million tons of waste, or about 188 pounds for every US producers traditionally have shipped some items, such
resident. as bread and milk, in reusable crates. Major soft drink
bottlers in recent years have switched to reusable crates
A dilemma that haunts the United States today is this:
for shipping some bottles directly to stores. And certain
what should be done with all of this solid waste? Incin-
other retail sectors are increasing their use of reusable
eration is increasingly unpopular because of concern over
containers, especially for shipping goods from distribu-
its environmental and public health effects. Recycling is
tion centers to individual retail outlets.
an important way of recognizing and recovering the value
of the natural resources contained within discarded prod- Based on interviews and site visits, INFORM has prepared
ucts. But recycling does not address several crucial ques- case studies of two major manufacturers, Xerox Corpo-
tions: Do we need all these boxes in the first place? ration and Toyota USA, and of various companies in the
How much material does a packaging system need to grocery and supermarket industry that reuse shipping
accomplish its purposes? How is it possible to reduce containers. These case studies provide examples of how
the overall generation of waste? reusable shipping container systems work. The case stud-
ies do not constitute a comprehensive survey of US com-
Each portion of the waste stream requires its own waste
panies involved in reusing shipping containers, but the
reduction solutions. Because packaging comprises such
a large segment of the total, any strategy that aims to systems profiled provide models for reuse that could be
reduce packaging can have a significant impact on the replicated by other companies.
nations solid waste burden -a burden that includes not
only the cost and difficulties of managing wastes, but
one that reflects, as well, wasted materials and resources.
Findings
This report examines the opportunities and obstacles in-
As shown in this reports case studies, reusing a con-
volved in implementing one specific strategy for prevent-
tainer means that less material is needed to manufacture
ing the generation of packaging waste: reusing ship-
containers and, ultimately, that less material requires re-
ping containers. Reusing containers can lead to dramatic
cycling and disposal. Similarly, reuse of packaging can
reductions in the generation of solid waste. As shown in
save money for companies that either ship or receive
one hypothetical example, a company that makes ship-
products.
ments in single-use corrugated boxes can cut the quan-
tity of container material needed for 1 million shipments Environmental benefits The primary environmental
by 50 percent if it uses those boxes twice; by 70.6 per- benefits of reuse are:

1
 l Waste prevention
Source reduction: Preventing waste l Resource conservation, including energy and raw
In recent years, national leaders from environmental materials
organizations, the United States Environmental Pro-
tection Agency (EPA), and business have all come to Economic benefits Reuse provides savings by reducing
agree that source reduction should be viewed as the the cost of:
nations top waste policy option, followed by recy- l Packaging
cling, waste-to-energy incineration, and landfilling. l Disposal
INFORM defines source reduction as a reduction in the
l Product damage due to shipping and handling
amount and/or toxicity of materials entering the waste In addition, some companies report that they have found
stream prior to recycling, treatment, or disposal. additional long-term cost savings associated with imple-
Source reduction applies to municipal solid waste and menting a reusable container system, including reduced
to waste resulting from other stages of a products life costs of:
cycle, including raw materials extraction, processing, l Freight
and distribution. l Labor and handling
Source reduction differs from recycling, which diverts l Storage2
materials that have entered the waste stream and uses Four features of reusable systems INFORM has identi-
them in place of virgin feedstocks to make other prod- fied four features (discussed in Section II) that are gen-
ucts. Source reduction instead prevents materials from erally conducive to the reuse of shipping containers:
becoming part of the waste stream at all. Materials l Short distribution distances
that are discarded, whether recycled or not, require l Frequent deliveries
costly and time-consuming collection, handling, and l Small number of parties
processing in a materials or waste management sys- l Company-owned or dedicated distribution vehicles
tem. Source reduction reduces or eliminates the need
for this effort. Five obstacles The report also identities five obstacles
to expanding the reuse of shipping containers:
Besides preventing waste, source reduction conserves l Large initial capital expense
resources. Reusing transport packaging reduces raw l Cost of tracking and accounting for containers
materials use, avoids the need for energy to manufac- l Cost of returning containers to points of origin
ture or recycle containers, and reduces pollution aris- l Lack of storage space for empty containers
ing from the manufacture or recycling of containers. l Resistance to change on the part of suppliers, distribu-
However, a reusable shipping container system may tors, and customers3
require different transportation logistics than a one-
way (single-use) system and thus may entail different Seven options that promote reuse The ease or diffi-
levels of transportation energy use and related pollu- culty a company may encounter in reusing shipping con-
tion. Moreover, a companys decision to use, for ex- tainers will depend on the total distribution system
through which containers must pass and the total cost of
ample, plastic instead of corrugated cardboard con-
tainers, whether reusable or one-way, will have distribution, including the cost of packaging materials,
different implications for the environment, affecting transportation, handling and labor, storage, and disposal,
recycling, or reuse. The report concludes (in Section V)
the use of natural resources, the kinds and quantities
of pollutants that enter our air and water, and the use with an outline of government and industry options for
of energy in making, transporting, and recycling those overcoming the above obstacles and facilitating reuse.
packages. These options include:
l Third-party leasing of containers
This INFORM report has not attempted a life-cycle l Industry-wide standardization
analysis to determine the relative environmental ben- l Cooperative efforts between producers, suppliers,
efits of reusable versus one-way containers. Nor has customers, and distributors
it attempted a cross-materials comparison of the life- l Designing containers to be easily stacked and stored
cycle impact of using reusable plastic versus one-way l Adopting more frequent and direct delivery systems
or reusable corrugated cardboard. However, it does l Government-backed model programs, low-interest
identify opportunities for reducing solid waste and cut- loans, or tax credits
ting overall distribution costs through the reuse of ship- l Government procurement guidelines that favor reuse
ping containers.

2
 Figure 1A: Categories of Products and Figure 1B: Leading Categories of
Packaging in the 1990 US Municipal Solid Packaging in the 1990 US Municipal Solid
Waste Stream Waste Stream

Source for both pie charts: Franklin Associates, 1992

The three major packaging categories In the United States today, most shipping containers are
shipped in bulk units, called unitized loads, in which a
Opportunities for reducing the amount of material used number of small containers are stacked onto a pallet or
in packaging systems vary, depending on the type of pack- slipsheet, secured with shrinkwrap or banding, and loaded
aging involved. Packaging falls into three categories, and unloaded onto transport vehicles by mechanical han-
which may overlap: dling equipment such as forklift trucks or cranes. (Pal-
Primary or consumer packaging is the basic package lets are portable platforms, typically made of wood or
that contains a product (e.g., soup can, soda bottle, soap plastic, used for storage or movement of materials and
powder box) and is used by the consumer until the prod- packages in warehouses, factories, and transport vehicles.
uct is consumed. Primary packaging is designed to con- Slipsheets are thin paper or plastic sheets with protrud-
tain and protect the product and to appeal to consumers ing tabs that replace pallets for stacking and moving con-
and stimulate product sales. tainers.)

Secondary packaging is additional packaging designed

to facilitate self-service sales, to prevent theft, to further Corrugated shipping containers: A
advertise and market the product, or to facilitate use by significant portion of the waste stream
the consumer (e.g., toothpaste box, six-pack carrier).
Secondary packaging is generally discarded when the As shown in Figures 1A and lB, corrugated cardboard
product is opened. containers make up the largest category of packaging
waste. In 1990, an estimated 90 to 95 percent of all US
Transport or distribution packaging is packaging used
manufactured consumer, wholesale, and industrial goods
to ship goods from their point of origin, such as a pro-
were shipped in corrugated boxes. Adding wood pack-
duction facility or farm, to their destination, (e.g., to a
aging (primarily wooden pallets and crates) brings the
manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer, or consumer). For dis-
contribution of transport packaging to more than 16 per-
tribution packaging, which includes boxes, crates, pal-
cent of the total national municipal solid waste stream.
lets, banding, and void fill packaging (e.g., polystyrene
peanuts), the greatest emphasis is placed on protec- The contribution of corrugated boxes as a percentage of
tive, functional (handling, opening, closing), and ship- the national municipal solid waste stream, by weight, has
ping considerations. The box or crate that physically con- increased steadily, from 8.3 percent in 1960 to 12.2 per-
tains the product is often referred to as the shipping cent in 1990. Recycling of corrugated packaging has also
container. Such a container may be designed for single risen. In 1990,48 percent of all corrugated packaging in
or multiple use. the US waste stream was recovered for recycling. None-

3
 Figure 2: Shipments of Corrugated Boxes by End Use Industry, 1993*
Durable and Nondurable Goods

* Percentage of shipment by Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) of Corrugated Customers

Source: Fibre Box Association, 1993 Annual Report

theless, 12.5 million tons still required disposal in 1990, Figure 2 shows the major users, by industry sector, of
up from 4.8 million tons in 1960. The Environmental corrugated boxes in the United States in 1993. The food
Industry Association (formerly the National Solid Waste and beverage industry (producers of fresh fruits and veg-
Management Association) estimated in 1992 that the cost etables, meat, dairy products, canned and preserved
of recycling corrugated cardboard was $43 per ton, not goods, bakery products, and confectionery supplies) led
including collection or transportation4 in the use of corrugated containers. The food and bever-
age industrys role as a user of corrugated boxes in the
Recycling of wooden packaging (pallets and boxes) in
United States rose between 1972 and 1990 from 28 per-
the past has been negligible. However, it appears that the
cent of all corrugated containers to 38.8 percent.5
contribution of wooden packaging to US landfills will
decline, with landfill restrictions in many parts of the
country spurring greater reuse and recycling efforts such
as pallet reconditioning and exchange. Source reduction options for shipping
containers
There are at least four ways to reduce transport packag-
Todays leading shipping container: The ing at its source:6
l Lightweighting Reducing the amount of material used
corrugated cardboard box
in a container made of a specific material without
Corrugated cardboard, a paper product, is valued in dis- compromising the containers strength, for example,
tribution packaging for its light weight, strength, and low by thinning the wall of a corrugated container.
cost. Corrugated boxes are used primarily as transport l Selecting another material Reducing the amount of
packaging. In general, they do not come in direct contact material used to transport products by replacing pack-
with consumer products in the way that primary or sec- aging made of one material with packaging made of a
ondary packages do. Corrugated boxes instead serve the smaller quantity of another material, for example, by
purpose of holding together units of product, a function delivering soup cans in corrugated trays covered with
called unitizing, for protection and easy distribution. shrinkwrap instead of in corrugated boxes.

4
 Table 1: Comparing number of boxes, weight of box, and total weight of box
material used to make 1 million shipments of equal volume in one-way and
reusable corrugated boxes and reusable plastic boxes

Number of Total weight of box

Box material boxes used for 1 million Weight of box material used
and number of times used shipments (thousands) (pounds) per million shipments (tons)
One-way corrugated, one time 1,000 1.5 750
One-way corrugated, two times 500 1.5 375
Reusable corrugated, five times 200 2.2 220
Reusable plastic, 250 times 4 5.5 11

SOURCE: INFORM

Bulk packaging Packing products in larger contain- nificant because it indicates the amount of material that,
ers to reduce the amount of packaging per product ultimately, must be recycled or disposed of.
being shipped, for example, by switching from indi-
vidual bags of flour to silos.
Switching from single-use to reusable containers
This report examines opportunities for employing reus-
II. Distribution Packaging Systems in
able shipping containers as an alternative to single-use the United States
transport packaging.7

Reusable shipping containers A part from reducing waste generation, reusing

shipping containers can lower a companys pack-
aging costs. As seen in Table 2, which compares the cost
Whether reusable containers are made of corrugated card- of three types of shipping containers, the initial cost of a
board or of other materials, such as plastic, reuse pro- single-use corrugated container is 95.2 percent less than
vides opportunities to reduce the amount of material used the initial cost of a reusable plastic container. However,
to ship goods and to reduce the amount of material en- if the plastic container is used 250 times, the reusable
tering the waste stream. For example, over the course of container costs 91.7 percent less per use than the single-
its lifetime, a 2-cubic foot plastic reusable shipping con- use corrugated container.
tainer weighing 5.5 pounds and making 250 trips will
replace 250 1.5-pound single-use corrugated boxes However, the cost of packaging is not the only consider-
weighing a total of 375 pounds8The single-use container ation in choosing between single-use and reusable trans-
will generate 98.5 percent more waste measured in weight port packaging. A number of activities make up the dis-
than the reusable container (5.5 pounds versus 375 tribution system for various products, and besides
pounds). containing and protecting products, shipping containers
must be designed to be compatible with the entire sys-
This kind of reduction can be quite significant for a com- tem through which they will pass. According to Charles
pany that uses large numbers of boxes. As shown in Table W. Ebling, president of Logistics Support Systems in
1, a hypothetical company that makes 1 million ship- Westville, Connecticut, purchasing managers consider the
ments in a year could cut the total weight of box material total value of goods or materials in deciding what to spend
used per million shipments 50 percent if it uses those on packaging. They research the potential sources for
boxes twice and by 70.6 percent if it switched to heavier raw materials and supplies and evaluate total procure-
corrugated boxes that could be used five times instead of ment costs, which include packaging, storage, handling,
once. The same company could reduce the total weight and shipping. lo
of box material by 98.5 percent if it changed from single-
use corrugated boxes to plastic containers that can be Ebling cautions that choosing the least costly packaging
used 250 times9 The total weight of box material is sig- material or container does not necessarily result in the

5
 Table 2: Lifetime Cost Comparison of One- Way and Reusable
2-cubic Foot Shipping Containers, by Material

Corrugated One-way Corrugated Reusable Plastic Reusable

Weight (pounds) 2.2 5.5
Initial cost 1.5 $1.06 $11.03
Estimated life (number of trips) 5 250
Cost per trip (average) $0.53 $0.21 $0.044

Source: How to Select Shipping Containers, Buckhorn, Inc., Milford, Ohio, 1991

lowest overall physical distribution costs. Whether single- Packing containers

use or reusable packaging is used, a number of other fac- Placing individual containers into bulk units on pal-
tors affect cost, including the type of packaging used, lets or slipsheets
the type of material, handling and labor, shipping Moving unitized loads to shipping docks
(freight), storage, and disposal or reuse costs. Loading and unloading trucks
Transporting unit loads from shipping docks to stor-
age or assembly areas
Costs in a packaging system Fitting individual containers onto assembly line equip-
ment
Material costs
A change in handling to accommodate new container
The cost of materials used in a packaging system varies types may add to the cost of shipping, storage, and dis-
widely and depends on the products protective and mar- posal or return of containers.
keting requirements. With some products, for which no
merchandising considerations enter into the selection of
the package (such as parts for automobile manufactur-
Shipping (freight) costs
ing), the packaging cost is usually based on the level of
protection desired for the product. The cost of transport Cost-efficient transportation requires optimum utiliza-
packaging for expensive electronic components, for ex- tion of available space (known as cube efficiency) in-
ample, may represent a small fraction of the product cost. side transport vehicles, without exceeding highway
The packaging cost for shipments of cement, on the other weight limits. The shape and size of containers and pal-
hand, may be much greater relative to the product cost. lets, as well as how they are loaded into position in trans-
The level of protection for cement may be set to antici- port vehicles (trucks, rail cars, cargo ship containers),
pate a certain percentage of product loss in shipment will determine how much of the available space is used.
because the cost of replacing this loss may be less than To be cost-efficient, individual containers and unitized
the cost of improving packaging to provide full protec- loads should conform to the interior dimensions of the
tion. transport vehicle.
For example, if the width of a trailer is 90 inches, then
the width of a pallet used in that vehicle should be 45
Handling and labor costs inches, not 50 inches. This will allow for two pallet loads
The process of shipping goods may involve the partici- to be placed across the width of the truck. By the same
pation of many parties at different points. Therefore, ship- measure, individual containers should conform to the
ping containers must be compatible with a variety of dimensions of the pallet to maximize the number of con-
handling methods and equipment. For example, in ship- tainers that can be placed on that pallet. If containers are
ping automobile parts from supplier to manufacturer, stackable, pallet loads can be built higher, taking advan-
individual containers holding parts should be compat- tage of interior space. This will allow for the shipment
ible with the handling methods and equipment involved of more product per delivery.
in the following procedures:

6
Storage costs portant to establish the number of containers (the float)
that will be needed at the outset and at any given time.
As is the case with shipping, cost-efficient storage de-
pends on the dimensions and stackability of bulk units to Investing in a float of reusable containers requires a much
maximize available warehouse or storage space. larger initial investment than would be needed to buy
one-way containers. Not only must capital be available,
but a system must be in place to guarantee the return of
Disposal or return costs empty containers.

Even after materials or goods have been delivered and

unloaded, single-use and reusable packaging entail dif- Features of systems compatible with
ferent costs. Single-use container systems entail handling reusable shipping containers
and labor costs related to recycling or disposal, includ-
ing: special handling equipment (compactors and bail- Reusable shipping containers generally work best when
ers); material pickup and disposal; and labor to sort and the following features are present. These features may
place items in appropriate waste containers, compactors, overlap:
or bailers. Short distribution distances Shorter distances mean
lower back-hauling costs. Shorter distances also ex-
Reusable containers entail a different set of costs associ-
pedite the return of containers to suppliers.
ated with the return of containers to their point of origin,
Frequent deliveries Frequent deliveries usually mean
including: administrative costs for managing and con-
that inventory turns over rapidly, which means that
trolling the flow of full and empty containers; the cost of
empty boxes are available for collection at the time
labor needed to put empty containers back on pallets for
of delivery. This makes it possible to collect empty
return shipments (restaging); the freight cost of haul-
containers with each delivery, minimizing the num-
ing back empty containers; and the cost of cleaning and
ber of containers in storage and transport and mini-
repairing containers.
mizing the size of the float of containers that a com-
pany must purchase and maintain.
Small number of parties Controlling the return of
Other considerations in reusing shipping empty containers is easier when the number of par-
containers ties handling containers is small, for example, when a
bakery delivers directly to a grocery store without in-
Once a company opts for reusable containers, there are a termediate storage in a warehouse.
number of design features that can lead to further cost Company-owned vehicles If companies involved in
savings and logistical benefits. For example, standard- shipping and receiving use company-owned vehicles
ization of container sizes may help increase transporta- there is typically no charge for return shipping, espe-
tion efficiency. However, one-way containers could be cially if trucks would otherwise return empty to their
standardized as well. point of origin after making a delivery. Producers may
Shipping containers are generally designed to fit into an also work with trucking companies that have dedi-
existing distribution system. However, in some cases the cated all or part of their fleet to making deliveries to
potential to save by changing packaging may be great or from a single customer.
enough to justify changing the distribution system The features just described generally are found in closed-
through which it passes. In other cases, reusable con- loop distribution systems, including inter-plant shipping
tainer systems are planned in the context of larger changes of materials from one part of a company to another. In
in shipping and receiving. The Xerox Corporation case general, closed-loop systems are systems in which the
study in this report describes this type of change. container always goes back to the same point of origin,
The time period over which a reusable shipping container passing through the same gateways. Most of the time, it
is functional - its useful life - affects its total mate- is possible to account for the containers location within
rial cost. Reusable containers may cost 2-to-20 times as the loop. However, as described later in this report, large,
much as one-way containers, so the number of times the multi-plant operations such as Xerox, which ship or re-
container is reused (its trippage) is a crucial variable in ceive supplies over long distances, may find it more ef-
calculating total material cost. In addition to anticipat- fective to use an open-loop system in which contain-
ing the number of trips a container will make, it is im- ers need not return to their point of origin. In addition,

7
reusable shipping containers may also work well in open- Lids Lids may be separate from or attached to the
loop systems in which containers are managed by third- body of the container. Separate lids facilitate access
party logistical service contractors. to the container interior, while attached lids may save
time in handling.
Side Access Some containers feature side doors that
Physical properties of reusable shipping drop down for unloading parts from stacked contain-
containers ers. This allows workers to randomly select parts for
Reusable shipping containers may be made from a num- quality control without disturbing the stack.
ber of different materials, including corrugated cardboard, Solid vs. lattice-work walls and bottoms Solid walls
fiberboard, plastic (such as high density polyethylene are best to hold bulk shipments (such as liquids, pow-
[HDPE] or polypropylene), wood, and steel. The choice der, grain, or chemicals) and to keep out contaminants.
of material influences the number of times the container Lattice-work or open walls or bottoms permit drain-
may be used and ultimately its cost per use (as shown in age or allow air to circulate through the container (for
Table 2), as well as the amount of material that ultimately example, for produce or food packed on ice).
Size The size of a shipping container depends in part
is discarded.
on whether the container will be handled manually or
Reusable containers of all materials may be designed with mechanically. Containers may range in size from l-
a number of features that facilitate shipping, handling, cubic foot totes designed to be handled manually (such
and storage, including: as on assembly lines or in supermarkets) to 80-cubic
l Collapsibility The walls of the container are designed foot bins used to ship bulk ingredients. Some bulk
to fold down when collapsed. bins are designed with a pallet-like bottom to allow
l Nestability Empty containers can easily be placed into for forklift access, thereby eliminating the need for a
one another. pallet.
l Stackability Tops and bottoms are designed to lock
into one another to allow for greater stacking heights.
Reusable shipping containers in two
retail operations
The first two features allow for a reduction in the space
empty containers take up in transportation and storage While single-use corrugated boxes are the leading trans-
and allow for more containers to be hauled back than port package in the United States, a number of industries
were delivered full. (Collapsed containers may use 3-to- have opted for reusable shipping containers in their op-
6 times less space than assembled containers.) erations. Besides the manufacturing and supermarket
Stackability makes it possible to make maximum use of industries described in the case-study section of this re-
the full height of space in warehouses or delivery ve- port, certain retail sectors are also increasing their reuse
hicles.12 of containers for shipments from distribution centers to
individual stores, especially for fast food, health and
Collapsibility, nestability, and stackability may not be beauty aids, clothing, and pharmaceuticals. Bergen Brun-
suitable under all circumstances. For example, many of swig Drug Company and In-N-Out Burger are compa-
Toyota USAs suppliers ship parts to Toyota in reusable nies in two of these fields that are using reusable con-
shipping containers that hold reusable dunnage (cush- tainers to ship from central facilities to retail outlets.
ioning or padding used to protect fragile parts against
shock or breakage). The dunnage is returned to suppliers
inside the empty containers, precluding the use of col-
Pharmaceuticals: Bergen Brunswig Drug
lapsible containers. Toyota also ruled out nestable con-
tainers. Nestable containers have drafted (slanted) walls Company
that allow them to fit together and pull apart easily, but In 1987, the Bergen Brunswig Drug Company in Orange,
they may hold less than straight-walled containers, which California, purchased 120,000 returnable plastic contain-
cannot be nested. Thus there is a trade-off between the ers to replace one-way corrugated cartons. The company
amount of product being shipped per delivery versus the ships from its 37 distribution centers to its 10,000 phar-
number of empty containers that can be back-hauled at. macies, located in 40 states.
one time.13
Brunswig reports that the elimination of carton assem-
Other features that affect shipping, handling, and stor- bly and manual taping operations has enabled the com-
age include:

8
pany to save money on packaging and labor. Other sav- bution between vendors (suppliers) and manufacturers
ings include conservation of warehouse space (corrugated and between sub-suppliers and suppliers. Perstorp Xytec
cartons were once assembled on the warehouse floor); offers its customers a free cost justification service for
better truck space utilization with the new containers, companies interested in switching to reusable contain-
which stack to completely fill the 8-foot height of the ers. In this cost analysis Perstorp Xytec computes a
companys box van; reduced damage to merchandise; and customers potential savings in the areas of transporta-
a reduction in trash. The plastic containers also fit better tion, container cost, product damage, storage, and dis-
into Brunswigs new automated distribution centers, posal. Perstorp Xytec and other manufacturers of reus-
where automated power conveyors would crush corru- able shipping containers also rent or lease their containers
gated boxes.14 for a trial period to allow companies to test the benefits
of a reusable shipping container system.

Fast Food: In-N-Out Burger

In-N-Out Burger in Baldwin Park, California, switched
from one-way waxed corrugated boxes to reusable plas- III. Reusable Shipping Containers in
tic totes for shipping meat patties and bags of dressing Manufacturing Industries
from its processing facilities to its 84 stores in and near
southern California. The company reports that eliminat-
ing 200 tons of nonrecyclable waxed cardboard annu-
ally has led to an estimated $24,000 in savings on dis-
I n the United States, a number of manufacturers
of automobiles, electronic goods, and appliances have
worked with their suppliers to develop systems in which
posal and packaging. In-N-Out recovered the initial the suppliers ship parts in reusable containers. The auto-
$140,000 cost of the totes during the first 11 months of mobile industry in particular and the manufacturing sec-
use.15 tor in general lend themselves to reusable packaging be-
cause parts are delivered frequently, often over short
distribution distances. For example, many suppliers to
A manufacturer of reusable shipping the auto industry are located in and around Detroit-area
containers auto assembly plants.
A number of companies in the United States manufac-
ture reusable shipping containers. One company, Perstorp
Xytec (formerly Xytec) in Tacoma, Washington, intro- Just-in-time delivery systems
duced the first large, solid-wall plastic bins to the US complement reuse
market in 1973.16 The bins were designed for the agri- The development of just-in-time delivery systems has
cultural and fishing industries as an alternative to wooden helped spur the use of reusable shipping containers in
and steel containers. In the mid-1980s Perstorp Xytec manufacturing, especially in the automobile industry.
began designing specialized reusable container systems, Just-in-time (JIT) is a delivery strategy that manufactur-
such as the first collapsible plastic container in the United ers use to reduce the quantity of supplies kept in inven-
States, for major automobile manufacturers, including tory. Instead of making infrequent deliveries of large
General Motors and Ford. Other customers in the auto volumes of parts that are inventoried over long periods
industry include Chrysler, Honda, and Volkswagen as of time, suppliers make smaller deliveries on an as-needed
well as some of the suppliers to these automakers. basis.
Other Perstorp Xytec customers include the fishing, ag- One JIT operational technique is to bypass traditional
riculture, utilities, and transportation industries and con- central receiving facilities by delivering inbound mate-
sumer markets. One segment of its market involves rials as needed directly to the point of use on the produc-
maquiladoras (twin plants) that use reusable contain- tion line. This results in faster turnover of materials and
ers to ship materials across the US-Mexican border. a reduction in product inventory. Less inventory means
Johnson & Johnson is one such customer: it ships pre- that warehouse space previously used to store parts can
cut surgical garments from Texas to be sewn in Mexico, now be used for production or other purposes. JIT sys-
where labor is significantly cheaper. tems appear to work best when vendors are located near
According to Perstorp Xytec, reusable shipping contain- manufacturing facilities; when the number of participants,
ers are used most frequently by its customers for distri- including vendors and carriers, is limited; and when these

9
participants are committed to working together over a l Reduced freight costs The switch to standardized
long period of time. containers may allow for greater utilization of space
inside trucks, resulting in more shipments per deliv-
Reusable container systems are compatible with JIT pro-
ery and thereby reducing freight costs. These savings
grams because containers can be moved into production
are often greater than the cost of back-hauling empty
facilities and then, almost immediately, moved out again.
containers.
This means suppliers can maintain smaller numbers of
containers. Working with fewer dedicated companies The benefits of standardized containers on the assembly
facilitates control and administration of empty contain- line are described in the case studies that follow of Xerox
ers, especially if companies use proprietary containers. Corporation and Toyota Motor Manufacturing USAInc.
For example, a dedicated trucking company may serve These companies have followed two different strategies
just one customer or dedicate some portion of its truck- for implementing and enhancing reusable shipping con-
ing fleet to serving only that customer. tainer programs.
INFORM'S research shows that reusable shipping contain-
ers have saved manufacturers and suppliers money in
the following areas:
Reduced packaging costs As the cost of reusable
CASE STUDY: Xerox Corporation
shipping containers is amortized over their useful life,
the cost per trip is lowered, making reusable contain-
ers cheaper than single-use packaging. This results in Xerox has switched from a system that used thousands
savings, either for manufacturers, if they have tradi- of different size one-way shipping containers to a sys-
tionally supplied vendors with containers, or for ven- tem that relies on nine different standard reusable corru-
dors, if they are responsible for purchasing contain- gated package sizes. By developing standardized, reus-
ers. Vendors elimination of one-way packaging and able shipping containers, Xerox has created a distribution
subsequent long-term savings may result in a lower system in which any of its facilities or suppliers world-
per-piece price for parts shipped. wide can reuse the same boxes.17
Reduced damage Reusable containers are usually
The key features of Xeroxs distribution system are:
sturdier than one-way containers because they are
designed to withstand multiple uses, and switching to l Standardized containers and long-distance supply
Xerox requires suppliers to use standardized contain-
reusable containers can result in lower rates of dam-
ers worldwide.
age of incoming supplies.
. Open-loop network Xerox operates an open-
Avoided disposal costs Eliminating one-way contain-
loop distribution network in which containers need
ers also eliminates the need to landfill or recycle them.
not return to their point of origin.
In addition, production, distribution, and productivity l Third-party collection A third-party handler collects,
improvement systems, such as just-in-time delivery, that sorts, and resells empty containers where they are
complement reusable shipping container systems may needed, eliminating the need to haul containers back
lead to other savings such as: to their point of origin.
l Reduced labor costs Freeing workers from the task l Just-in-time Xeroxs system is compatible with just-
of breaking down single-use corrugated containers and in-time delivery.
removing them from assembly-line operations can l Savings Reuse has enabled the company to save on
offer savings. Standardizing containers to conform packaging, disposal, and other costs.
with assembly-line layouts can eliminate the need for
labor to repack incoming supplies into containers com-
patible with the assembly line. Background: Inefficient use of
l Reduced storage costs Reusable shipping contain- containers
ers may stack to higher heights than one-way corru-
gated containers, taking full advantage of available Xerox Corporation is a multinational producer of copi-
warehouse space. Just-in-time delivery in reusable ers, printers, facsimile machines, computer software, and
shipping containers may allow companies to use ware- other electronic products that are sold in over 130 coun-
house space previously used for storing inventory for tries. The company has major manufacturing facilities
other purposes. in the United States, Canada, England, Holland, France,
Japan, and Mexico and in South America.

10
In recent years, international competition has led Xerox engineers from Xerox and its international suppliers to
to reevaluate its worldwide operations and costs. Xerox achieve a consensus on box style and to help make boxes
looked for the potential for change and savings in many consistent from country to country. Quality control en-
facets of its operations, including its supplier packaging gineers, parts buyers, line engineers, assembly-line work-
program. Beginning at its manufacturing and research ers, suppliers, and box makers took part in the planning
facilities in Webster, New York, the company examined process, and senior manufacturing management gave its
how supplier parts were being shipped to its facilities final approval.
worldwide and ultimately instituted the worldwide stan-
Standard boxes and pallets The core of the program
dardization of the packaging used to ship Xerox compo-
consisted of designing nine standard corrugated card-
nent parts.
board boxes of different sizes and two standard wood
The Webster facility receives component parts from more pallet sizes that suppliers must use for shipping compo-
than 400 suppliers. While the company has been work- nent parts to Xerox. Xerox makes exceptions where
ing to localize its supplier base, it still receives many weight, size, or safety pose limitations. The standard-
types of parts from Europe and Japan. In the past, each ized corrugated boxes and pallets can be used at any
component shipped to Xerox was packaged in a box Xerox facility and are designed to fit directly into desig-
unique to that part. This resulted in the shipment of thou- nated positions on the assembly line. According to Xerox,
sands of different types of boxes with as many as 24 dif- With the use of standard containers, assembly line lay-
ferent pallet sizes. The use of non-standard packaging out and storage rack compatibility within all Xerox fa-
resulted in a number of inefficiencies and costs that in- cilities worldwide will be ensured. 19
cluded:
New delivery schedules Besides changing the boxes
Waste disposal costs Because different suppliers used
and pallets, Xerox also reworked its delivery schedules.
a variety of different packages, these packages and
Previously, large quantities of parts were delivered on a
pallets reached a dead end as soon as parts were
weekly-to-monthly basis and put into inventory at on-
delivered to Xerox plants - that is, Xerox was not
site warehouses. To replace this system, Xerox devel-
able to reuse them. Xerox reported spending over
oped a just-in-time inventory program based on direct
$500,000 to send more than 4 million boxes to land-
deliveries to assembly-line operations on an as-needed
fills each year.18
basis. Deliveries are now made on a daily or weekly ba-
Operational costs Xerox often had to repack incom-
sis, minimizing the amount of storage and warehouse
ing component parts into new boxes that fit onto racks
space Xerox needs.
in its assembly-line operations. Also, unit loads of
boxes sometimes required repalletization for move- Xerox also introduced scanners and a uniform bar code
ment within the plant. labeling system to speed up the throughput of incoming
Packaging costs Worldwide, Xerox had to spend $100 supplies and to reduce errors and invoicing time. (Bar
million annually on new corrugated boxes and pallets codes are electronic labels that replace paper invoices
for its shipments of supplier parts and finished goods. and that contain such information as the contents of the
This was because the diversity of the old incoming package, name of supplier, date, etc. Uniform bar codes
boxes, many of them unique to the parts they carried, could also be used with one-way boxes.)
made it impossible for Xerox to reuse them to ship
Distribution and third parties Under the new distri-
parts between plants or to repair centers.
bution system, as incoming shipments of supplier parts
Inefficient use of freight The use of boxes and pal-
are received and used in assembly-line operations, boxes
lets of many different sizes prevented Xeroxs sup-
are collapsed and stacked. Xerox then either uses them
pliers from fully utilizing the space of transport ve-
in its internal pipeline to ship subcomponent parts to
hicles. Since Xerox pays the cost of shipping from its
other Xerox facilities or repair centers, or returns them
suppliers, this led to freight costs that were higher than
to third-party box distributors who sort and resell them
necessary.
to Xerox suppliers.
In seeking solutions for these problems, Xerox saw great
Xerox uses three box distributors in the United States,
opportunities for change in its distribution packaging
one on each coast and another in the Midwest. Boxes
system, not only at the Webster facility, but worldwide.
shipped from overseas enter one of the three US distri-
Planning Xerox began developing its box reuse pro- bution loops once they are unpacked. A box shipped from
gram (called the 88P311 Supplier Packaging Program) Europe or Idaho to New York, for example, enters the
in April 1989. The company brought together packaging east coast distribution loop.

11
On the east coast, Xerox contracts with H.P. Neun Com- program. Xerox developed a Supplier Packaging Agree-
pany, Inc., a private manufacturer of corrugated and set- ment Form that specifies how parts should be delivered
up boxes located in Fairport, New York, a few miles from to Xerox facilities and describes under what circum-
Xeroxs Webster facility. In the past, Xerox had purchased stances exemptions are allowed. Xerox also developed a
its own new boxes from Neun. Under contract agree- videotape for suppliers that explains the program in de-
ments, Neun now sells both new and used boxes to tail. Xerox helped suppliers defray some costs by sup-
Xeroxs suppliers at a set rate. Neun buys the new boxes plying free software for using the new bar-code system.
from the Jefferson Smurfit Company in Chicago, Illi-
For some suppliers, the switch to standardized packag-
nois, at a price negotiated by Xerox. New boxes cost an
ing meant an increase in packaging costs, especially if
average of $0.50 per box for 10,000 boxes. Neun in turn
they had been using lighter weight corrugated boxes. In
sells the boxes, whether new or used, to Xerox suppliers
some instances, suppliers passed the higher cost of pack-
at an average cost of $1.00 per box. (Actual box costs
aging along to Xerox in the form of increased prices per
for suppliers range from $0.19 to $14, depending on box
part. On the other hand, suppliers that were already us-
type.) The boxes average eight uses. Neun recycles boxes
ing more expensive, better quality corrugated boxes are
that are too dirty (e.g., greasy) or damaged beyond re-
now getting boxes of similar quality for less money. This
pair.
is because H.P. Neun is able to buy them at lower rates
Neun has 10 full-time employees responsible for han- due to the economy of scale in making large purchases.
dling returned boxes. They remove or cross out bar-code
According to James E. Baxter, Jr., manager of technical
labels from the used boxes, put boxes needing repair into
services, Xerox had to promote its standardized packag-
a repair bin, and separate for recycling those boxes that
ing program to suppliers worldwide. A large company
are no longer useful. Boxes to be used again are shrink-
such as Xerox may find this a relatively easy thing to do,
wrapped or banded and sent out to suppliers. Since they
since in many cases its purchases represent a major por-
are standardized, the reused boxes do not necessarily go
tion of its suppliers sales. Where this is not the case -
back to the same supplier.
for example, Xerox might represent only 1 percent of a
According to Robert R. Vannozzi, packaging commod- screw manufacturers business - getting suppliers to
ity team contracting specialist at Xerox, Xerox chose to switch to standardized packaging may be more difficult.
work with a third party rather than working directly with
suppliers to return boxes because of existing logistics.
Xeroxs distribution loops were already in place, and Savings
changing them to require suppliers to haul back empty
containers would have been very difficult: many of Xeroxs Jim Baxter conservatively estimates that the new
Xeroxs suppliers are located far away and use common packaging program saves Xeroxs manufacturing facili-
carriers to deliver parts. On the other hand, Vannozzi says ties between $2-5 million annually.21 While Xerox did
that a company just starting operations would be able to not provide INFORM with a breakdown of its actual costs
develop its distribution system from scratch, with dedi- and savings, the company did describe six areas in which
cated carriers and back-hauling in mind. is seeing or expects to see savings:
Reduced freight costs Standard sized boxes and pal-
Cost is another reason for using third-party companies. lets cube out cargo ship containers and trailers more
Neun can do things cheaper than Xerox because its labor efficiently, allowing Xerox to pay lower freight costs.
and overhead costs are lower. For example, Neun em- Reduced damage According to Xeroxs Jim Baxter,
ployees are paid $8-10 per hour to handle box returns.20 the new boxes offer better protection and have resulted
Employees doing the same work at Xerox might be paid in a significant reduction in damage to incoming parts.
$12- 15 per hour. Neun provides similar services for other Avoided disposal costs Xerox estimates that 60-80
companies, including General Motors. percent of all incoming parts can be handled with the
According to Vannozzi, Neun works well with Xerox new system, eliminating the need for 2.4-3.2 million
because of its proximity. The program would be much boxes and millions of pallets annually at its Webster
more expensive to operate if the third party were further facility alone.22 According to Vannozzi, the company
away. Xerox works with another third-party company to has saved $1.5 million in avoided pallet disposal costs
handle returns of its standardized pallets. since 1990.
Reduced packaging costs Xerox does not have to
Working with suppliers Xerox worked closely with its buy as many boxes for shipping between its plants,
suppliers in implementing the standardized packaging and using standard container sizes allows for a large

12
 leveraged purchase contract with the box manufac- Other goals
turers.
. Reduced labor costs The uniform bar-code system Standard dunnage Xerox has worked to remove the
has enhanced the accuracy of Xeroxs materials track- expandable polystyrene dunnage used in boxes to pro-
ing and receiving, leading to reduced labor needed tect parts and to replace it with corrugated cardboard,
for handling and administration. Xerox has also re- which is more easily recyclable. However, with the new
duced its labor costs because workers do not have to standardized box system, suppliers may have to insert
repack parts into boxes compatible with assembly- more dunnage than before to secure their products, and
line operations. this may be more expensive than the box itself. The dun-
. Reduced storage costs Xeroxs Supplier Packaging nage inserts are not standardized and are typically dis-
Program and just-in-time delivery system has enabled carded after one use. Xerox is working on the develop-
Xerox to reduce its packaging inventory and reduce ment of standard reusable inserts, possibly made of
warehouse space, allowing the company to use this plastic.
space for other purposes. Suppliers have also realized Palletless? The Supplier Packaging program allows
savings from reduced packaging inventory. Xerox to reuse and therefore use fewer new pallets, but
pallets still represent a major cost for the company.
Switching from wood to a more durable plastic pallet
A ro/e for plastic reusable shipping would save money over time but, as is the case with re-
containers usable plastic containers, the initial costs are high. Anew
plastic pallet costs about $38, compared with $5-6 for
According to Jim Baxter, the current packaging program wooden pallets. Eventually, Xerox might experiment with
is an intermediate step toward Xeroxs long-term goal of palletless shipping. According to Vannozzi, this would
localizing its supplier base and using reusable plastic require switching to clamp-type forklift trucks at all load-
containers in a closed-loop distribution system. Baxter ing and receiving locations. In the long run, this might
indicates that Xerox initially chose reusable corrugated save millions of dollars.
boxes because they are cheaper than reusable plastic.
According to Baxter, the initial cost of buying plastic
containers was too high to justify before the whole dis-
tribution system has been worked out.
CASE STUDY: Toyota USA
Bob Vannozzi says that plastic containers, which would
last longer than the corrugated boxes now in use, are more
practical when suppliers are mostly local and where there
Toyota, Japans largest auto manufacturer, began mak-
is a tightly closed distribution loop. Controlling the loop
ing cars in the United States in 1988. Toyotas initial blue-
is a major problem, says Vannozzi. The boxes are sub-
print for its US auto manufacturing operation involved a
ject to theft because they are of such good quality, but
distribution system based on the use of reusable ship-
closed-loop distribution helps to minimize this risk.
ping containers, which the company was already using
Hybrid system? According to Baxter, Xerox might even- in Japan. But Toyota USA encountered obstacles that its
tually develop a hybrid system in which reusable plastic parent company did not face in Japan.
containers are used with local suppliers and reusable
In implementing its reusable shipping container system,
corrugated containers with long-distance suppliers. Lo-
Toyota has applied a philosophy known as kaizen, which
calized supply has other advantages besides better con-
means striving toward continuous improvement. This
trol over containers, says Baxter. While parts ordered
approach has helped Toyota USA find a number of op-
from overseas may be cheaper, they include many hid-
portunities to increase efficiency and lower transporta-
den expenses, such as: the cost of long distance phone
tion costs.
bills and air freight; little flexibility in distribution fre-
quency and inventory; and quality control problems. In Toyotas distribution system relies on the frequent deliv-
other words, the cost of dealing with a distant supplier ery of standardized reusable shipping containers. The key
may lead to higher overall costs. According to Baxter, features of Toyotas system include:
in the end it boils down to price per piece versus total l Standard container and pallet sizes that maximize
acquisition costs. space in transport vehicles

13
l Containers that fit into its assembly-line operations handling, with hand grips to minimize the risk of re-
l Reliance on dedicated carriers that make daily deliv- petitive motion disorders.
eries and pickups of empty containers, facilitating the
Design new containers Toyota developed the specifica-
smooth distribution and hauling back of containers.23
tions and standards for its new containers and worked
Toyotas reusable shipping container system has enabled with container manufacturers to design them. Toyota re-
the company to save in at least two areas: quires its suppliers to purchase and maintain these con-
l Reduced freight costs, by over $3 million annually tainers, which include plastic crates, metal racks, and
l Avoided disposal costs corrugated cardboard boxes with plastic lids. According
to Toyota, initial purchase of the new containers cost
suppliers $8-10 million overall, with costs per supplier
Background ranging from $1,000 to $1 million, depending on the
number of parts they were shipping. While suppliers make
Toyota Motor Manufacturing USAInc. began mass-pro- the initial investment, over time they recoup this cost
ducing Camry Sedans at its 3.7-million-square foot manu- from Toyota, the automaker says. Toyota says that some
facturing facility in Georgetown, Kentucky, in 1988. In reusable containers may last up to 20 years and may make
1991, 4,000 Toyota team members (the companys term 30 to 40 trips per year, depending on the number of de-
for its employees) produced 200,000 vehicles. A 3.2- liveries suppliers make each day.
million-square foot expansion is expected to double pro-
duction by 1995. Toyota worked closely with one container manufacturer,
LEWISystems in Watertown, Wisconsin, a division of
When Toyota began operations at its Kentucky facility, Menasha Corporation, which supplies the containers for
it developed a distribution system with reusable ship- about 50 percent of all Toyotas parts. LEWISystems also
ping containers in mind, adapted from its main opera- worked with Toyotas suppliers and helped defray costs
tions in Japan. Dedicated carriers - trucking compa- by buying back old containers or swapping new contain-
nies hired to work solely with Toyota - were assigned ers for old ones. LEWISystems containers are plastic
specific routes for daily pickups of parts from suppliers. totes designed for manual handling that conform to Au-
A just-in-time delivery system helped to ensure a rapid tomobile Industry Action Group standards and Toyotas
turnover of full and empty containers, allowing for cost- 40-pound maximum weight limit.
efficient hauling back of containers. Toyota further en-
hanced this system by increasing its use of domestic sup- Toyota uses about 30 different types of containers, vary-
pliers and by working with suppliers to develop a ing in size and weight from small totes that weigh one
standardized container system. pound to bulk bins that weigh up to 500 pounds. Indi-
vidual containers are designed in 15-inch increments so
Local Suppliers Toyota purchased $1.2 billion in parts that, regardless of size, they fill out standard sized pal-
made by US companies in 1992, up from $70 million in lets that are 48 inches long and 45 inches wide. The pal-
1988. About 90 percent of these suppliers are located lets themselves are designed to utilize maximum space
within 500 miles of the Georgetown plant.24 The use of to cube out standard size trailers that are 48 feet long,
local suppliers has helped the company to increase its 90 inches wide, and 96 inches high.
use of reusable shipping containers, because smaller dis-
tances facilitate the return of empty containers. Reusable dunnage Many of the containers are designed
with custom dunnage which, besides protecting parts
New cars, new containers When Toyota planned for a inside the containers, improves handling efficiency on
major model change in 1991, it also planned a new dis- the assembly line by positioning parts for fast removal.
tribution packaging system. Toyota developed the new Suppliers reuse about 90 percent of the dunnage Toyota
container system with the following goals: uses. The dunnage itself - polystyrene, high density
l Standardize reusable containers and pallets to polyethylene (HDPE), or other molded plastic partitions
maximize cube efficiency in trailers Previously, the -typically lasts from three to five years.
use of many non-standard shipping containers resulted
in much lost or dead space in the trucks making de-
liveries, leading to higher freight costs for Toyota. Distribution
l Design containers to be ergonomically compatible
Containers were designed for material loads within Toyota uses three trucking companies that own and op-
the 40-pound limit required by Toyota for manual erate trailers dedicated to the companys routes; each

14
trailer may make deliveries 2-to- 16 times per day. In to- Manufacturing: Challenges for smaller
tal these carriers travel approximately 70,000 miles per companies
day at a freight rate of $1.30 per mile, or about $91,000
per day. Toyota suppliers that use reusable containers are The two case studies above describe the programs of large
located as far away as Quebec (1,700 miles). multinational corporations. Smaller manufacturers, how-
ever, may face greater difficulties in switching to reus-
Distribution is set up so that, with each delivery, trucks able shipping containers. John Okun is waste reduction
bringing supplier parts to Toyota pick up empty ship- and recycling director of the Long Island City Business
ping containers. At Toyota, as container or pallet loads Development Corporation, a non-profit organization
of materials are carried to the production line, empty dedicated to the preservation and enhancement of busi-
containers are returned to a designated storage area where ness opportunities for companies in western Queens, New
they are palletized and loaded onto trucks for back-haul York. Okun reports that some of the manufacturers and
to suppliers. On the production floor, full containers are distributors with whom he works find that a number of
placed on gravity flow racks - slopes that allow con- obstacles often make it impractical to switch to reusable
tainers to slide down to the assembly line by the force of containers. These obstacles may include high initial costs
gravity. Assembly-line workers return empty containers and resistance on the part of suppliers and customers.
to reverse flow racks for pickup and return to storage. Besides the expense of investing in a float of containers,
Dunnage remains inside the containers for return ship- Okun states that often, labor and handling costs increase
ment, saving labor for both Toyota and the supplier. in the short run when a reusable shipping container sys-
As suppliers are responsible for their own containers, tem is established.
the containers are hot-stamped with the suppliers names The purchasing habits of smaller companies may also
to ensure that they get back to them. Toyota reports very pose an obstacle. Smaller companies often purchase
little container loss - about 3 percent annually due to materials in small quantities, too small to give them much
damage or misplacement within the plant. Since all con- clout with suppliers. Or companies may purchase their
tainers are delivered by dedicated carriers, loss due to materials from spot markets, often overseas, which offer
theft or misdelivery is not a big problem. substantial purchasing savings but little flexibility in
terms of shipping medium distances. Similarly, Okun re-
ports that smaller manufacturers dont represent a large
enough source for some of their customers. These cus-
Impact tomers may have rigid receiving policies which preclude
By standardizing its container system, Toyota has been switching to reusable shipping containers. One solution,
able to increase its space efficiency in trailers by 21 per- Okun suggests, may be for several small to medium com-
cent. According to Toyota, this has resulted in a savings panies to purchase raw materials cooperatively, thereby
of more than $3 million in transportation costs, or ap- gaining the clout to persuade suppliers to ship materials
proximately $18 for each vehicle built. Toyota sees fur- in reusable containers.
ther opportunity to increase space efficiency inside trucks Another factor for smaller companies may be storage
by designing containers to hold more parts without go- costs, as maintaining a supply of shipping containers re-
ing over the 40-pound limit and by marking pallets bet- quires additional space. This is especially true during
ter so that they are not loaded incorrectly onto trucks. the transition period from disposable to reusable con-
Toyota hopes through its current review process or kaizen tainers or where companies have relationships with some
to reduce transportation costs by an additional 15 per- customers that preclude the use of reusable containers,
cent. Okun says.
Waste Toyota has not calculated the amount of waste Freight costs sometimes increase, too, when companies
reduction achieved by increasing its use of reusable ship- haul back empty containers to suppliers. In addition, com-
ping containers. In general, it reports a reduction of waste panies that adopt reusable shipping containers may find
going to landfills, due in part to continually reducing the that savings in waste disposal costs lag behind any re-
amount of disposable material that enters the plant and duction in generation of waste materials.
to its in-house recycling efforts. Manufacturers of reus-
able containers generally take them back when they be- But in the long run, costs for packaging and disposal
come unusable, grind them up, and recycle them into decrease, and product damage is minimized, Okun says.
new containers. These savings tend to offset cost increases in labor and

15
handling, freight and storage. But again, it is often the Reuse: Opportunities and obstacles
size of the firm and quantity of materials involved that
determines bottom-line benefits. 25 Does the reuse of shipping containers offer opportuni-
ties for reducing the grocery industrys waste stream of
corrugated boxes? What types of distribution systems are
most compatible with this switch? To answer this, IN-
Working with business intermediaries
FORM spoke with representatives of two product manu-
Local development corporations, small business devel- facturers, five large supermarket chains, a small chain of
opment centers, and trade associations may play a role food cooperatives, a reclaimer of empty produce boxes,
in encouraging industry standardization of shipping con- and a company that manufactures and leases standard-
tainers and cooperative efforts to work with suppliers. ized shipping containers.
According to John Okun of the Long Island City Busi-
INFORM has identified two kinds of distribution systems
ness Development Corporation, business intermediaries
that are compatible with reusable shipping containers and
may be better suited to play such a role than many gov-
one industry segment in particular that has shown in-
ernment agencies. Companies that fear government agen-
creasing interest in reusables:
cies regulatory powers may be more comfortable work-
l Direct delivery from product manufacturer to store
ing with a business intermediary on issues related to
Many grocery goods are distributed through ware-
switching to reusable shipping containers. In addition,
houses, but direct delivery to stores is still common
business development centers and trade associations can
in the milk, baked goods, and soft drink industries
provide varied assistance for companies that want to
and in cases where supermarkets run their own pro-
implement reusable shipping container programs in gen-
duction facilities. The manufacturer ships products
eral and standardized container systems in particular.26
either to its own stores or to other companies retail
outlets.
l Break-bulk operations When individual stores or-
der in quantities smaller than full cases of products,
IV. Case Studies in the Grocery and distributors may unpack bulk cases and repack prod-
Supermarket Industry ucts in smaller boxes for store delivery.
l Produce industry The waxed cardboard commonly
used for produce is not recyclable,32 so reusable con-

T he food and beverage industry received more

shipments in corrugated boxes than any other in-
dustry in 1993 (see Figure 2). Food Marketing Institute
tainers can save retailers money in disposal costs and
also save growers money in reduced packaging ex-
penses.
surveys indicate that old corrugated containers (OCC)
can make up about 84 percent of a large supermarket Implementing an industry-wide reusable shipping con-
chains waste and 46 percent of a smaller operations tainer program presents a significant challenge for the
waste.27 Nearly 80 percent of grocery distributors and manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers involved in the
retailers have OCC recovery programs. But about 30 per- production and distribution of grocery goods. In general,
cent of grocery store OCC is not recyclable because it is a number of factors related to grocery distribution cur-
28
waxed or contaminated. Even when recycling OCC rently work against a comprehensive reuse system, in-
would generate revenue, the labor and handling costs of cluding the following:
preparing the material for recycling may exceed that rev- Investing in a large enough float of containers is
enue. expensive. Switching from single-use to reusable ship-
ping containers requires a large initial investment. Not
Waxed corrugated containers used to ship fresh produce only may reusable containers cost 2-to-20 times more
make up 3-5 percent of the OCC stream, accounting for than single-use containers, but manufacturers may
about 17 percent of all grocery waste, according to the need to start with one-and-a-half to three times as
Grocery Manufacturers Associations committee on solid many because they need a steady supply of contain-
waste.29 The produce industry alone disposes of 100-200 ers to compensate for those in transit. According to
million waxed boxes per year.30 According to Franklin one container manufacturer, the capital investment
Associates, between 1972 and 1987, corrugated contain- may be hard to justify, especially in times of reces-
ers used for produce constituted the fastest growing seg- sion.33
ment of the corrugated packaging waste stream for food l The cost of return freight to haul back empty con-
and kindred products.31 tainers may be prohibitive. Most product manufac-

16
 turers do not own their own trucks but, instead, con- The milk industry Single-use corrugated shipping boxes
tract out to common carriers. After making deliver- do not work well in the milk industry for two reasons.
ies, these carriers usually pick up additional loads for First, milk must be kept cold while shipped, and with
other companies. To accommodate a reusable con- condensation, corrugated cardboard becomes too soggy
tainer system, common carriers may need to change to hold the weight of the milk containers. Second, milk
routes or add extra trucks to haul back empty con- is a perishable product that is delivered frequently to the
tainers - adding to the cost of such a system and same locations. This means that dairies, which make fre-
possibly making it uneconomical. quent round trips, save money on packaging by opting
Ensuring the return of containers is difficult. A na- for reusable cases. Today most dairies use plastic cases,
tional manufacturer may deliver hundreds of differ- which began to replace wood in the 1960s.
ent products to thousands of distribution warehouses
Stewarts Processing Corporations Saratoga Dairy
and stores across the country. As common carriers
(Saratoga Springs, New York) ships one-way and refill-
typically distribute these goods, it is difficult to con-
able milk bottles and cartons in plastic shipping crates to
trol an individual manufacturers pool of containers.
Stewarts 200 convenience stores. On return runs, the
And because reusable shipping containers tend to be
companys trucks haul back empty milk bottles in the
valuable, concerns about theft are great. Even when a
same crates. According to Stewarts management, this
company uses its own trucks, ensuring the return of
kind of back-hauling does not add significantly to the
containers may be a problem.
companys transportation costs.35
Tracking containers may be difficult. As thousands
of different product lines may pass through a Soft drink industry The soft drink industry tradition-
supermarkets distribution warehouses and stores, ally has maintained direct store delivery from bottling
tracking individual companies containers would be plants to stores, sometimes via company-owned distri-
an added expense and administrative burden - espe- bution warehouses. As the industry as a whole moved
cially if the system entailed deposits for empty con- from refillable to one-way primary packaging, it aban-
tainers. doned reusable transport packaging. However, this is
Adequate storage facilities may not be available. starting to change. The Pepsi-Cola Company has shipped
The lack of secure storage space for empty containers its 2-liter bottles in reusable plastic crates since the mid-
presents another problem. According to one supermar- 198Os, and the company currently uses them for 80-90
ket industry source, todays stores have less available percent of these deliveries.
back-room space than stores had in the past.34
Pepsi-Cola delivers its beverages directly to retailers in
company-owned trucks. Company personnel unload and
stock the product on shelves and take back empty crates.
Distribution systems in which reusable Sometimes workers leave crates in the stores until the
shipping containers are common next delivery, where they form displays at the end of
Despite these barriers, INFORM has identified two distri- aisles. (The loaded crates are designed to stack together.)
bution systems in which reusable shipping containers are In some instances, Pepsi-Cola charges stores a deposit
commonly used to ship grocery products today: direct of $1.OO for each crate.
store delivery and break-bulk operations. Reusable crates cost less per use than single-use corru-
gated boxes. One-way cardboard cartons cost $0.25-$0.30
apiece. The plastic crates cost Pepsi-Cola about $1.60
Direct store delivery each and may average 100 uses. Over the course of its
useful life, the reusable crate costs $0.016 per use, nearly
Most grocery products are shipped to stores in the United
$0.26 less per use, on average, than a single-use corru-
States by wholesalers, via distribution warehouses that
gated box.
may store thousands of different products. However,
some products are shipped directly from the point of According to S.P. (Sal) Porrazzo, Pepsi-Colas director
manufacture to individual stores. Perishable items such of environmental affairs, the plastic crates are also more
as milk and bread are shipped frequently and directly to durable and can be stacked higher, thereby taking up less
stores to ensure freshness. Soft drink companies tradi- floor space than corrugated containers. Pepsi-Cola esti-
tionally have also shipped their products directly to stores mates that switching to plastic has eliminated 80-90,000
from bottling facilities or company-owned warehouses. tons of corrugated waste per year.36

17
Pepsi-Cola may begin to ship cans and bottles of other board boxes into the totes. The totes save Wakefern
sizes in reusable crates as well. The company is testing money on packaging and labor. A separate company re-
prototypes of crates for 16-ounce glass and plastic bottles pairs the totes, which may last for seven or more years.
and 12-ounce cans in northern California. However, Wakefern trucks bring all totes to and from its stores.
Porrazzo says that getting reusable crates back from con-
Hannaford Brothers provides another example of break-
sumers who buy a case of 24 cans is sometimes a prob-
bulk operations. The company, which has 93 supermar-
lem, because there is no deposit.37
kets in Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New
Products manufactured or prepared at supermarkets York, and Vermont, currently uses reusable totes for re-
own production facilities Some supermarkets and con- packed health and beauty items and to deliver in-house
venience stores make or prepare their own line of prod- sanitation supplies. When health and beauty items are
ucts at facilities near the stores distribution centers. This shipped to Hannafords warehouse, the company repacks
arrangement allows companies to deliver directly to their them in reusable totes for specific store orders40
stores and avoid third-party distributors.
H. E. Butt Grocery Company (San Antonio, Texas) -
the largest family-owned grocery company in the United
Shipping produce in reusable containers:
States, with 235 stores -produces or prepares many of Three different systems
its own items in manufacturing facilities at its distribu- Besides the direct delivery and break-bulk settings de-
tion centers. According to Linda Smith, the companys scribed above, some retailers have shown increasing in-
manager of environmental affairs, H. E. Butt packs its terest in reusable produce containers in place of waxed
baked goods and dairy items in plastic, reusable ship- cardboard. Because waxed cardboard is not currently
ping containers. After receipt at the store, the containers recyclable, the retailers view reusable containers as one
are emptied and returned to the distribution centers by way of cutting disposal costs. The following case stud-
returning H. E. Butt trucks. The companys manufactur- ies describe three different solutions for reusing produce
ing facilities are equipped with conveyors and washers containers. The Puget Consumers Co-op (PCC) in Se-
that prepare and clean the reusable containers before they attle, Washington, worked with a local produce grower
are returned to the appropriate facility.38 and a wholesaler to develop a pilot program in which
Wakefern Food Corporation, the merchandising and dis- reusable plastic containers are used in a closed-loop dis-
tribution arm of ShopRite supermarkets in Connecticut, tribution system. The second case study describes the
Delaware, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania, uses operations of Doms Empty Package Supply Inc., in New
reusable containers to ship fish directly from its distri- Paltz, New York, which reclaims nonrecyclable produce
bution warehouse, where it cuts up the fish for shipment containers from grocery stores and supermarkets and sells
to its stores.39 them for reuse. The third case study describes the Ger-
man-based International Fruit Container Organizations
development of a standardized industry-wide reusable
Break-bulk operations plastic container system for shipping produce in Europe.

To accommodate individual stores that order products in

quantities smaller than a full case, distributors at super- Puget Consumers Co-op: A local
market warehouses or third-party wholesalers may break distribution network
up the bulk cases - mostly corrugated boxes - and
repack products in smaller boxes for delivery to stores. PCC is a 36,000-member food cooperative that owns and
Some supermarket distributors have found it more eco- operates eight stores in Seattle, Washington. The co-op
nomical to repack these smaller loads into reusable ship- received a grant of $10,800 from the Seattle Solid Waste
ping containers. Utility to develop a pilot project using reusable shipping
containers to distribute fresh produce.41 PCC used most
Wakefern Food Corporation has been using nestable, re-
of the grant money to buy 800 reusable plastic contain-
usable plastic totes for about 15 years. The company uses
ers to replace nonrecyclable wax-coated corrugated
the totes to send orders of various products, such as house-
boxes42
hold appliances and health and beauty aids, from its gen-
eral merchandise warehouse to individual stores. When PCC tested the reusable plastic shipping containers in a
a store orders less than a whole boxs worth of a particu- limited distribution system that shipped produce from a
lar product, Wakefern repacks the products from card- local organic grower, Rents Due Ranch (Stanwood,

18
Washington), to a local wholesaler, Rosellas Produce Growers do better The project demonstrated that grow-
(Seattle, Washington), and to PCC. As part of the test, ers could save substantially in shipping container costs.
Rents Due used reusable containers to ship cases of pro- PCC estimates that over a five-year period, the expected
duce (leaf lettuce, zucchini, squash, peas, broccoli, and useful life of the reusable containers, a small grower could
beans) from Rents Due to PCC. save more than $40,000 in packaging costs and recoup
its initial investment within four months.44
How it works Rents Due Ranch packs freshly picked
produce into the reusable containers, which it holds in Other advantages PCC reports that the reusable con-
cold storage until Rosellas picks it up. Five days a week, tainers protect produce better than waxed cardboard and
Rosellas takes the produce from Rents Due and deliv- are easier for wholesalers to handle and ship.
ers it to PCC stores, then hauls back the empty contain-
Obstacles to broader use PCC identified a number of
ers to Rosellas warehouse. PCC and Rosellas use an
obstacles that must be overcome in establishing similar
invoice system to track each time a full container is ex-
programs, including the large initial investment required;
changed for an empty one. PCC is Rosellas only cus-
the risk of container loss, particularly in a system with
tomer using reusable containers, so accounting for the
multiple growers and retailers; an efficient and frequent
containers is a relatively simple job. Rosellas ships empty
back-hauling system; and lack of storage space in stores.
containers to the grower as needed.
PCC told INFORM that it would like to expand the pro-
The containers, made by Buckhorn Manufacturing in
duce shipping program and find other farmers willing to
Milford, Ohio, are nestable when empty, for space-effi-
participate. PCC would like to develop a partnership with
cient storage, and have an open lattice-work bottom that
the grower that would pay for additional reusable con-
allows for air circulation and drainage.
tainers, since the grant money will have been spent. Those
Project goals One goal of the project was to reduce the parties that would receive greater savings would pay for
amount of waxed cardboard PCC was discarding. PCC a greater percentage of the containers.
estimated that waxed cardboard produce boxes made up
The PCC case study shows the advantages of using reus-
16-18 percent of its stores waste stream, with disposal
able shipping containers in a tightly controlled, locally-
costs ranging between $30.84 and $41.57 for every
based distribution system. Even for seasonal markets,
$100,000 of store sales. All told, PCC was spending $170- switching to reusables makes sense economically. How-
$229 per month on disposal of waxed cardboard pro- ever, according to Ted Brown at Hannaford Brothers,
duce boxes.
reusable shipping containers are not appropriate for ship-
A second goal was to reduce Rents Due Ranchs pack- ping goods from far away.45 Lettuce, for example, is
aging costs. Single-use waxed cardboard boxes repre- shipped to Hannafords New England stores from Cali-
sented a significant cost for the grower, in part because it fornia and Florida, making back-haul of containers ex-
can afford to buy only a small volume of boxes at one pensive. Brown adds that while Hannaford is consider-
time. At $1.50 apiece, the cost of the box itself made up ing using reusable containers for locally shipped produce,
25 percent of the wholesale cost of a case of lettuce dur- produce is not available from local growers year-round.
ing peak growing season.
Less garbage but no immediate savings for PCC Re-
usable containers reduced PCCs waste stream, but this
Doms Empty Package Supply: An open-
reduction was not enough to lower the co-ops disposal loop reuse system
costs. This is because PCCs waste hauler charges on the James A. Badami, president of Doms Empty Package
basis of the number and volume of dumpsters collected Supply Inc., in New Paltz, New York, has overcome the
from PCC monthly, not by weight. To reduce disposal problem of reuse and long-distance distribution by de-
costs, PCC must cut its waste volume enough to allow it veloping what he calls an open-loop reuse system.
either to reduce the number of times its waste is collected Badamis business reclaims used produce containers from
weekly or to switch to a smaller dumpster. PCC estimates stores and sells them back to growers, who can use them
that it could save $115 per month, or 12 percent of total again. The business collects a wide variety of produce
disposal costs, if it could switch 45 percent of its pro- containers destined for disposal, including: wire-bound
duce shipments from waxed cardboard to reusable con- wooden crates, waxed corrugated cardboard boxes, plas-
tainers; other retail stores of similar size might show simi- tic one-pint strawberry baskets, and polystyrene foam.
lar savings, according to PCC.43 These containers are generally not accepted by recyclers;

19
but even though they were intended for just one use, they cheaper than the cost of paying a compactors fee plus
are durable enough to withstand further use for shipping transport and landfill tipping fees.
produce or other items. Badami says that wooden wire-
Still, Badami has had a hard time convincing some re-
bound boxes constitute his biggest market. He estimates
tailers that his service makes sense. Many of them think
that he handles more than a million of the 80-90 million
that putting [the boxes] in the dumpster is the cheaper
wire-bound boxes that are manufactured in the United
way to go, he says. Another problem is that many lo-
States each year.46
calities do not require stores to separate reusable items
Doms was founded in 1941 by James Badamis father from trash, even in areas with source-separation laws.
and today employs 18 people. Doms recently added a And some source-separation laws specifically exclude
5,000-square foot building next to an already standing waxed cardboard. As a result, many retailers feel no ob-
6,000-square foot facility. Supply and demand was the ligation to separate these boxes from their trash, even
basis for the creation of a reuse business in the 194Os, though reclaiming the boxes would keep them out of land-
he says. Today, Doms service is still in demand for fills or incinerators.
small growers and farmers who save money by buying
Nationwide potential Badami believes that his type of
used instead of new containers.
operation could be replicated easily. He believes that
Savings for growers Badami describes his operation as government at all levels could help in the creation of
an open-loop system. At a supermarket in New York, similar businesses by:
Doms may reclaim a one-bushel bean crate that origi- Creating an awareness of the importance of reuse in
nated in Tennessee, then sell it to an onion grower in reducing the waste stream
Maryland or a clammer in New England. Badami has no Establishing a network of reuse markets so that grow-
idea how many times individual boxes are actually re- ers, shippers, and distributors can be put in contact
used. In some cases, growers buy the used boxes, which with reclaimers
then reenter the loop. In other cases, a buyer uses a box Mandating source separation of reusable containers,
in such a way that it may not be possible to reclaim it for such as waxed cardboard and wire-bound boxes
future use. For example, Doms may reclaim a box that Providing tax incentives or loan programs to help get
was used to ship grapes from California to the east coast businesses started and to stimulate job creation.
and sell the box to a nursery that uses it as a planter. Or a Doms is an example of regional third-party reclamation
consumer may bring the box home from the store filled that can be replicated on a local or regional level any-
with fruit. In either case, there is no further possibility where. Within the region, Doms performs a unique ser-
for reclaiming the box as part of the produce loop. Try- vice in keeping a significant quantity of containers out
ing to monitor the movement of a specific container over of the solid waste stream - primarily containers that
its useful life would depend on the cooperation of too were intended for just one use - at what is, in effect, no
many different people and would add to the cost of reus-
cost to stores.
ing the container, Badami says.
Doms has as many as 200 customers, some as-far away
as Florida, Canada, and California. In some cases, Doms International Fruit Container Organization:
ships reclaimed containers in its own trucks; in others, Leasing standardized containers
customers come to pick up containers. Sometimes Doms
This next case study documents a more sophisticated
ships containers back to their point of origin. One Cali-
third-party reclamation system than that of Doms. It in-
fornia grape grower buys back its own boxes from Doms
volves leasing standardized reusable produce containers
at about 50 percent of the cost of new boxes.
on an industry-wide basis. International Fruit Container
Retailers save on disposal costs In addition to helping Organization (IFCO), a German company based in
growers save money, Doms saves large retailers money Munich, makes shipping containers for produce.
in avoided disposal costs. Badami says that he is saving Schoeller International, a Munich-based company that
one large supermarket chain $25,000 a month in disposal makes reusable beer and soft drink crates, formed IFCO
and related costs by collecting its nonrecyclable produce largely in response to the 1991 German packaging ordi-
containers. The 41 chain stores, located in New York and nance that makes industry financially responsible for its
Northern New Jersey, pay him to pick up the boxes but packages to the end of their life cycles, including the
save money because, according to Badami, his fee is costs of collecting, sorting, and recycling packages after

20
 Figure 3: IFCO 's Deposit System

Source: Schoeller International Group

they are discarded. The goal of the ordinance was to shift tomobile, book, furniture, and mail order industries.
the cost of managing packaging waste from the public
Standardization simplifies the reuse of packaging in a
sector to private industry.47
distribution system by enabling companies to use each
IFCO differs from US manufacturers of reusable ship- others containers interchangeably, reducing the number
ping containers in two fundamental ways. First, IFCO of containers any one company must purchase and elimi-
designs and markets standardized reusable plastic ship- nating the need to haul back empty containers to their
ping crates not for individual companies but for the fruit points of origin. Standardization also simplifies sorting
and vegetable industry in general. Second, IFCO does of container types and accounting for individual contain-
not sell crates to growers and packers. Instead, it leases ers.
the containers to them.
How IFCO works IFCO leases containers to growers
An industry standard IFCO manufactures its fruit and and packers of produce on an as-needed basis. After de-
vegetable containers from polypropylene in seven stan- livery to retail food outlets, the empty containers are col-
dard sizes. According to Peter B. Zaboji, president and lected by a logistics service company hired by IFCO,
chief executive officer of Schoeller International, the stan- which cleans, stores, and redelivers empty containers to
dardized crates accommodate nearly 75 percent of all growers. In Germany alone, the company has 30 depots
produce shipped through the German market.48 Since for reconditioning and storing empty containers.
nearly 80 percent of the produce consumed in Germany
To be competitive with makers of single-use packaging,
is imported, IFCO also has worked with growers who
IFCO must keep its rental costs lower than the purchase
ship produce to Germany from other countries, includ-
price of single-use containers. For IFCO, this means keep-
ing Belgium, France, Israel, Italy, Netherlands, and Spain.
ing the cost of storage, handling, transportation, and de-
During the period from April 1993 to March 1994, over
preciation lower than the cost of manufacturing and re-
12 million IFCO containers were reused. According to
cycling single-use containers. IFCO crates themselves
Zaboji, this translates into a reduction of 100 million ki-
last up to five years and may be recycled at the end of
lograms (110,250 tons) of waste. Schoeller has also in-
their useful life into new crates.
troduced standardized packaging systems for supermar-
ket dry goods and for eggs, meat, and fish. The company Deposits are key A grower who leases a container from
is exploring the feasibility of similar systems for the au- IFCO leaves a deposit (see Figure 3). The grower then

21
charges a deposit to retailers when the product is deliv- of reusable packaging. As shown in Table 3, most of the
ered to stores. Retailers redeem their deposits once IFCO obstacles to expanding the use of reusable shipping con-
recovers the crates. However, these deposits are gener- tainers in the United States are financial. Resistance to
ally accounting procedures with no money changing change is another obstacle. According to Xerox, prior to
hands unless the IFCO containers are lost or stolen. Ac- implementation of its Supplier Packaging Program, many
cording to Peter Zaboji, deposits help to control the whole of its suppliers had good long-standing relationships with
process. IFCO reports little loss due to theft. the companies from which they bought their packaging
and so were reluctant to change. As described earlier,
Savings Zaboji reports that both growers and retailers
convincing suppliers to switch to reusable containers may
save by leasing the crates. Growers save on packaging
be an especially difficult task for small businesses that
and associated disposal costs and avoid the administra-
lack the procurement clout of a company such as Xerox.
tive burden of ensuring that empty containers are recycled
or reused, as required by the German Packaging Ordi-
nance. Retailers report better product protection and re-
duced handling and labor costs in the stores. The crates Promoting reuse: Government options
themselves are collapsible, reducing the volume of space INFORM has identified at least five government policies
needed to store empty containers and the number of trucks that alone or in combination could promote the use of
IFCO needs for hauling containers back to its depots. reusable packaging in the United States:
US potential? Chep USA The German Packaging Or- Government mandates to use reusable shipping con-
dinance stimulated new reusable packaging systems such tainers, including requiring the use of standardized
as IFCO. However, in the United States, it may be pos- containers
sible to implement third-party container systems in re- Economic incentives to encourage reuse
sponse to market demand, without legislative catalyst. Government procurement policies favoring reusable
Such a system could reduce many of the costs associated packaging
with using reusable packaging outside of a closed-loop Manufacturers responsibility legislation
distribution system. Broad materials policies encouraging reuse

Chep USA in Park Ridge, New Jersey, provides plastic

pallets through a similar service in the United States and
Government mandates
other countries, including Australia, Canada, South Af-
rica, New Zealand, and various European countries. In Government at any level can require producers or ship-
the United States, Chep operates a national pallet rental pers to deliver goods in reusable shipping containers. To
service for grocery manufacturers and distributors, mass facilitate such a mandate, government may also require
merchandisers, warehouse clubs, discount drug stores, that each industry use standardized containers so that
and fresh produce companies. Chep rents pallets to manu- companies can use each others containers interchange-
facturers who deliver goods on Cheps pallets to partici- ably. Standardization simplifies the reuse of packaging
pating distributors. The distributor is responsible for re- in a distribution system by reducing the number of con-
turning the pallets to one of the more than 140 depots tainers any one company must purchase, eliminating the
that Chep operates nationwide. Chep maintains pallets need to haul back empty containers to points of origin,
and helps both manufacturers and distributors track pal- and simplifying the sorting and accounting of individual
lets. Donna Gorman of Cheps Marketing Services De- container types. Government mandates may work best if
partment says that the chief benefits of the system are designed with enough flexibility to encourage other types
lower damage rates for products shipped; quicker deliv- of packaging innovation, besides reuse, that would re-
ery; and elimination of distributors pallet storage costs. duce material use - for example, selecting a different
packaging material or adopting bulk packaging, then
encouraging use of recycled content and recyclability.

v. Policy Options that Promote Reuse

Economic incentives encouraging reuse

D espite the environmental and economic advan-

tages of reusing shipping containers, not all distri-
bution systems easily lend themselves to the efficient use
Government at any level can provide financial incentives
that help industry switch from one-way to reusable con-
tainers. These incentives may include tax credits or low-

22
 Table 3: Expanding Reuse of Shipping Containers:
Challenges and Solutions

OBSTACLE SOLUTION: Industry options SOLUTION: Government options

Large initial capital expense Third-party leasing Low-interest loans, tax credits

Cost of administering system Third-party leasing Mandated standardization

Industry-wide standardization
of containers

Cost of long-distance freight to Industry-wide standardization

return containers of containers

Resistance to changing packaging Cooperative effort Government procurement guidelines

and shipping practices within an industry that favor or require reusable shipping
to work with suppliers containers

Lack of procurement clout on the Cooperative purchasing

part of small business

Lack of storage space for empty Collapsible, nestable, and stackable Financial incentives for establishing
containers containers storage depots, such as loans or
Frequent collection of containers tax credits
Just-in-time delivery
Direct delivery
SOURCE: INFORM

interest loans for container manufacturers, product manu- Manufacturers responsibility legislation
facturers, wholesalers, and retailers converting to reus-
able shipping container systems. Incentives can also take In 1991 Germany passed a packaging ordinance that
the form of grants that provide the capital for companies makes industry financially responsible for its primary,
to pilot a reusable shipping container program, as in the secondary, and transport packaging to the end of the pack-
case of the PCC project. Incentives would ease the way ages life cycles, including the costs of collecting, sort-
toward investing in containers and related handling equip- ing, and recycling packages after they are discarded. The
goal of the ordinance was to shift the cost of managing
ment.
packaging waste from the public sector to private indus-
try.
Government procurement One component of Germanys Packaging Ordinance is
the requirement that manufacturers and distributors take
Government in the United States is the nations largest back transport packaging for reuse and recycling inde-
economic sector, accounting for about 20 percent of the pendent of the public waste management system. The
Gross Domestic Product and employing one in six work-
requirement has led manufacturers and distributors ei-
ers at the federal, state, or local level. Just as Xerox and
ther to arrange for third parties to pick up used packag-
Toyota had the purchasing clout to persuade large sup- ing or to compensate retailers for managing waste based
pliers to switch to reusable shipping containers, govern- on the materials and quantities involved. By adding the
ment can use its considerable purchasing power to re-
cost of waste management to the overall cost of single-
quire suppliers to use reusable shipping containers when
use transport packaging, the ordinance has encouraged
shipping to government-run or government-contracted
shippers of consumer goods and other products to shift
facilities. These may include armed forces installations,
to reusable packaging. Many new reusable packaging
schools, hospitals, correctional facilities, and recreational
systems have been developed for various products, in-
facilities.

23
cluding the IFCO system for fruits and vegetables and has led companies to switch to reusable containers. To
other container systems for fish, medicine, bicycles, fur- cite one example, the John Deere Company in Horicon,
niture, and the general line of consumer products sold in Wisconsin, switched to plastic reusable transport pack-
supermarkets. aging when Wisconsin passed a law banning corrugated
paperboard from landfills and incinerators starting in
1995.49
Broad materials policies Proposals are surfacing in Congress and in state legisla-
tures to expand manufacturers responsibility for prod-
Establishing broad materials policies, such as taxes on
ucts and packages to include the cost of recycling and
raw materials or energy consumption, can give compa-
disposal. As seen in Germany, such legislation can pro-
nies an economic incentive for reducing the environmen-
vide a strong economic incentive for reuse as a source
tal impact of material use. The broad goal of these poli-
reduction measure. Some states also have proposed to
cies is to internalize the environmental costs of an
ban the import of out-of-state waste, which could limit
economic activity so that industry absorbs these costs
manufacturers and municipalities options for sending
and accounts for them in pricing goods and services. Cost
materials to landfills.
internalization can give industry an incentive to adopt
reusable products and packages as one strategy to re- Business may decide to adopt reusable shipping contain-
duce material consumption. ers for a variety of reasons: as a way of boosting effi-
ciency and saving money on packaging and disposal; in
response to customer demand; or in response to govern-
Incentives to Reuse ment mandates or incentive-based policies. Whatever the
motivation, INFORM has found that using reusable ship-
As shown in the case studies in this report, the opportu- ping containers can help manufacturers and agricultural
nity to save money on packaging, waste disposal, and producers improve their bottom lines while lessening the
associated handling costs may be enough of an incentive nations garbage burden.
for some companies to switch to reusable shipping con-
tainers. In other cases, the prospect of legislation that
would restrict their current waste management practices

24
Notes 12. It is conceivable that a single-use container could be
1. Some of the trade journals INFORM reviewed are: developed that would be collapsible, nestable, and
Transportation and Distribution; Modern Materials stackable, but the cost of producing such a container
Engineering; Modern Materials Handling; Packag- for a single use would likely be prohibitive.
ing Magazine; Packaging Digest; Plastics News; 13. Draft article by Lawrence Dronek, marketing com-
Beverage Industry; Beverage World; Resource Re- munications manager of LEWISystems, for Modern
cycling. Materials Handling, April 21, 1992.
2. Switching to reusable shipping containers may not 14. Larry Beck, Drug Company Prescribes Returnable
lead to immediate savings in these areas. This is dis- Shipping Totes, Modern Materials Handling, Feb-
cussed in greater detail later in this report. ruary 1989, pp. 76-77.
3. In New York City, resistance from a baking 15. Dan Milojevich, director of support services, In-N-
companys trucking union has prevented the bakery Out Burger (Baldwin Park, California) at $eeing
from implementing a deposit system for tracking and Green workshop on business waste prevention, spon-
controlling containers that are not returned immedi- sored by US Environmental Protection Agency and
ately to the production facility. Letter from John INFORM, Los Angeles, California, June 8, 1993.
Okun, director, Waste Reduction and Recycling, Long 16. INFORM met with Joe M. Oates, Jr., national sales
Island City Business Development Corporation, June manager for custom products, and Kara M. Balmer,
21, 1994. marketing coordinator at Perstorp Xytec in Tacoma,
4. The Cost to Recycle at a Materials Recovery Facil- Washington, on September 9, 1991.
ity, National Solid Waste Management Association, 17. INFORM visited Xeroxs Webster, New York, facility
Washington, DC, October 1992. on December 7 and 8, 1992, and met with Robert R.
5. 1972 figures: Franklin Associates, Analysis of Trends Vannozzi, packaging commodity team contracting
in Municipal Solid Waste Generation, 1972 to 1987: specialist, and James E. Baxter, Jr., manager of tech-
Final Report, prepared for Procter&Gamble, Brown- nical services. INFORM also visited H.P. Neun Com-
ing Ferris Industries, General Mills, and Sears, Janu- pany, Inc. in Fairport, New York, a private manufac-
ary 1992; 1993 figures: Fibre Box Association, 1993 turer of corrugated and set-up boxes that is also a
Annual Report, and Steve Apotheker OCC Shines third-party contractor that distributes Xeroxs reus-
in All-Star Recycling Role, Resource Recycling, able shipping containers to Xeroxs suppliers. INFORM
February 1994. met with Neuns president, James E. Woods, on De-
6. International Design Guidelines for IBM Packaging cember 7, 1992.
Engineers, International Business Machines Corpo- 18. The Market, New York State Department of Eco-
ration, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1990. nomic Development, Office of Recycling Market De-
7. This report does not explore alternatives to single- velopment, December 1991, Albany, New York.
use pallets, which comprise a significant portion of 19. Supplier Packaging Program (training material for
the waste stream. Xerox suppliers), Xerox Corp., Webster, New York.
8. 250 is a reasonable expectation, according to the 20. James E. Woods, president, H.P. Neun, plant visit,
manufacturers of some reusable shipping containers. Fairport, New York, December 7, 1992.
9. The hypothetical examples in Table 1 do not take into 21. Other sources have indicated greater savings, but ac-
account the huge range of box types, sizes, and ship- cording to Baxter, those figures may include a num-
ping requirements of containers in general use. Nor ber of indirect cost reductions that are harder to quan-
do they take into account the cradle-to-grave envi- tify. According to Benchmark, a quarterly publication
ronmental effects of the entire life-cycle of shipping for Xerox customers, Xerox estimated in 1991 that
containers, including extracting raw materials, pro- the new packaging program, when fully implemented,
cessing, and manufacturing. would save the company $20 million per year.
10. Charles W. Ebling, Integrated Packaging Systemsfor (Benchmark, Summer 1991, p. 6, El Segundo, Cali-
Transportation and Distribution, Marcel Dekker Inc., fornia.) The Corporate Environmental Solutions
New York, NY, 1990. Project at Stanford reported in 1991 that over a five-
year period, Xeroxs $8 million investment to develop
11. Walter F. Friedman and Jerome J. Kipnees, Distribu- the program was expected to generate $80 million in
tion Packaging, Robert E. Krieger Publishing Com- savings. (Corporate Environmental Solutions Project:
pany, Inc., Malabar, Florida, 1977.

25
 Independent Study Project, Professor Robert 36. Interview with S.P. (Sal) Porrazzo, director of envi-
Augsburger, faculty advisor, Stanford Graduate ronmental affairs, Pepsi-Cola, Somers, New York,
School of Business, Stanford, California, June 10, May 28, 1992.
1991.) 37. Porrazzo interview (above).
22. The Market, New York State Department of Eco- 38. Linda B. Smith, manager of environmental affairs,
nomic Development, Office of Recycling Market De- H. E. Butt Grocery Company, written communica-
velopment, December 1991, Albany, New York. tion, June 27, 1994.
23. INFORM visited Toyota USAs plant in Georgetown,
39. Reilly interview (above).
Kentucky, on June 4, 1992, and met with David R.
40. Telephone interview, Ted Brown, environmental af-
McCulloch, specialist in production logistics control.
fairs and promotions manager, Hannaford Brothers,
Additional information on Toyota USA came from
September 16, 1992.
an April 21, 1992, draft article by Lawrence Dronek
of LEWISystems for Modern Materials Handling. 41. Telephone interview, Tim Bernthal, program devel-
oper, Puget Consumers Co-op, July 7, 1992, and
24. Dronek, op. cit.
Produce Waste Reduction Project: Final Report,
25. Letter from John Okun, director, Waste Reduction Tim Bernthal, Seattle, Washington, January 7, 1993.
and Recycling, Long Island City Business Develop-
42. Bernthal interview (above).
ment Corporation, June 21, 1994.
43. Bernthal, Produce Waste Reduction Project, op. cit.
26. Ibid.
44. PCC estimated that the break-even point for the
27. Steve Apotheker, OCC Tomorrow and OCC Yester-
grower was three-and-a-half months. PCCs estimate
day -But What About Today? Resource Recycling,
assumed a $7,800 one-year loan at 12 percent inter-
March 1993.
est; $1.50 to buy each waxed cardboard container;
28. Ibid. $13 to buy each reusable container, which could be
29. Apotheker, Resource Recycling, Feb. 1994, op. cit. used continually over a five-year period; shipments
30. Ibid. of 400 cases per week over a four-month growing
season; a 3 percent rate of loss and a 3 percent rate
31. Franklin Associates, op. cit.
of breakage per year. PCC also assumed that it would
32. Stone Container, the largest producer of container need a starting float of one-and-a-half times as many
board in the United States, planned to test recyclable containers as were shipped each week. Bernthal, Pro-
waxed containers in 1994; Apotheker, Resource Re- duce Waste Reduction Project, op. cit.
cycling, Feb. 1994, op. cit.
45. Brown interview (above).
33. Spencer Hoopes, president and CEO, Perstorp Xytec,
46. Interview with James A. Badami, president, Doms
cited in Shipping Container Markets Slow Growth,
Empty Package Supply, New Paltz, New York, Oc-
Bill Bregar, Plastics News, August 19, 1991.
tober 19, 1993.
34. Interview with Mike Reilly, manager of environmen-
47. Bette K. Fishbein, Germany, Garbage, and the Green
tal, consumer and corporate affairs, Wakefern, Eliza-
Dot: Challenging the Throwaway Society, INFORM,
beth, New Jersey, October 26, 1992.
New York, NY, 1994.
35. Interview with Stewarts Processing Corp. president
48. Interview with Peter B. Zaboji, president and chief
William Dake, vice-president and dairy manager Gary
executive officer, Schoeller International Group,
Dake, vice-president of plant operations Richard
April 13,1994 at INFORM'S office in New York, NY.
Dunn, and public affairs director Susan Law Dake at
Stewarts headquarters, Saratoga Springs, New York, 49. Transport Packaging and the Environment 1993:
December 4, 1991. State Recycling Laws Update, Raymond Commu-
nications, Riverdale, Maryland, September 1993.

26
Company Contacts

Doms Empty Package Supply, Inc. Perstorp Xytec Inc.

87 So. Ohioville Road P.O. Box 99057
New Paltz, NY 12561 Tacoma, Washington 98499
Contact: James A Badami, President Contact: Ron Springer, National Sales Manager
Phone: (914) 883-6757 Phone: (800) 423-3221

H.P. Neun Co., Inc. Puget Consumers Co-op

75 North Main Street 4201 Roosevelt Way N.E.
Fairport, New York 14450 Seattle, Washington 98 105
Contact: James E. Woods, President Contact: Tim Bernthal, Program Developer
Phone: (716) 388-1360 Phone: (206) 547- 1222

H.E. Butt Grocery Company Schoeller International Group

4839 Space Center Drive Heilmannstrasse 1
San Antonio, Texas 78218 81479 Munich, Germany
Contact: Linda B. Smith, Manager of Contact: Peter B. Zaboji, President and Chief
Environmental Affairs Executive Officer
Phone: (210) 662-5414 Phone: 01l-49-89-79 20 35

LEWISystems Wakefern Food Corporation

128 Hospital Drive 33 Northtield Avenue
PO Box 508 Edison, New Jersey 08818
Watertown, Wisconsin 53094-0508 Contact: Michael Reilly, Manager of
Contact: Mike Curran Environmental, Consumer and Corporate Affairs
Phone: (414) 262-5000 Phone: (908) 906-5929

Long Island City Development Corporation

29- 11 Queens Plaza North
Long Island City, New York 11101
Contact: John Okun, Director of Waste Reduction
and Recycling
Phone: (718) 786-5300

27
About the Author

David Saphire is a research associate in INFORM'S Sustainable Products and Practices Program, where he investigates
municipal, institutional, and business waste prevention initiatives. He has presented workshops and testimony on waste
prevention for solid waste planners, government officials, citizens groups, and business executives.
He is co-author of INFORM'S landmark report, Burning Garbage in the US: Practice vs. State of the Art, and is the
author of Case Reopened: Reassessing Refillable Bottles, which analyzes the opportunities and obstacles for reducing
the environmental impact of packaging by refilling beverage bottles.
Mr. Saphire received a B.A. in environmental studies from the State University of New York at Binghamton. He has
been a researcher at INFORM since 1989.

28
Publications and Membership Cutting Chemical Wastes: What 29 Organic Chemical
Plants Are Doing to Reduce Hazardous Wastes (David J.
Sarokin, Warren R. Muir, Ph.D., Catherine G. Miller,
Sustainable Products and Practices: Ph.D., and Sebastian R. Sperber), 1986,548 pp., $47.50.
Selected Publications
Case Reopened: Reassessing Refillable Bottles (David
Saphire), 1994, $25. Energy and Air Quality
Germany, Garbage, and the Green Dot: Challenging the Paving the Way to Natural Gas Vehicles (James S. Can-
Throwaway Society (Bette K. Fishbein), 1994, 216 pp., non), 1993, 192 pp., $25.
$25.
Making Less Garbage: A Planning Guide for Communi- Other INFORM Publications
ties (Bette K. Fishbein and Caroline Gelb), 1993, 192
pp., $30. For a complete publications list, including materials on
land and water conservation and a quarterly newsletter,
Business Recycling Manual (copublished with Recourse or for more information, call or write to INFORM.
Systems, Inc.), 1991, 202 pp., $42.50.
Burning Garbage in the US: Practice vs. State of the Art
(Marjorie J. Clarke, Maarten de Kadt, Ph.D., and David
Saphire), 1991,288 pp., $47. Sales Information
Reducing Office Paper Waste (Robert Graff and Bette
Fishbein), 1991, 28 pp., $15.
Payment
Garbage Management in Japan: Leading the Way (Allen
Hershkowitz, Ph.D., and Eugene Salerni, Ph.D.), 1987, Payment, including shipping and handling charges, must
152 pp., $5. be made in US funds drawn on a US bank and must ac-
company all orders. Please make checks payable to
INFORM and mail to:
Chemical Hazards Prevention: INFORM, Inc.
Selected Publications 120 Wall Street
New York, NY 10005-4001
Stirring Up Innovation: Environmental Improvements in
Paints and Adhesives (John Young, Linda Ambrose, and Please include a street address; UPS cannot deliver to a
Lois Lobo) 1994, 128 pp., $25. box number
Preventing Industrial Toxic Hazards: A Guide for Com-
munities (Marian Wise and Lauren Kenworthy), 1993, Shipping Fees
208 pp., $25. United States: Add $3 for first book + $1 for each
Environmental Dividends: Cutting More Chemical additional book. (4th class delivery;
Wastes (Mark H. Dorfman, Warren R. Muir, Ph.D., and allow 4-6 weeks)
Catherine G. Miller, Ph.D.), 1992,288 pp., $75. Canada: Add $5 for first book + $3 each
Tackling Toxics in Everyday Products: A Directory of additional book.
Organizations (Nancy Lilienthal, Michele Ascione, and Foreign/surface: Add $8 for first book +$4 each
Adam Flint), 1992, 192 pp., $19.95. additional book.
Toward a More Informed Public: Recommendations for Foreign/airmail: Add $20 for first book + $10
Improving the Toxics Release Inventory (Jacqueline B. each additional book.
Courteau and Nancy Lilienthal), 1991, 26 pp., $10.
Outside the US: Allow additional shipping time.
Preventing Pollution Through Technical Assistance: One
States Experience (Mark H. Dorfman and John Riggio), Priority shipping is higher; please call for charges.
1990, 72 pp., $15. (more...)

29
Discount Policy Membership
Booksellers: 20% on l-4 copies of same title; 30% on Individuals provide an important source of support to
5 or more copies of same title INFORM and receive the following benefits:

General bulk: 20% on 5 or more copies of same title Member ($25): A one-year subscription to INFORM Re-
ports, INFORM's quarterly newsletter.
Students with ID; public interest and community
groups with nonprofit federal ID: Friend ($50): A one-year subscription to INFORM Re-
Price: ports and advance notice of new publications.
Books under $10: No discount
Contributor ($100): Friends benefits, plus a 10% dis-
Books $1O-$25: $10 count on new INFORM studies.
Books $25 and up: $15
Supporter ($250): Friends benefits, plus a 20% discount
Government, upon request: on new INFORM studies.
Books $45 and under No discount
Books over $45 $45 Donor ($500): Friends benefits, plus a 30% discount
on new INFORM studies.
Associate ($1000): Friends benefits, plus a complimen-
Returns tary copy of new INFORM studies.
Booksellers may return books, in saleable condition, for Benefactor ($5000): Friends benefits, plus a compli-
full credit or cash refund up to 6 months from date of mentary copy of new INFORM studies.
invoice. Books must be returned prepaid and include a
copy of the invoice or packing list showing invoice num-
ber, date, list price, and original discount. All contributions are tax deductible.

30
INFORM Board of Directors

Charles A. Moran, Chair Kenneth F. Mountcastle, Jr.

President Senior Vice President
Government Securities Clearing Corporation Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.

KiKu Hoagland Hanes, Vice Chair Margaret Murphy

Vice President Shearman & Sterling
The Conservation Fund
Carol R. Noyes
Victor G. Alicea, Ph.D.
President S. Bruce Smart, Jr.
Boricua College Senior Counselor
World Resources Institute
Paul A. Brooke
Managing Director Frank T. Thoelen
Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc. Partner
Arthur Andersen & Co.
Christopher J. Daggett
Managing Director Grant P. Thompson
William E. Simon & Sons, Inc. Executive Director
Libraries for the Future
William Graves
Editor Joanna D. Underwood
National Geographic Magazine President
INFORM, Inc.
C. Howard Hardesty, Jr.
Andrews & Kurth Howard Wolpe
Distinguished Visiting Professor of Public Policy, Uni-
Martin Krasney versity of Michigan Institute of Public Policy Studies
President Distinguished Msiting Professor of Political Science,
The Coalition for the Presidio Pacific Center Western Michigan University

Stephen B. Land
Howard, Darby & Levin

Philip J. Landrigan, M.D.

Ethel H. Wise Professor of Community Medicine
Chairman, Department of Community Medicine
The Mount Sinai Medical Center
 INFORM
Of all the reports I have read on packaging over the years, I can honestly say I learned the most from this
one. Delivering the Goods is a timely, thorough, and thoroughly readable examination of reuse potential in
an often overlooked packaging category. It provides a balanced review of reusable shipping container sys-
tems, their appropriateness for certain businesses and manufacturers, and their economic benefits.

Janet Matthews
Program Director
New York State Legislative Commission on Solid Waste Management

Delivering the Goods is a comprehensive report which provides an industry perspective and a good over-
view of the promise and challenges of employing reusable shipping containers. Case studies and and ex-
amples from leading businesses complement the industry perspective.

Abhay Bhushan
Manager, Environmental Leadership Programs
Xerox Corporation

Reusable shipping containers have the potential to significantly reduce muncipal solid waste generation.
INFORMs report provides an excellent overview of the environmental and economic benefits of reusable
shipping containers and offers practical advice to companies interested in using these containers.

Edgar Miller
Director of Policy and Programs
National Recycling Coalition