Policy Forum on ISWM Proceedings_FINAL

8/6/2019 Policy Forum on ISWM Proceedings_FINAL

1/103


2/103


3/103


4/103

L IST OF T ABLES

Table 1. Outputs of Workshop 1 - Facilitating LGU Compliance with WasteDiversion........................................................................................................... 8

Table 2. Outputs of Workshop 2 - Facilitating the closure and rehabilitation of open dumps and the establishment of SLF ..................................................... 10

Table 3. ESWM Policy Forum Consolidated Outputs.................................................. 10

L IST OF ANNEXES

Annex C-1 - Closure, Post-Closure and Remediation Management of DumpsitesAnnex C-2 - Closure, Rehabilitation and After Use of Open and Controlled DumpsAnnex C-3 - Guidelines on Waste Disposal FacilitiesAnnex D - Waste DiversionAnnex E - Assessment of Existing Modes of CompostingAnnex F-1 - Clustering for SWM FacilitiesAnnex F-2 - Waste Disposal Site IdentificationAnnex G - What in the World is Palisam MRFAnnex H-1 - Fast Tracking SLF Site and Identification and AssessmentAnnex H-2 - Inventory of Solid Waste Management FacilitiesAnnex H-3 - List of Proposed SLF SitesAnnex H-4 - Proposed Level of Sanitary Landfill SystemAnnex I - Guidelines on the 10-Year Solid Waste Management PlanAnnex J - ESWM Plan Preparation Evaluation and Approval EcoGov Process


5/103

ACRONYMS

C/MLGU - City/Municipality Local Government UnitDA - Department of AgricultureDENR - Department of Environment and Natural ResourcesDepEd - Department of EducationDILG - Department of the Interior and Local GovernmentDOH - Department of HealthDOST - Department of Science and TechnologyDTI - Department of Trade and IndustryEcoGov - The Philippine Environmental Governance ProjectEMB-ARMM - Environmental Management Bureau-Autonomous Region in Muslim

MindanaoESWM - Ecological Solid Waste ManagementIEC - Information, Education and CommunicationIRR - Implementing Rules and RegulationsISWM - Integrated Solid Waste ManagementKRA - Key Result AreaLGU - Local Government UnitsLMP - League of Municipality of the PhilippinesMGB - Mines and Geosciences BureauMRF - Materials Recovery FacilityNGO - Non-Government OrganizationNSWMC - National Solid Waste Management CommissionPIA - Philippine Information AgencyRA - Republic ActSLF - Sanitary LandfillSWAPP - Solid Waste Management Association of the PhilippinesSWM - Solid Waste ManagementTESDA - Technical Education and Skills Development AuthorityUSAID - United States Agency for International Development


6/103


7/103

P OLICY FORUM ON ISWM: FACILITATING COMPLIANCE WITH RA 9003Continuing Education Center (CEC), UPLB

March 1-2, 2005

HIGHLIGHTS

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

The passage of RA 9003, the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 and itsimplementing rules and regulations (IRR) provides the legal spur for the propermanagement of the countrys solid wastes. However, though many local governmentunits (LGUs) are committed to comply with this laws requirements, the implementationof this law has been slow in the overwhelming majority of the countrys more than 1,600LGUs.

LGUs and other stakeholders attribute this poor compliance record to many factors-biophysical, technical, financial and institutional. For instance, most LGUs claim thatthey do not have adequate technical capability to comply with the requirements for siteselection, design, establishment and operation of solid waste management (SWM)facilities. Majority of LGUs also lack the required financial resources to pay for thetechnical assistance or fund the process of establishing, operating and maintaining aneffective solid waste management facility. While the National Solid Waste ManagementCommission (NSWMC) have made solid accomplishments over the years, some sectors

point to the inadequacy or ambiguity of existing guidelines and procedures for complyingwith the ecological solid waste management law and its IRR.

This Policy Forum and Workshop was conducted to help scope the issues and determineneeded changes in the policy and institutional environment in order to facilitate thecompliance of LGUs with the ecological solid waste management law. Specifically, thePolicy Forum aimed to provide a venue for both policy makers and major stakeholders tosit down together in order to: a) share field-based experiences on ISWM implementation,

which can input into national policy advocacy and legislative initiatives, b) discuss andrefine proposed guidelines and procedures for fast-tracking compliance with specificrequirements of RA 9003 and its IRR, and c) reach a consensus on additional policy andinstitutional support needed for addressing key outstanding concerns and moving forwardwith RA 9003 implementation.


8/103

identified issues and gaps. It covered three themes representing most pressing issuesconcerning LGU compliance with RA 9003:

Theme 1: Facilitating compliance with waste diversionTheme 2. Facilitating site identification and clustering of LGUs for common waste

management facilityTheme 3. Strengthening the institutional system for the preparation, evaluation and

approval of ISWM Plans

Each workshop was followed by results presentation and an open forum. There weredaily synthesis of the issues, analyses and recommendations.

A short 1.5- hour visit to the ecological waste management site of the municipality of LosBaos was conducted in the afternoon of the first day (March 1) of the Forum. This visitenabled the participants to have a glimpse of the on-going composting and wasterecovery projects of Los Baos. The coordinator of the municipalitys solid wastemanagement program briefed the participants about their ISWM program.

The program for the forum is presented in Annex A.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 50 key participants from the National Solid Waste Management Commission(NSWMC), NSWMC Secretariat, Local Government Units (LGUs), Solid WasteManagement Association of the Philippine (SWAPP), House of Representatives, UnitedStates Agency for International Development (USAID), EcoGov 2 Project, DENRIntegrated Solid Waste Management (ISWM) Regional Coordinators, private sector, andEMB-ARMM attended the forum (Annex B).

PLENARY INPUTS

A total of eight plenary presentations were. The topics, resource persons, and reactors areas follows:


9/103

Presentation 1. Guidelines on closure and rehabilitation of open and controlleddumps and the establishment, operation and maintenance of

sanitary landfill facility (Annex C)

Presentor: Dir. Albert Magalang, NSWMC SecretariatReactors: Mr. Joulan Aralar (LMP), Ms. (SWAPP), Mayor

John Bagasao (Bayombong)

Presentation 2. Measurement of waste diversion at end-of-pipe and method forclosure and rehabilitation of open and controlled dumps

(Annex D)

Presentor: Dr. Victor Luis, EcoGov ProjectReactor: Ms. Psyche Sucaldito (Tacurong City)

Presentation 3. Assessment of existing modes of composting (Annex E)

Presentor: Dr. Jun Abrigo, EcoGov ProjectReactor: Ms. Celia Marquez (SWAPP)

T HEME 2: Facilitating site identification and clustering of LGUs for commonwaste management facility (Day 2)

Presentation 4: Guidelines and updates on waste disposal site identificationand LGU clustering for common waste facilities (Annex F)

Presentor: Dir. Albert Magalang, NSWMC SecretariatReactor: Mr. Joulan Aralar (LMP)

Presentation 5: PaliSam experience on ISWM clustering (Annex G)

Presentor: Mr. Mario Marcial, PaLiSam Community MRF,Inc.

Reactor: Mr. Eddy Tiongson (League of Barangays of thePhilippines)

Presentation 6. Fast tracking of SLF Site Identification and Assessment(Annex H) Presentor. Mr. Reynar Rollan, EcoGov Project


10/103

Reactor: Ms. Delia Biel (Isabela City)

Presentation 8: Recommendations for improving the preparation, evaluationand approval of ISWM Plans (Annex J) Presentor: Dr. Victor Luis, EcoGov ProjectReactor: NSWMC

WORKSHOP

Two concurrent workshops were held during the first day of the Forum. The summarizedoutputs of these workshops are found in Tables 1 and 2 below .

Table 1. Outputs of Workshop 1 - Facilitating LGU Compliance with WasteDiversion

Issues/Concern RecommendationsObjective of composting how do we frame this as anissue; what are our recommendations?

not as so much as revenue generation but to address morethan 50% of solid waste in an ecological manner;

encourage urban gardening vegetable & flower;segregation at source will eliminate contamination such asheavy metals;

make biodegradables as raw materials to produce auseful/environment friendly product;

reduction of SW residue handling/mgmt cost comply with RA9003 convert biodegradable waste component into usable input

for ornamental gardening; enhancement of backyard/local food production; savings from disposal cost (as an objective); reduce waste disposed at the disposal facility; application target (market) farm & plantation food;

flower and plants/gardens; export; Recommendations: make composting as simple as possible

guidelines and earning will be addressed later; come up with clear guidelines on utilization of compost

product;

Options on Composting how do we achieve economies of l d h d l d


11/103

Issues/Concern Recommendations recommend what is most economical and doable for a

city/municipality; for information to be made available; NSWMC to set standard or methods for composting tobe adopted;

Municipality/City MRF should be responsible for 1)residual waste of barangays, 2)biodegradable waste thatcant be addressed by barangays, 3) recyclables thatcannot be sold by barangays

MRF 1) for rural barangays recommend backyardcomposting; b) for urban barangays may use in-vessel& activators for composting

On composting a) for rural bgys composting shouldbe done at the Barangay level., b) cluster of bgys orcentral municipal/city for urban bgys if impractical forthe barangays

Proper segregation at source i.e., segregation of special waste household level;

Conduct a capability building program/training,particularly on composting processes/operations and itsmaintenance (involve DA, DOST, NGOs like MotherEarth Foundation, Recycling Movement of thePhilippines, etc.) (cautioning agencies to be as simpleand make use of available indigenous resources and notimpose a particular technology);

Presentation of technology options for composting toLGUs (cite pros and cons) as an information material;

Institutionalize composting (whichever method is foundto be most effective and scale it up)Diversion

Measurement (where?, how?,by whom?, guidelines; whatmethod to adopt );

Issue on segregation(attitudinal/behavioral);

MRFs site selection, socialacceptability; market forrecyclables

MRFs to house both recyclables and residuals includingcomposting; need not be big, not to necessarily put upnew structures;

Measurement: recommend to adopt the method of developed by EcoGov EOP measurement at thecity/municipal level; need to establish a standard develop the model that will become the guidelines;baseline and end-line waste diversion measurement;

Clear guidelines as to the function of C/MLGU andbarangays (role clarification)

How can DENR validate the figures on wastegeneration & diversion submitted by LGUs?(useindicators)


12/103

Issues/Concern Recommendations Contracting for highly specialized technical requirement

by specific city/municipality i.e., design of landfill,composting, engineering equipment.

Table 2. Outputs of Workshop 2 - Facilitating the closure and rehabilitation of open dumps and the establishment of SLFIssues Recommendations

No technical guidelines onclosure of open dumps;guidelines inadequate forcontrolled dumps

e.g., Payatas- need to evaluatethe hazard/risk factors (siteassessment prior to closure)Who is going to pay for risk

assessment?

Develop and communicate guidelines that build on existingguide for SLF and controlled dumps Substitute some aspects, e.g., use rice hull for daily soil

cover plus combination of doable/practical substitutes Work on doables: fencing , signage, soil cover, site isolation

etc

Manpower Financialconstraints

Identify potential areas (not sites ) to reduce costs Waive assessment charges Cluster/synchronize assessment Firm up land use plans

Weak/lack of timelyenforcement of law- Lack of manpower

- Inadequate mechanism forenforcing/monitoringdeadlines

Provide additional manpower and allocate budget for ESWM(both LGUs and national agencies)

CONSOLIDATED OUTPUTS

Table 3 below shows the consolidated outputs of the various open forums and workshops held.

Table 3. ESWM Policy Forum Consolidated Outputs Issues Policy Recommendations


13/103

Issues Policy Recommendations Centralized composting for targeted sources

(markets/commercial establishments) Segregate at source.

Methodology NSWMC to promote models for composting (may makeuse of Mother Earth model communities VCD);

Technology should be simple and appropriate to the scale(household or centralized).

Heavy metals/ othercontaminants

Segregate-at-source materials containing toxics and heavymetals;

Compost from mixed waste (whether from markets orhouseholds) or suspected to contain toxics/ HM should notbe used for food crops.

Selling compost (fromlarge-scale/ centralizedoperations)

Mandatory testing for toxics/ HM Labeling of source, quality monitoring of quality by DA

Waste Diversion

Strategy

Segregation at source (household, market, commercial) biodegradables separated out Barangay.-level collection and segregation at MRF

recyclables separated out Municipality collects residuals from MRFs Mandate that SLF only accept residuals/ provide penalty

for haulerMeasuring diversion Commission to prescribe a standard process for measuring

waste diversion Standard may be quantitative and/or qualitative depending

on appropriateness Simple qualitative indicators to be promoted at barangay.

Level (is there an MRF? household/sitio/barangaycomposting? System for collecting/ selling recyclables?)

Quantitative measures limited to municipal/city levelmonitoring (both on-site/end-of-pipe and baseline/endlinedata gathering).

Simple, inexpensive, indirect estimates may be allowed(e.g., survey of waste generating sectors; monitoringnumber of trucks delivering residuals to disposal facilities)conditioned on 100% segregation and collection

Post-Closure Management of Open/Controlled Dumps


14/103

Issues Policy Recommendations

medium-term- as new site for development)

Immediately doableactions

Fencing, signage and security Immediate stop to illegal dumping (closure) Covering Leachate containment (where possible) Diversion drainage Greening or planting trees, slope stabilization, as

appropriate

Inter-Agency Concerns

IEC involve DENR, DepEd, DTI (on non-envi packaging),DOST, TESDA, DOH, DA PIA in the ESWM program

Agency funding reflect in agency budget (allocate) the needed support forthe ESWM program

tap CDF of legislators

Site Identification, Clustering and Assessment

LGU Capability

Re: meeting the deadline: make SLF optional providedthere is very strict compliance and monitoring that onlyresidual wastes are disposed of (requires amendment of thelaw) [staged compliance]

Synchronizing EMB,MGB and LGU efforts(how to get interagencyand LGU cooperation)

Review drafted memo circular on siting procedures; issue ageneral Administrative Circular (Office of the Secretary)consolidating all administrative guidelines on EMB-MGB-LGU coordination/cooperation in site selection

Provide training on evaluation of SLF design to regionaloffices;

Include in the GPOA and KRAs/ MFOs of MGB and EMBthe targeting of all SLF assessment (as opposed to only afew) during the preparation of work and financial plans of these agencies;

Finance /Costing Include in Administrative Circular a provision on feescharged by MGB and EMB (on one hand, DENR shouldnot charge because it is their regular duty; on the other

hand some LGUs are willing to pay)Use of Available Data Conduct comprehensive review of existing technical data

(including maps) and make these available to LGUs;Lack/Absence of SuitableSites

Incentives for clustering Separate containment area for hospital and hazardous

wastes; provide guideline on the design of special area for


15/103

Issues Policy Recommendations

Preparation of ESWM Plans

Content/ outline features Some portions very difficult to complete because theserequire data not currently available or technicalinformation not obtainable with current capability (half of the submitted plans may be returned for being incomplete)

IEC/ training of LGUs distribute step-by-step modules, handouts / modelordinances (already prepared by NSWMC but do not reachLGUs)

consider EcoGov annotated outline (and others) asaccepted method technical training on waste characterization, etc. standardize training protocols (currently each Region has

different style) access to model ESWM Plans (e.g. Ecogov assisted) to

guide other LGUsPost-training/ actualplanning process

procedure should be simple enough for LGU staff to do (noneed for consultants)

already include DENR field staff in the planning process,reduces time for validation and approval later on

partnership with Leagues to get support for sharing costs create TWG assisting the local boards, create LGU ENROs

Deadline for submissionof plans

commission to set deadline

ESWM Approval Process

Hierarchy of approval passes through EMB regional office, but not throughProvincial SWM Board (which may not exist yet) copysubmitted to Province

[information from DILG: 98% compliance with creation of provincial boards, but no info whether these are functional;need for updating and validation circular issued toreconstitute boards]

Fast-track approval delegate review (validation?) to Regions / Commission

makes ministerial approval (but consider limited capacityof Regional offices)

Feedback/ remand of incomplete plans

participatory review (immediate feedback)


16/103


17/103

Annexes


18/103


19/103

Annex APROGRAM OF ACTIVITIES

Day/Time Activity In-Charge

Day 1 ( March 1, 2005)9:00-10:00 AM Registration NSWMC/EcoGov

National Anthem Ms. Sally AguinaldoEcoGov

Opening Prayer Mr. Eddy TiongsonLeague of Barangays of the

Philippines Opening Message Dir. Albert MagalangNSWMC Secretariat

Objectives and Expected Outputs of thePolicy Forum

Dir. Albert MagalangNSWMC Secretariat

10:01-10:30

Introduction of Participants

Theme 1. Facilitating compliance with waste diversion, the closure and rehabilitation of opendumps and establishment, operation and maintenance of Sanitary Landfill Facility

Over-all Facilitator: Atty. James Kho (EcoGov) 10:31- 11:00

11:00-11:10

Presentation 1. Guidelines on closureand rehabilitation of open and controlleddumps and the establishment, operationand maintenance of sanitary landfillfacility

Reaction

Presentor:Dir. Albert MagalangNSWMC Secretariat

Reactors: LMP, SWAPP,Mayor John Bagasao(Bayombong)

11:11-11:40

11:41-11:50

Presentation 2. Measurement of wastediversion at end-of-pipe and method forclosure and rehabilitation of open andcontrolled dumps

Reaction

Presentor:Dr. Victor LuisEcoGov Project

Reactor: Ms. PsycheSucaldito (Tacurong City)

11:50:12:10

12:10-12:20

Presentation 3. Assessment of existingmodes of composting

Reaction

Presentor:Dr. Jun AbrigoEcoGov Project

Reactors: BarangayLeague, SWAPP, NSWMC

12:21-12:45 Open Forum EcoGov


20/103


James KhoDocumentor: Ms. SallyAguinaldo

Workshop 2: Facilitating the closure andrehabilitation of open dumps and theestablishment, operation andmaintenance of sanitary landfill facility(1.5 hours)

Facilitator: Mr. Ed QueblatinResource Persons: Dr.Luis, Atty. Pollisco, R.RollanDocumentor: Ms. ZitaToribio

3:01-3:103:11-3:55

3:55-4:00

Workshop Results PresentationOpen Forum

Day 1 Synthesis

Facilitator: Atty. James Kho

EcoGov4:00-5:00 Guided visit to the Los Baos Ecological

Waste Management SiteLos Baos Municipality

6:30 Dinner

Presentation on EcoGov 2 Projects

method for waste characterization andmeasurement of waste diversion

Dr. Ernesto S. Guiang

Day 2 (March 2, 2005) 8:00-8:10 AM Recap EcoGovTheme 2: Facilitating site identification and clustering of LGUs for common waste management

facilityOver-all Facilitator: Ms. Rachel Aquino (EcoGov Project)

8:11- 8:40

8:41-8:50

Presentation 4: Guidelines and updateson waste disposal site identification and

LGU clustering for common wastefacilities

Reaction

Presentor:Dir. Albert Magalang

NSWMC Secretariat

Reactor: Mr. Joulan Aralar(LMP)

8:51-9:10

9:11-9:20

Presentation 5: PaliSam experience onISWM clustering

Reaction

Presentor:Mr. Mario Marcial, PaLiSamCommunity MRF, Inc.

Reactor: Mr. EddyTiongson (BarangayLeague of the Philippines)

9:21: 9:50 Presentation 6 . Fast tracking of SLF Site Identification and Assessment

Presentation 6 . Fast tracking of SLF Site Identification and A


21/103


Theme 3. Strengthening the institutional system for the preparation, evaluation and approval ofISWM Plans

Over-all Facilitator- Mr. Ed Queblatin (EcoGov Project)10:21-11:40

11:41-12:00

Presentation 7: Existing system andguidelines in the preparation, evaluationand approval of ISWM Plans

Reaction

Presentor:Dir. Albert MagalangNSWMC Secretariat

Reactor: Ms. Delia Biel(Isabela City)

12:01-1:00 Lunch BreakVideo Presentation (Mother EarthESWM project)

1:01-2:20

2:21-2:30

Presentation 8: Recommendations forimproving the preparation, evaluationand approval of ISWM Plans

Reaction

Dr. Victor LuisEcoGov Project

Reactors: NSWMC2:31-2:50 Open Forum Mr. Ed Queblatin

Moderator2:50-3:15 Over-all Forum Synthesis and Next

StepsDr. Victor Luis (EcoGov)

Reaction from the Participants Mr. Tony ChiongNSWMC-Recycling Industry

Closing Remarks Dir. Albert MagalangNSWMC Secretariat


22/103


23/103

Annex BLIST OF PARTICIPANTS

Name Office/ Designation Address Contact Number/ email1. Ms. Celia Marquez,

SWAPP SecretariatTraining Coordinator,SWAPP

U 6-9 Citiland 898 Sen. Gil PuyatAve., Makati, MM.

Tel. 632-830-0005;[email protected] (c/o NSWMC)

2. Atty. Dilbert Quetulio Committee on Ecology,Phil Congress

02-9315001 loc. 713602-9315346 T/F

3. Dr. Desiree Narvaez NSWMC, DOH 09174120316;[email protected]

4. Ms. Elsie Encarnacion NSWMC-MMDA c/o NSWMC5. Ms. Sonia Mendoza NSWMC-NGO-Mother

Earth647-1143; 09209068809;[email protected]

6. Joulan Aralar NSWMC- League ofMunicipalities of thePhilippines

265 Ermin GarciaSt., Cubao QC

02-9135737; 0917691-4712; [email protected]

7. Mr. Edward Templonuevo NSWMC- DILG BLGD8. Mr. Eddy Tiongson League of Barangays of

the Philippines Dir. ForExternal Affairs

63204096320710-12; 09176217714;[email protected]

9. Mr. Tony Chiong NSWMC- RecyclingIndustry

c/o NSWMC

10. Mr. Alfredo Chan NSWMC Manufacturingand Packaging Industry

02845-09-50; 09175311893

11. Dr. Wilfredo Sanidad NSWMC Department ofAgriculture

BSWM, SRDCBldg., cor. VisayasAve, Elliptical Rd.,Diliman, Q.C.

02-923-0459; 09198839391

12. Mayor John SeverinoBagasao

Bayombong, NuevaVizcaya

Municipal Hall,Bayombong, NV

078-321-2113; 321-2113

13. Leozardo Pantua Exec Asst./ MENRO Los Baos,Laguna

049-5360050; 09179340857

14. Psyche Sucaldito Councilor, TacurongCity, Sultan Kudarat

City Hall,Tacurong City

064-200-4941; 09194234387;[email protected]

15. Eduardo Halasan CPDC and Co-Chairman, ISWM TWGIsabela City

City Hall Complex,Isabela City,Basilan

09162726185

16. Mr. Albert Magalang NSWMC Sec DENR, Q.C. 029202279/920225217. Ms. Delia Valdez NSWMC Sec DENR, Q.C. 029202279/920225218. Jonas Maronilla NSWMC Sec DENR, Q.C. 029202279/920225219. Mr. Edward Vergara DENR-EMB Ecological

Solid Waste MgtCoordinator Region 1

EMB, Lingsat, San

Fernando, LaUnion

(072) 844-4321/ 8446662

20. Ms. Ana Cabatbat DENR-EMB ESWMRegional CoordinatorRegion 2

NurseryCompound, SanGabriel,Tuguegarao City,Cagayan

(078) 844-4321/ 844-6662;09162943797
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


24/103

Name Office/ Designation Address Contact Number/ emailMIMAROPA

24. Ms. Maribeth L. Fruto DENR-EMB Ecological

Solid Waste MgtCoordinator Region 5

EMB 5 Regional

Center Site,Rawis, LegaspiCity

052.4820326/8205065; 0917817-

8685; [email protected]

25. Ms. Marilou G. Espinosa DENR-EMB EcologicalSolid Waste MgtCoordinator Region 6

EMB VI, P. AquinoSt., Fort Area,loilo City

033.3379801/336.9910;09184728889;[email protected]

26. Ms. Lourdes N. Brosas DENR-EMB EcologicalSolid Waste MgtCoordinator Region 8

EMB VIII, Tabo-an, Marasbaras,Tacloban City,Leyte

053.3234054/3254827/ 323-2710,O53.3232388 , 09179265715

27. Ms. Emma S. Alipala DENR-EMB EcologicalSolid Waste MgtCoordinator Region 9

EMB 9, Gov.Camino Avenue,Zamboanga City

062.9922669/99265479926548; 09276446876;[email protected]

28. Mr. Raeduolf Geollegue DENR-EMB EcologicalSolid Waste MgtCoordinator Region 10

EMB 10, Cagayande Oro City

088.726243

29. Ms. Dulce D. Hufrancia DENR-EMB EcologicalSolid Waste MgtCoordinator Region 11

EMB XI, FelbetsBldg., Lanang,Davao City

082.2351259/2330809305.3629; [email protected]

30. Mr. Job G. Apiado DENR-EMB EcologicalSolid Waste MgtCoordinator Region 13CARAGA

EMB XIII, Bancasi,Butuan City

085.3425332/8151045/3413826

31. Ms. Alma Ferareza DENR-EMB EcologicalSolid Waste Mgt OfficeNCR

EMB NCR, 5/F.Hizon Bldg., 29Quezon Av., Q.C.

7810471/7499828/7499829;09178956721; [email protected]

32. Mona Salilaguia DENR- ARMM33. James Kho EcoGov Project Unit 2401 Prestige

Tower, F. OrtigasJr. Road, OrtigasCenter, Pasig City

1605

02-636-3189/ 634-0260/ 635-6260/ 635-0747 (fax: 637-8779)

34. Wilman Pollisco EcoGov Project -do- 02-636-3189/ 634-0260/ 635-6260/ 635-0747 (fax: 637-8779)

35. Dr. Victor Luis EcoGov Project -do- 02-636-3189/ 634-0260/ 635-6260/ 635-0747 (fax: 637-8779)

36. Ma. Zita Toribio EcoGov Project -do- -do-37. Mr. Hector Florento EcoGov Project -do- -do-38. Dr. Jun Abrigo EcoGov Project -do- -do-39. Mr. Reynar Rollan EcoGov Project -do- -do-40. Mr. Ed Queblatin EcoGov Project -do- -do-

41. Ms. Sally Aguinaldo EcoGov Project -do- -do-42. Ms. Rachel Aquino EcoGov Project -do- -do-43. Dr. Ernesto S. Guiang EcoGov Project -do- -do-44. Ms. Marilyn Juan SWM Coordinator,

Nueva VizcayaBayombong,Nueva Vizcaya

078-321-2795; 09204416951;[email protected]

45. Ms. Joy Jochico USAID 8/F PNB FinancialCenter, Manila

025529823
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


25/103

Name Office/ Designation Address Contact Number/ emailProject (Benguet)Project Leader

Emerald Square,cor. PTuazon and

J. P. Rizal St.Projct. 4, Q.C.

[email protected] ,[email protected]

50. Francisco Sabugal Vector Engineering, Inc.,Engineer Consultant

143E SpringhillDrive, GrassValley CA 94595

0632-887-2564; 0916282-6848(Phil.); US 1(707)344-5297
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


26/103

Annex C-1CLOSURE POST-CLOSURE AND REMEDIATION MANAGEMENT OF DUMPSITES


27/103

CLOSURE, POST-CLOSURE ANDREMEDIATION MANAGEMENT OF

DUMPSITES

Albert Magalang

Executive DirectorNSWMC Secretariat

RA 9003 Section 37:Closure or conversion of open dumpsinto controlled dumps; establishment of controlled dumps; closure of controlleddumps

Issue

Lack of guidelines on the closure, post-closure and remediation management of

dumps

Open dumpsite

CLOSURE, POST CLOSURE AND REMEDIATION MANAGEMENT OF DUMPSITES

Page 1 of 3

Annex C-1CLOSURE, POST-CLOSURE AND REMEDIATION MANAGEMENT OF DUMPSITES


28/103

ssessment o t e ac ty as as sfor the closure plan

1. Responsibilities of Stakeholders inDumpsite Closure2. Pertinent Considerat ions-physico/ social characteristics, maps

Evaluation of alternatives forthe plan

Minimum regulatory requirementsTechnical feasibilityEnvironmental soundnessSocial considerationPolitical considerationFinancial viability

Formu lation of the closure plan

Stabilization of critical slopesFinal cover

Drainage control systemLeachate and gas management systemsFire controlPrevention of illegal dumpingResettlement action planSecurity

POST-CLOSURE ANDREMEDIATION MANAGEMENT

Maintenance programMonitoring programRemediation program

CLOSURE, POST CLOSURE AND REMEDIATION MANAGEMENT OF DUMPSITES

Page 2 of 3

Annex C-1CLOSURE, POST-CLOSURE AND REMEDIATION MANAGEMENT OF DUMPSITES


29/103

AFTER USES OF CLOSEDDUMPS

Green area/open meadowsPark and recreation area

Page 3 of 3


30/103

Annex C-2CLOSURE, REHABILITATION AND AFTER USE OF

OPEN AND CONTROLLED DUMPS

Outline

1. Provision of RA 9003 and its IRR on the closure and conversion of open dumps2. Recommendations for the closure of open and controlled dumps3. Recommendations for post-closure care and remediation of closed and controlled

dumps4. Recommended after uses of open and controlled dumps

Summary

1. RA 9003 Section 37:

Closure or conversion of open dumps into controlled dumps; establishment of controlleddumps; closure of controlled dumps

Lack of guidelines and procedure for the following:

a) closure and rehabilitation of open dumps;b) conversion of qualified open dumps into controlled dumps;

2. Recommendations for the closure of open and controlled dumps

Assessment of the facility as basis for the closure plan


31/103

Open dumpsite

Annex C-2, Page 2


32/103


33/103

Annex C-2, Page 4

Water Pollution from a Waste Disposal Facility (over an unconfined aquifer)confining layer

(aquitard)

groundwater flow

contaminatedsurface runoff

leachateplume

infiltration & leachateproduction

wastedisposal

precipitation

runoff cleansurface

unconfinedgroundwater

aquifer

groundwater flow

drainageditch

groundsurface


34/103

Assessment considerations

1. Responsibilities of Stakeholders in Dumpsite Closure

Stakeholder Responsibility/ConcernLocal Government Unit Implement the actual closure of the open dumpsite

Coordinate with pertinent local and national entities to implementclosure

Enact regulations/ordinances as necessary to implement closure Implement other necessary activities/plans to facilitate and effect

closurePublic/Community Participate in the planning for the closure of the open dumpsite

Participate in the monitoring of these open dumpsites afterclosure

National Government Through the waste management authority, formulate thenecessary policies, standards, criteria and guidelines relative toclosure of open dumpsites

Coordinate with pertinent local and national entities to implementclosure of open dumpsites

Monitor (and may even supervise) the closure of these opendumpsites

Extend necessary technical and other allowable and viable formsof assistance to LGUs

Business Support closure of open dumpsites and opening of new sites Introduce recycling programs at the new sites Introduce appropriate technologies, services, and equipment for

landfill closure and/or design, construction and operation

There may be many offices, units or bodies in an LGU handling waste management concerns,and proper coordination among them is essential in the success of this endeavor. These entitiesmay include Solid Waste Management Boards, the General Services Office (GSO),Environment and Natural Resources Office, Environment and Sanitation Division (ESD),Municipal Health Office, and others.

The Crucial Role of Local Chief Executives

Since LGUs are responsible for solid waste management in most developing and inindustrialized countries, local chief executives are often the determining factor in the success, or

failure, of a solid waste management program.


35/103

Interview with those directly involved with the operation of the dumpsite, waste pickers,and residents near site;

ater bodies, water wells, etc.;within and beyond the disposal

cility; Identify existing land uses around the are

phic s stance from itsboundaries;

Conduct geotechnical investigation t Identify sources of soil or Determine, if practical, th

s leakage whate and ga

Conduct water quality sa f surface waters, water wells, groundwater (if practical).

Evaluation of alternatives for t

The regulatory requirement l, financial, environmental and social

considerations will generally

Inventory of existing settlements, structures, surface w Determine points of leachate seepage and ponding

faa;

Conduct topogra urvey of the dumpsite, extending some di

o determine stability of slopes;other cover material for the site;

e depths of the dumped wastes; Determine ga Conduct leac

ithin and on the areas surrounding the dumpsite;s sampling (if practical); andmpling o

he plan

as well as the technica

dictate closure and post-closure plans.

Minimumregulatory

requirement

Closure and

post-closureplan

Socialconsideration

tas

Environmenl soundnes

Politicalconsideration

Technicalfeasibility

Financialviability

Evaluation of Closure Options/Alternatives


36/103

For Bef is

pre einclude not limited, to the following:

Stabilization of Critical Slopes

ocedures in most open dumpsites often result inn

graded to about 2 - 4%, while the side slopes should have a vertical to horizontal ratio less than1:3. Please

Final Cover

The final soil cover (or cap) is applied to a completed disposal facility to act as a barrier in order

mulation of the closure plan

ore a disposal facility stops receiving wastes, it is important that a final closure plan

par d, approved, and available for implementation. The main components of the plan, but are

Stabilization of critical slopes; Final cover;

Drainage con trol systems; Leachate and gas management systems; Fire control; Prevention of illegal dumping; Resettlement action plan; and Security.

The absence of proper operational prda gerously high heaps of garbage. Thus, it may be necessary to level the heaps of garbage inorder to reduce the hazards posed by unstable slopes. The final surface of the fill should be

see Figure

Grading of the Final Surface

2 - 4% 2 - 4%

1

3

1

3


37/103

A uniform layer with a minimum depth of 0.60m (2 ft.) is recommended as final soil cover. It isusually composed of a layer of compacted soil with a depth of at least 0.45m (1.5 ft.) and atopsoil of at least 0.15m (0.5 ft.). The topsoil, which is usually not compacted, will serve asprotection layer for the compacted soil cover, as well as support plant growth

un-on and runoff of surface waters can cause erosion and scouring of the final cover, as wells water ponding. Thus, to mitigate these effects, drainage control systems are installed in and

along the periphery of the disposal area.

urface waters should be diverted away from the disposal site at the shortest distanceractical;

he path or route of the drainage system should convey the surface waters at adequateelocities to prevent stagnation or deposition;

ydraulic gradient should be sufficient to maximize removal of surface waters but at theame time not too steep as to cause scouring, and;

The design of the drainage systems and the materials used should consider the effectsof settlement.

eachate Management Systems

le (economically and technically), leachate pipes may be installed to collect theachate for subsequent treatment. However, this will depend on several factors such as depth

0.15m minimum vegetation cover/layer

0.45m minimumfinal cover

0.15m (optional) grading layer or gas collection layer

Recommended Final Soil Cover

Drainage Control Systems

Ra

When planning and designing the drainage control systems, the following should be considered:

SpTvHs

L Where feasibleof the waste, topography of the area, underlying soil, and age of the deposited waste.


38/103

Sources of leachate seepage at and around the surface of the disposal site. This

. For leachate seepages on the surface, these may be intercepted by constructingcanals/ditches to collect the leachate. The collected leachate is then channeled towards a

3.

collect site will not

occur. ey are only simple and inexpensive remedial measures that are intended to reduce asmuch as practical, the potential contamination that may occur.

cted leachate is usually treated using bf both). Biological methods involve letting the wastewater pass through a series of stabilizationonds or the use of vegetation to absorb or digest the pollutants, while chemical methods

leachate. The latter is less preferred since it is more costly.owever, it maybe implemented if the situation warrants because of limited space for the

Ga

Lan lwasit aenv nflar ,of r u

his is sen the impact of the leachate on area ground and surface waters. Gasxtraction, however, entails a significant capital investment, and for many LGUs may not be an

should be determined before application of the final soil cover to determine the pointsof potential leachate seepage or ponding;

General topography of the area, and; Inventory of existing water wells in the area.

2

leachate retention basin/pond located downgradient of the site.

To intercept leachate movement below ground, an interceptor trench, cutoff wall, and

ion pipes may be constructed down gradient of the disposal site.These measures do not ensure that ground or surface water contamination near the

Th

The colleo

iological or chemical methods (or a combination

pinvolve the use of chemicals to treatHtreatment ponds, high organic characteristics of the influent, and if the chemicals are availableand affordable

s Management Systems

ldfi gas, such as methane and carbon dioxide, will continue to be generated as long aste decomposition occurs. Methane is a highly combustible gas and may cause explosions ifmccu ulates in an enclosed structure such as houses and buildings. Thus, depending on the

iro mental sensitivity of the area, it may be necessary to collect the gas and vent it freely,e it or recover it for energy use. Extracting gas from a waste fill has the additional advantageed cing the concentration of various chemicals in the leachate thereby improving its quality.

one way to lesTeoption.

Vent pipes may be made of perforated polyvinyl chloride (PVC), bamboo, or discarded oil drumswelded together at the edges. The following Figure shows a closed disposal area with ventpipes for gas management.


39/103

vent pipes

downgradientgroundwate

upgradient

Vent Pipe and Monitoring Well Installation

Extinguishing Fires

If waste is burning in the dumpsite, or burning has been practiced for a long time, it is essentialbefore applying final cover or capping. Where the

elatively shallow, the waste in the affected area is spread out to

y bee. To control illegal dumping, the following may be implemented:

that the fire be thoroughly extinguished firstdepth affected by burning is rallow for complete combustion and after which, water may be applied prior to applying the final

cover. Sand may also be applied instead of, or with water.

If the depth affected by burning is relatively deep, it may be necessary to isolate the burningarea by excavating trenches around it. The waste is then spread or regularly agitated to allowfor complete combustion. The ashes subsequently produced are then smothered with sand orsoil.

Prevention of Illegal Dumping

It is possible that there will still be some individuals or private haulers who will attempt todispose of their wastes on the closed disposal site. It may be becausethe new or alternative disposal facility is quite far from the source of waste and they mareluctant to travel the distanc

groundwatermonitoring well

rmonitoring well

groundwaterflow


40/103

Resettlement Action Plan

If there are informal settlers (scavengers/waste pickers) at the disposal site, they should berelocated and an alternative livelihood provided for them. If the LGU operates or will operate aMaterials Recovery Facility (MRF), these people can be formally hired since they are efficient inwaste segregation. If organized waste picking is allowed at the new disposal site, a small spacecan also be allocated for these displaced families. Organized or managed waste picking may beallowed at controlled disposal sites with certain procedures in place.

Additional Recommended Activities

Upgradient and downgradient wells from the closed dumpsite should be constructed todetermine the existence of any gas or water contamination. Periodic testing of these wells isrecommended until such time as the waste stabilizes.

Security should be provided to control access and to prevent stray animals into the area. Signage/billboards should be installed informing the public that no structures should be

. Post-Closure and Remediation Management

ns have ceased and final cover or capping has been applied to the

ing:

(allowable emissions/effluents, minimum period for such an

facility).

itis essential that a post-closure maintenance plan be developed. An ideal post-closure plan

erected and no excavations/burrowing is permitted in the area. The signage should use thelocal dialect(s) so that the residents easily understand them.

3

hen disposal operatioWwaste, the disposal facility is considered as closed. Wastes should no longer be accepted atthe facility for disposal and post-closure management is effected.

The long-term effects of settlement, gas emissions and leachate production, among others, will

require aftercare measures for a closed disposal site long after it has ceased operations. Thus,ost-closure activities are important in ensuring the proper functioning of the final cover,pdrainage control systems, leachate management systems, and other environmental controls.

Maintenance and monitoring programs should be carefully planned so that it will meet thefollow

Regulatory requirements

activity); Annual budgetary constraints of the LGU; and Other factors (ex. environmental and community sensitivity of the

Maintenance Programs. In order to effectively meet post-closure maintenance requirements,


41/103

health and the surrounding environment. Although not specifically required by law in somemended that a monitoring program for the quality of groundwater,

urface waters nearest the closed disposal facility, final effluent (leachate), as well as gaseous

be attributed to the site.he remedial action(s) taken will depend on the nature and degree of problem(s) that needs to

imple measures such as excavation or installation ofdditional materials such as vent pipes, while others may require the application of more

Cle er, soil washing, thermal treatment,al

The

Types of contamination present;the site;

Length of time needed to achieve cleanup objectives;

enerally, the more intensive the cleanup approach, the more quickly the contamination will be

. After Uses of Closed Dumps

Planning Considerations

Differential Settlement. As the waste in a disposal facility decomposes, it is reduced in size andset grade that may be as much as 30% (orgre r lement usually

ccurs within the first five (5) years after closure.

ll d d t d t t i filt t th

countries, it is highly recoms

emissions, be implemented.

Some problems may develop at a closed disposal site (or even during its operation) that mayrequire remedial action. These problems may include severe leaking from leachate, fires andexplosions due to methane gas, odor, litter, exposure of large areas due to waste slippage, orchronic health problems experienced by nearby communities that mayTbe addressed. Some may require saaggressive remediation or cleanup technologies.

anup technologies include the isolation of groundwatvitrification, and the use of microorganisms, all of which may be very costly for most locgovernment units.

main considerations in selecting a cleanup technology include the following:

Cleanup objectives and planned afteruse of

Post-treatment care needed; and Budget.

Gmitigated and the more costly the effort. For most LGUs, financial constraints will most likely

dictate the actions taken (or not taken).

4

tlement occurs. This settlement results into a finalate ) lower than the initial grade was during closure. Most of the expected sett

o Settling can produce wide cracks in the cover of the disposal facility, exposing the wastes to

i fli d t i l It l


42/103

Before Settlement After Settlement

Bearing Capacity . Simply put, the bearing capacity of a completed disposal site is the measureof its ability to support foundation. The bearing capacity of the cover material depends on thecharacteristics of the underlying waste and the compaction achieved during operation and

losure. To construct substantial structures over an old disposal site generally requires deep

In not as heterogeneous as wastes and produce apre t ce a uniform pattern of deformationwh s lter its structure and compositionove dent that extreme caution be taken when conductingbea ests of completed disposal sites in the hope that heavy structures can beerected over it.

can also kill or stunt the growth of vegetation. Consequently, structures over and nearbyhould have ventilation and monitoring systems in their foundations to detect gas buildup.

r acids produced during waste decomposition, liquids from aompleted disposal site are very corrosive. Unprotected steel, underground pipes, structural

s are subject to these corrosive elements. The acids can also

otential Uses

cfootings to assure a firm foundation.

contrast to natural soils, which aredic able pattern of deformation, solid wastes do not produen ubjected to stress (loads) but instead, continues to ar a long period of time. Thus, it is pruring capacity t

Gases . Gaseous by-products of decomposition will continue to be produced long after closure ofthe disposal site. Methane can accumulate in confined areas, structures and cause explosions.Its

o rosion . Because of the organicC cfoundations and utility line

eteriorate concrete surfaces, and in the process, expose the reinforcing bars of the structuredand cause the concrete to fail. To mitigate these effects, all materials belowground at a closed

disposal site that have the potential to corrode should be protected from these deleteriouseffects.

P Unlike sanitary landfills where an end use is already contemplated even in the planning stages

final cover

refuse

nativematerial

cracks waterondin

refusenative

material


43/103

Annex C-3GUIDELINES ON WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES


44/103

Guidelines on Waste DisposalFacilities

Office of the Secretariat

National Solid Waste Management Commission

RULE XII I OPERATIONS OFCONTROLLED DUM PSI TES

Section 1. Controlling the Operation of Open Dumpsites

No open dumpsites shall be established andoperated by any person or entities, includingthe LGUs, will be allowed. Within three (3)years following the effectivity of the Act, allopen dumpsites shall be converted tocontrolled dumpsites to operate only withinfive (5) years and beyond the said periodshall consider these facilities as deemedclosed and phased out.

Upgrading of an Open Dumpsite intoa Controlled Dump

1 . P la nn in g C on si de ra ti on sa. Site Options

Considerations:

- area- regulatory requirements- social acceptability- degree of contamination of theenvironment- impact to public health andenvironment

b. Closure and rehabilitation of an open dump

2. Development of a Controlled Dump on aNew Site

Considerations:- Siting requirements- Design requirements- Site preparation- Additional recommended activities

Upgrading of an Open Dumpsite intoa Controlled Dump

Page 1 of 5

Upgrading of an Open Dumpsite into a



45/103

Daily cover consisting of inert materials or soil;

Drainage and runoff control shall be designed andmanaged such that storm water does not come in contactwith waste;

Provision for aerobic and anaerobic decomposition shall beinstituted to control odor;

Working areas shall be minimized and kept at no morethan a ratio of 1.5 square meter (sqm) or less per ton/day(tpd) of waste received;

4. Operating Guidelines for Controlled Dumps

Upgrading of an Open Dumpsite into aControlled Dump Security fencing shall be provided to prevent illegal entries,

trespassing and large animal entries;

Basic record keeping;

Provision of maintained all-weather access roads;

Controlled waste picking and trading;

Provision of at least 0.60 m final soil cover at closure, and post-closure maintenance of cover, drainage and vegetation;

Site shall not be located in flood plains and areas subject toperiodic flooding and it shall be hydro-geologically suitable;

5. Monitoring of dumpsite performance

6. Post closure management

Upgrading of an Open Dumpsite into aControlled Dump

Sanitary Landfill Designand Operation

Planning for a sanitary landfill system Preparation of a SWM master plan; SWM immediate treatment; Basic Design Parameter

Target lifespan Designed landfill capacity

Page 2 of 5



46/103

Components of a Sanitary

Landfill System Waste retaining facility Stormwater Drainage Facility Leachate collection facility Liner facility Gas venting facility

Leachate treatment facility Landfill control facilities

Other related facilities

Access roads Littering prevention facility Notice Boards, Fencing, Gates and

security Fire prevention facility

Disaster prevention facility

RULE XIV OPERATIONS OFSANITARY LANDFILLS

Section 2. Minimum Considerations for Operating SanitaryLandfills

1. Disposal site records2. Water quality monitoring of surface and ground waters and effluent,

and gas emissions3. Background Groundwater quality Monitoring Statistical Data

Evaluation and Establishment of Concentration Limits forcontaminant Indicators

4. Detection Groundwater Monitoring Data Statistical Analysis, Verification Monitoring

5. Assessment Monitoring and Corrective Action6. Documentation of approvals, all reports, certification, plans and

specifications, as built drawings, determinations and otherrequirements

6. Signs

7. The site shall be designed to discourageunauthorized access by persons and vehicles byusing a perimeter barrier or topographicconstraints.

8. Roads within the permitted facilityboundary shall be designed to minimize thegeneration of dust and the tracking of materialsonto adjacent public roads.

Page 3 of 5



47/103

9. Sanitary facilities consisting of adequate number of toilets and handwashing facilities shall be available topersonnel at or in the immediate vicinity of the site.

10. Safe and adequate drinking water supply for the sitepersonnel shall be available.

11. The site shall have communication facilities availableto site personnel to allow quick response toemergencies.

12. Where operations are conducted during hours of darkness, the site and/or equipment shall be equippedwith adequate lighting as approved by the Departmentto ensure safety and to monitor the effectiveness of operations.

13. Operating and maintenance personnel shall wear anduse appropriate safety equipment as required by theDepartment.

14. Personnel assigned to operate the site shall beadequately trained in subject pertinent to the siteoperation and maintenance, hazardous materialsrecognition and screening and heavy equipmentoperations, with emphasis on safety, health,environmental controls and emergency procedures. A record of such training shall be placed in the operatingrecord.

15. The site operator shall provide adequatesupervision of a sufficient number of qualified personnelto ensure proper operation of the site in compliance withall applicable laws, regulations, permit conditions andother requirements.

16. Any disposal site open to the public shall have an

attendant present during public operating hours or thesite shall be inspected by the operator on a regularlyscheduled basis, as determined by the Department.

17. Unloading of solid wastes shall be confined to asmall area as possible to accommodate the number of vehicles using the area without resulting in traffic,personnel, or public safety hazards.

18. Solid waste shall be spread and compacted inlayers with repeated passages of the landfillequipment to minimize voids within the cell andmaximize compaction.

19. Covered surfaces of the disposal area shall be

graded to promote lateral runoff of precipitation andto prevent ponding.

20. Cover material or native material unsuitable forcover, stockpiled on the site for use or removal, shallbe placed so as not to cause problems or interferewith unloading, spreading, compacting, access,safety, drainage or other operations.

Page 4 of 5



48/103

THANK YOU!Office of the SecretariatNational Solid Waste Management Commissionhttp://www.emb.gov.ph/nswmc

(02) 9202252/ (02) 9202252)[email protected] or [email protected]

Waste no more . . . . .

Waste no time!

Page 5 of 5

RA 9003

Annex D-1WASTE DIVERSION


49/103

WASTE DIVERSION

RA 9003

Sec. 3 (ss) Waste diversion shall refer toactivities which reduce or eliminate theamount of solid wastes from waste disposalfacilities.Integral component of the Solid WasteManagement Plan of each LGU.

Section 20Requires that at least 25% of solid waste shallbe diverted by year 2006

25% goal shall be increased every three (3)years after 2006;LGU may set goal higher than 25%.

DENR AO No. 2001-34 Rule VII Section 7Establishing Mandatory Solid Waste Diversion

Page 1 of 3

Average Composition of Waste from



50/103

ISSUE

There is no specified method for measuringwaste diversion

Average Composition of Waste from19 LGUs

WasteComponent

% composition(9 Cities)

% composition(10 Towns)

Biodegradable 62 61

Recyclable 18 20

Special waste 2 2

Residual 18 17

Total 100 100

MEASUREMENT OF WASTEDIVERSION

Waste Generated Waste Diverted = WasteDisposed

10 T/d - 5T/d = 5T/d

Waste Diverted = 10T/d 5T/d = 5T/d or50%

Waste diverted in LGUs at present is difficultto track. Portions of the 5T/d diverted could befound in street corners, banks of rivers, vacant

lots or even loss through indiscriminateburning.

Page 2 of 3

The EcoGov method of measuring



51/103

The EcoGov method of measuringwaste diversion

Formation and training of the waste assessment teamConduct of waste assessment at the end-of-pipe toestablish baselineAfter a year, a 2 nd round E-O-P assessment isconductedThe difference of the 2 nd year and the base line interms of % biodegradable and % recyclable willprovide an estimate of waste diversion between thetwo measurements

ILLUSTRATION

LGU Biodegradable(2003)

Recyclable

(2003)

Biodegradable(2004)

Recyclable

(2004)IsabelaCity,Basilan

75% 9% 62% 5%

Maddela,Quirino

65% 9% 46% 7%

Recommendations

The succeeding E-O-P assessments can bedone in 3 days with 2 week days and 1weekend day.

Qualitatively, waste diversion can be measuredin terms of support ordinances, number of functional composting facilities, organizationand strengthening of the informal recyclingsector and the general change in wastemanagement practices of the community

Page 3 of 3

A D 2


52/103


RA 9003Sec. 3 (ss) Waste diversion shall refer to activities which reduce or eliminate theamount of solid wastes from waste disposal facilities.

Integral component of the Solid Waste Management Plan of each LGU.

Section 20 Requires that at least 25% of solid waste shall be diverted by year 2006 25% goal shall be increased every three (3) years after 2006; LGU may set goal higher than 25%.

DENR AO No. 2001-34 Rule VII Section 7 Establishing Mandatory Solid Waste Diversion

MEASUREMENT OF WASTE DIVERSIONIn general, waste diversion can be estimated by a simple straightforward materialbalance equation:

Waste Generated Waste Diverted = Waste Disposed

10 T/d - 5T/d = 5T/d

Waste Diverted = 10T/d 5T/d = 5T/d or 50%

Waste diverted in LGUs at present is difficult to track. Portions of the 5T/ddiverted could be found in street corners, banks of rivers, vacant lots or even lossthrough indiscriminate burning.

The essence of the law is that waste diversion from the disposal is throughcomposting and recycling. However not all biodegradables are composted and inthe same token not all recyclables are recovered. In fact, only few householdsand establishments in LGUs have on-site composting and recycling facilities. Theoffsite facilities on composting are mainly demonstration units operated by the

waste diverted the project opted for End of Pipe measurement of potential waste


53/103

waste diverted, the project opted for End-of-Pipe measurement of potential wastediversion. The process/steps of measurement are the following:

1. The LGU conducts its waste assessment that includes actual sampling,measurement and characterization of wastes generated by varioussources within the collection area. An inventory of the major categories ofwaste sources is done so that the results of sampling and measurementper category can be extrapolated within the collection area and for theentire LGU. It should be noted that the collection area is usually restrictedwithin the poblacion/urban barangays of the LGU including the centralbusiness district. At the disposal, at least two truck deliveries per day arecharacterized with 1 truck coming from a mix of residential/commercialcollection area and the other truck coming solely from the market which isthe largest waste generator in the LGU. All deliveries at the disposalduring the assessment activity are monitored. In EcoGov 1, this activitywas done for 7 days straddling a salary day and a market day.

2. Using an Excel program developed by the project, the data generated areinputted, and the program can produce reports that show some trends andimportant statistics about the waste characteristics of the LGU.

3. Using the extrapolated results of total waste generation and wastedisposal, waste diversion can be loosely estimated from the aboveequation. However the waste diversion results include all possiblediversion pathways in addition to composting and recycling.

4. To pin down the potential diversion of biodegradables and recyclablesfrom the disposal (essence of the law), the project conducted a secondround end-of-pipe waste characterization. Comparing the percentages of

the biodegradables and recyclables from the first E-O-P characterization,the potential reduction and hence diversion of these materials can beestimated.

ILLUSTRATION

The following are the E-O-P measurements and characterizationconducted in Isabela City, Basilan and Maddela, Quirino in 2003 and 2004:

2003 2004LGU Biodegradable Recyclable Biodegradable RecyclableIsabela City 75% 9% 62% 5%

2004 then for Isabela City was 84% 67% = 17% while that of Maddela was 74%


54/103

2004 then for Isabela City was 84%-67% = 17%, while that of Maddela was 74%-53% =21%.

RECOMMENDATION

The EG1 method for measuring waste diversion quantitatively is accurate,intensive, tedious and it requires trained personnel and financial resources.Based on the EG1 experience, the duration for the conduct of E-O-Pmeasurement and characterization can be shortened to 3 days without sacrificingthe reliability of the results provided it includes the salary and market days.Qualitatively, waste diversion can also be measured in terms of ordinancesrequiring on-site composting of biodegradables, number of functional compostingfacilities, organization of the informal sector and the general change in wastemanagement practices of the community. Hence, documentation of these eventscan indicate a positive change(increase) in waste diversion.


55/103

Annex E-1ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING MODES OF COMPOSTING


56/103

Indicators of Finished Compost

Carbon / Nitrogen should be between 12-15

Volume ideal volume should be 10-20% of theoriginal volume

pH slightly alkaline (ph 7-9)Moisture - moisture content of about 20-25% isideal for easy handling and longer shelf life

Temperature and Appearance ambient and with grayish to very dark brown color, flabbystructure and not odorous

Benefits of Composting

Improve soil physical structure water holdingcapacity availability of oxygen to microbesStimulates growth of root systemA good source of trace elements essential for plantgrowthControls soil pathogensReduce soil erosion and surface

run off Increase quality and quantityof crop yield

Harmful Effect if Raw OrganicWaste is Mixed with the Soil

Decomposition of organic matter would robpart of available soil nitrogen if C:N > 30

Breeding place for soil pathogens

Composting System SelectionCriteria

Clusterability of LGUs for centralizationAggregate volume of solid wastes

Capacity of LGU to finance or mobilizefinancing for theestablishment andoperation of thecomposting facility.Market for packedfinished compost

Page 2 of 10

Composting process comparisons assumingth t l t t t

Rules of Thumb for Estimating the Economic



57/103

other control parameters constant.Retention

Time

(wks)

InitialInvest-

ment a

OperatingCost a

(P/ton SW)

CompostQuality

PotentialUsers

Remarks

Intermittentrotating bin / in-vesselsystem

< 4 Capitalintensiveequip.

5T-8T Excellent

Prov/City/ Private

Entrepreneur

*Big vol. of waste*Limited space*High intensitySWM

Fixed bed / aerated staticpile

4-7 Concretebinsfacility

1T-2T Good City/ Mun.

*Big vol. of waste* Limited space*Limited funds

Vermicompostingfixed bed

>12 Compostbins/pits- Fair Mun./

H.H*Med. vol. of waste*Enough space*Limited funds

Windrow w/ mech. turners

>12 Buckettractor0.8T-1.5T Fair Agric.

Mun.

*Farm residues*Enough space

Simple pit/ Basket

>12 Area, pitbasket - Poor/ HH/

Gardens*Compatible withbiointensive garden

and Composting Process Parameters

200,000 population : 1-2 hectareshigh intensity composting areaApproximately triple area if windrowing or static pipesare used

Rules of Thumb for Estimating the Economicand Composting Process Parameters

Total capacity of composting bins:

v x rC = ---------------

0.8 x 2

v = volume of solid wastes/d, cu ftr = retention time, d0.8 = 20% allowable for air void volume2 = factor for finishing composting

outside bins when volume of materialsshrinks by 50% to maximize useful capacity of bins


Municipal, city or provincial scale - centralizedcomposting of residual organics for better qualitycontrol of finished compost

The average production cost of 1 ton compost for a centralizedfacility is P2,750, average sellingprice is P2,200, cost benefit ratioof 1.25

Page 3 of 10

Rules of Thumb for Estimating the Economic Rules of Thumb for Estimating the Economic



58/103


Adjustment of C/N.Ligno cellulosic wastes 6 10 parts cellulosic to1 part manure


Moisture content adjustment for household andmarket wastes is not necessary (moisture contentis approximately 70 80% by weight)Saw dust and rice straw maybe addedManual squeezing of compostproducing leachate too wet

Leachate catch basin notnormally necessary (leachate tobe returned to compostingmaterial)


Leachate catch basin is not normally necessarysince leachate should be returned to compostingmaterial to recycle the decomposers simulating the

activated sludge system.

Thank You

Page 4 of 10

Pi t



59/103

Pictures

Cross Section of Composting Bin

Plastic cover tominimize drying andammonia escapeShredded solid

wastes looselypacked

AIR

TopperforatedBamboo orPVC pipes

Tilting walls for easy

Compost

Page 5 of 10


60/103

Collection / transport



61/103

Collection / transport

typical for medium to large-scale off-sitecentralized composting.raw materials within the economic radius(44 kilometers).Satellite transfer stations for economy of scale transport system

Segregation

negligible or no non-biodegradable is a must forrapid composting and high quality compost.Examples: plastic wrappers, PET, PVC, thick wood chips, etc.Dry ligno-cellulosic materials are also veryresistant to biodegradation.Homogeneity of organic biodegradablematerials

Shredding / Chopping

Optimum particle size / surface areaNot too courseNot too fine

Page 7 of 10

Sampling Carbon to Nitrogen Ratio



62/103

Sampling

Follow standard sampling procedure

Carbon to Nitrogen Ratio

Carbon Source of energyNitrogen For cell multiplicationC/N ratio approximately 30Ideal mixture Plant residues and animalwastes

Moisture

40-60%Below 40%, too dryAbove 60% too wet

Stacking / Pile depth

Loose to minimize turning frequencyRice straw ideal mixPile depth assist temperature and moisturecontrolAvailable space for compostingIdeal through simple experiment

Page 8 of 10

Aeration/Temperature Frequency of turning



63/103

Aeration/Temperature

Sufficient oxygen supply turning, perforatedpipes and air compressorsAeration for aerobic decomposition andtemperature controlTemperature 55-70 oC

Frequency of turning

Too often slows down decomposition rate(rapid dissipation of heat)Too seldom unaerobic condition (slow andodorous)Turning time temperature exceeds limit or

onset of foul odor emission

Visual Indicators

Grayish todark brownto black Flabbystructure

Field application

Page 9 of 10

Vermicomposting



64/103

Vermicomposting

Page 10 of 10



65/103

Rationale

The implementation of technically efficient and cost effective integrated solidwaste management (ISWM) by the LGUs should result to a sustained compliance withRA 9003 and its IRR. To achieve this end, solid wastes generation should be minimizedat the source; segregated; the non-biodegradable recycled; and the biodegradable used as

raw material to produce a commercially saleable product called humus thru a processknown as composting.

There are several types of existing composting systems. These are: single bin,multi-bin, rotating/tumbling drum, trench, windrow on worm bin. The choice of composting system depends on the prevailing and projected conditions in the respectiveor concerned LGUs.

This paper shall briefly discuss the basic principles involved in controlledcomposting. It shall also analyze the existing composting systems with emphasis oncomparative costing, advantages/disadvantages and potential users.

Basic Principles, Issues and Practices in Controlled Composting

Composting is simply defined as the controlled biological decomposition of organic matter into a stble product called humus or compost useful as soil conditioner.The process involves the following steps:

Collection / transport stage this initial step is typical for medium to large-scaleoff-site centralized composting. The sources of raw materials should be within theeconomic radius of not exceeding 44 kilometers. Satellite transfer stations mightbe necessary for economics of scale transport system.

. Segregation of non-biodegradable - Absence or negligible amount of non-

biodegradable or hardly biodegradable materials is a must for rapid compostingand high quality compost. Examples of these unwanted materials are plastic

PET PVC hi k d hi D li ll l i i l

Shredding / Chopping almost all raw municipal garbage has very low bulk


66/103

g pp g p g g ydensity. The solid wastes surface area available for contact with microorganisms

is quite low and will need longer decomposition time. Compostable materialsshould not be too fine since it will create a compact layer (for fixed bed system)preventing aeration and eventually emitting foul odor and slower decompositionrate. Shredding is therefore required to shorten the composting period. Shreddersare essential equipments for this purpose.

Sampling Obtaining samples for analysis should follow standard samplingprocedure.

Carbon to Nitrogen Ratio Carbon is the main energy source of microbes, whilenitrogen is essential for cell multiplication. These two elements should be presentin correct proportion in the composting medium for fast composting rate. Thiselement ratio should be in the vicinity of 30 since most decomposers are veryactive at this ratio assuming vital parameters are normal. Most organic wastes of plant origin except legumes have C/N ratio of greater than 70, while animalmanure have C/N Ratio of below 30. These two waste materials are ideal mixingredients for composting to avoid using chemical additives like urea for C/Nadjustment.

Moisture The average moisture content of the composting pile should be withinthe range of 40% - 60%. Below 40% is too dry and decomposition will be veryslow. Above 60% is too wet and will favor anaerobic decomposition which is alsoslower, less complete and will generate foul odor and other reduced gaseousproducts which are harmful to the air environ.

Stacking / Pile depth for large scale static windrow mode with minimal or noturning, the choice of pile dimension can help to control the temperature andmoisture of the pile. Without the elaborate and sophisticated procedure of measuring the heat of reaction of the decaying mixed garbage, a simple andpractical experimental method of making different pile size and measuring thewet bulb temperature by an ordinary thermometer will do the job.

Aeration/Temperature Sufficient oxygen (O 2) should be supplied todecomposing materials for rapid composting. This can be done thru periodicturning of pile or inserting perforated PVC or bamboo pipes (vertical orhorizontal) or incorporating chopped rice straw or combination of the above

Frequency of turning turning the pile too often will slow down decompositionrate since this will result in rapid dissipation of heat needed to maintain the


67/103

desired level for fast action of microbes. For moderate to large scale composting,

whenever the temperature at the middle of the pile exceeds the desiredtemperature, it is time to turn. Experience showed that the frequency of turning isdirectly related to pile depth and volume. Another indicator of turning time is theonset of foul odor generated.

Schematic diagram of the composting process

Collection Segregation Shredding/Chopping

Stacking C/N , Moisture Adjustment Composite sampling/ Characterization

Temperature Control Visual /Technical Sundrying/PackagingAeration Parameters

MonitoringSale/Field Application

Indicators of Finished Compost

The carbon to nitrogen ratio of finished compost is within the range of 12 to 15.This level is normally reached in about 3 to 4 weeks under high intensitycomposting procedure.

The volume of finished compost is about 10-20% of the original.

The pH is slightly alkaline (ph 7-9).

The temperature at the middle of the pile is ambient indicating that there are nomore decomposition reactions occurring.

Benefits of Compost


68/103

Improve soil physical structure water holding capacity availability of oxygen tomicrobes

Stimulates growth of root system

A good source of frace elements essential for plant growth

Controls soil pathogens

Reduce soil erosion and surface run off

Increase quality and quantity of crop yield

Harmful Effect if Raw Organic Waste is Mixed with the Soil

Decomposition of organic matter would rob part of available soil nitrogen if C:N> 30.

Breeding place for soil pathogens

Composting System Selection Criteria

Clusterability of LGUs with respect to proximity to a centralized compostingfacility located at a place nearest to all point sources of solid wastes (not morethan 40 km radius). Volume aggregate and characteristics of solid wastes areimportant considerations.

Capacity of LGU to finance or mobilize financing for the establishment andoperation of the composting facility. Composting is not financially profitable inthe first few years of operation. However, the indirect health cost reduction andthe long term benefit of enhancing the soil properties leading to increased

Composting process comparisons assuming other control parameters constant.


69/103

RetentionTime(wks)

InitialInvest-ment a

OperatingCost a

(P/ton SW)

CompostQuality

PotentialUsers

Remarks

Intermittentrotating bin

/ in-vesselsystem

< 4 Capitalintensive

equip.

5-8T Excellent Provincial/ City/

Privateentrepreneur

*Big volume of waste

*Limited space*High intensity SWM

Fixed bed / aeratedStatic pile

4-7 Concretebins

coveredfacility

1-2T Good City/ Municipal

*Big volume of waste* Limited space*Limited funds

Vermicompostingfixed bed

>12 Compostbins/pits

Fair Municipal/ Household

*Big volume of waste*Enough space*Limited funds

Windroww/ mech.turners

>12 Buckettractor

0.8-1.5T Fair Agricultural / Municipal

*Farm cluster*Centralized

Simple pit/ Basket

>12 Area, pit / basket

Poor/ Odorous

Household/ Gardens

*Compatible withbiointensivegarden tech

Rules of Thumb for Estimating the Economic and CompostingProcess Parameters

Approximate quantity of mixed solid wastes generated per person per day is 0.5 0.6 kg (about 60% is biodegradable). However, this figure should be used onlyfor composting capacity projection. Actual quantity of residual solid wastesshould be determined

v = volume of solid wastes/d, cu ftr = retention time, d0 8 20% ll bl f i id l


70/103

0.8 = 20% allowable for air void volume

2 = factor for finishing composting outside bins when volume of materials shrinks by 50% to maximize useful capacity of bins

Sample calculation:

v = 900 cu ftr = 14 daysC = 7800 cu ft

Volume of bin 10 ft length x 6 ft diameter = 282 cu ftNo. of bins = 27Stainless for rotating bins, concrete for fixed bed

A municipality of 200,000 population will need about 1 hectare of compostingarea using high intensity composting system. This area will be triple if windrowing or static piles systems are used.

At the municipal, city or provincial scale, centralized composting of residualorganics is recommended for better quality control of finished compost by skilledpersonnel and to generate additional job opportunities.

The average production cost of 1 ton compost for a centralized facility is P2,750while the average selling price is P2,200 or a cost benefit ratio of 1.25. Thisfinancial cost/benefit is only for the first year of operation. For the subsequentyears the financial cost/benefit ratio will be less than unity.

Adjustment of C/N. Ligno cellulosic wastes such as paper, fruit peelings, wooddust, vegetable residues have C/N between 70 90. These materials should bemixed with animal manure (C/N= 8 15) for at least 6 10 parts cellulosic to 1part manure by fresh weight. Without animal manure urea may be used instead as

nitrogen supplement. Moisture content adjustment for household and market biodegradable wastes is

not normally necessary since the average moisture content of these materials isapproximately 70 80% by weight. This level is actually a little higher than the

p o l i c y ,

it h L G U s

Avoid

, r s

Annex F-1CLUSTERING FOR SWM FACILITIES


71/103

CLU STERING FORSWM FACILI TI ES

Office of the Secretariat

National Solid Waste Management Commission P a r

t n e r s h

i p e n

t e r p r i s e s a s

d i c t a t e d

b y p

e c o n o m

i e s o

f s c a l e a n

d i n p a r t n e r s h

i p w

i tReduce

Reuse

Residuals Management

Treatment

Recycle

Recover

Lastpreferredoptions

Firstpreferredoptions

M u n i c i p a

l i t i e s /

C i t i e s

B a

r a n

g a y

s

P r o v i n c e

/ M e t r o w

i d e o r

F i r s

t C l a s s

C i t i e s

Direct Responsibility Influencing Responsibility

o u s e o

Documents

Policy Forum on ISWM Proceedings_FINAL