How Cascade Packaging Recovered $2.3M and Diverted 1.6M Cans in Year One

When Cascade Packaging's lean-six-sigma team first pulled a full week of end-of-line residual data off their two flagship lines, they expected the 12–13% figure the industry trade press had been publishing since 2024.

They measured 15.1%.

That single number — three points above the highest published benchmark for personal-care aerosol — set off a chain reaction across operations, finance, and compliance that ended in FullCan's first multi-line personal-care deployment on the West Coast.

The Challenge

Cascade runs two high-speed fill lines at their Portland facility — both producing personal-care and household-product aerosols in the 200–340 cans-per-minute range. Combined output across both lines sits near 90 million cans per year, with a SKU mix that runs heavily through one specialty valve platform their procurement team had standardized in 2023.

The 15.1% residual figure didn't surprise the line engineers. It surprised the controller's office.

> "We had a marginal-waste line on our P&L that'd been written off as cost-of-quality for years," said Cascade's Director of Manufacturing Finance. "What we didn't know was the SKU-level variance underneath that line. Once we measured residual by SKU, we found personal-care SKUs averaging 16.4% and household-product SKUs closer to 11%. That spread was a seven-figure gap on a number we'd been treating as a rounding error."

Three structural issues sat underneath the number:

No SKU-level residual reporting. Cascade's QA process validated fill weight, pressure, and valve function within spec. End-of-line residual — the share of acceptable cans still holding recoverable product that would leave the facility as waste — wasn't a tracked metric. It was a back-of-napkin estimate baked into a single waste-line on the income statement.

Disposal exposure was compounding. Oregon's EPR program had added a new fee tier in 2025, and Cascade's waste hauling contract had been renegotiated twice in eighteen months. The disposal-fee line on the P&L was compounding at a rate that outpaced net revenue growth — a profile the board had flagged on the Q3 2025 review.

Retrofits had been declined. The engineering team had evaluated a full line-replacement plus reclaim-loop option in late 2024. Combined capex ran north of $11M once changeover windows and validated fill-loss curves were priced in. The board declined. Cascade needed a recovery path that worked with the equipment they already had running.

The Solution

FullCan's reclamation cell integrates upstream of the existing waste stream — no line teardown, no valve modification, no changeover window. The Cascade pilot installation took nine days across one planned maintenance weekend and three overnight cutovers. Total installation cost: $1.6M.

The fit landed cleanly because of a procurement decision Cascade's VP of Supply Chain had made three years earlier: valve consolidation. Cascade had moved to a single valve platform across both lines, with a single supplier contract and a single set of trim SKUs. That one piece of standardization collapsed integration scope from "tune per SKU" to "tune per valve spec." Install time followed.

Three operating parameters drove the year-one numbers:

- Reclaim loop targeting — The system prioritizes high-residual SKUs first. Personal-care SKUs running above 15% baseline residual got pulled into the high-priority reclaim queue on every shift cycle; lower-residual SKUs cycled in based on line availability. - End-of-line pairing — The FullCan reclaim cell runs in parallel with Cascade's existing quality pass, not after it. Recoverable product is split off before disposal routing rather than after — capturing material that would otherwise leave the facility as waste. - Monthly SKU-level residual reporting — Every month, the operations team receives a per-SKU residual report pulled directly from the reclaim cell instrumentation. The data feeds both production scheduling (which SKUs to schedule against the reclaim cell) and finance (true cost-of-goods).

The reporting piece again turned out to matter as much as the recovery hardware. The reclaim cell recovered product; the reporting changed decisions about which products to optimize first.

The Results

Year-one findings from the Cascade deployment:

- $2.3M in product value recovered — across eleven months of operation, the reclaim cell recovered trapped product equivalent to roughly 7.2% of input volume across both lines, with the worst-performing personal-care SKUs (the ones running 16.4% residual at baseline) exceeding 8.5% recovery on a sustained basis. - 42% reduction in disposal fees — direct consequence of routing recoverable cans off the waste stream before they hit the hauler contract. Combined with the Oregon EPR fee tier change, disposal savings alone cleared $310K. - 1.6M cans diverted from the waste stream — absolute count of cans that the reclaim cell kept out of the disposal path over the eleven-month window. Mapped against the vendor's lifecycle-assessment data, the diversion figure eliminated roughly 47 metric tons of landfilled steel and propellant. - Measured residual dropped from 15.1% to 8.4% — reclaim aside, the monthly SKU-level data triggered process changes on two specific personal-care SKUs (propellant ratio tuning and valve trim adjustment) that alone closed four points of residual loss. - 2 production lines modified — zero. The FullCan cell integrated with both lines without modification to fill heads, valve assemblies, or line control systems. - No safety incidents, no line-downtime variance — operations-grade deployment metrics held steady throughout the pilot and scaled run.

The line item that surprised the finance team most: an avoided $440K in incremental EPR exposure that would have hit Cascade's Oregon-bound household-product SKUs in 2026, based on the residual improvement measured through the deployment.

> "We went into this thinking the headline was going to be the recovery dollars. It was. But the reporting was the actual unlock — it gave procurement a number to negotiate valve trim against, gave finance a number to renegotiate the hauling contract against, and gave us an EPR number we could put on a board slide. Three different functions got a tool out of the same data stream."

Cascade's year-one numbers were pulled from their line-level instrumentation and validated against the third-party waste hauling contract over the same window. The 7.2% recovery figure sits above the 5–8% recovery range that early FullCan deployments have produced across the personal-care and household-product categories since 2025.

Want results like Cascade?

Talk to the FullCan team about your operation. We'll walk you through the line-side install, payback window, and a side-by-side comparison with your current fill-loss rate — based on your volume and SKU mix.

Talk to FullCan →