nepal: integrated urban development project...2. according to the modality of iudp, each of the...

Technical Assistance Consultant’s Report

This consultant’s report does not necessarily reflect the views of ADB or the Government concerned, and ADB and the Government cannot be held liable for its contents. (For project preparatory technical assistance: All the views expressed herein may not be incorporated into the proposed project’s design.

Project Number: P41598-012 July 2012

NEPAL: Integrated Urban Development Project (Financed by the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction)

Prepared by

Shafiul Azam Ahmed Ashok Ratna Tuladhar For Government of Nepal Ministry of Physical Planning & Works Department of Urban Development and Building Construction

Government of Nepal Ministry of Physical Planning & Works Department of Urban Development and Building Construction

PREPARING THE INTEGRATED URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (PPTA 7727 – NEP)

FINAL REPORT

JULY 2012

Shafiul Azam Ahmed Ashok Ratna Tuladhar

COPYRIGHT: The concepts and information contained in this document

are the property of ADB & Government of Nepal. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of either ADB or Government of Nepal constitutes an infringement of copyright.

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Background .................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Objectives of the Study ................................................................................................................. 2

1.3 Expected Results/Outputs ............................................................................................................. 2

1.4 Scope of Work ............................................................................................................................... 3

1.5 Approach & Methodology ............................................................................................................. 4

1.6 Work Plan and Input Schedule ...................................................................................................... 5

2. ANALYTICAL ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT SWM PRACTICES AND TECHNICAL CAPACITY OF THE PROJECT MUNICIPALITIES .............................................................10

2.1 Review of Existing Documents .................................................................................................... 10

2.2 Consultation with Project Municipalities .................................................................................... 13

2.3 Current SWM Practices and Technical Capacity .......................................................................... 21

2.3.1 Nepalgunj Municipality................................................................................................................ 21

2.3.2 Siddharthanagar Municipality ..................................................................................................... 24

2.3.3 Janakpur Municipality ................................................................................................................. 27

2 29

3 29

0 29

3. INVOLVEMENT OF PRIVATE SECTOR IN SWM ..............................................................30

3.1 Existing Situation in Nepal ........................................................................................................... 30

3.1.1 Background .................................................................................................................................. 30

3.1.2 Solid Waste Management Act, 2011 ........................................................................................... 30

3.1.3 Some Existing Arrangements in Various Municipalities .............................................................. 31

3.1.4 Analysis of Existing Situation in Project Municipalities ............................................................... 38

3.2 International Experience ............................................................................................................. 41

3.2.1 Background .................................................................................................................................. 41

3.2.2 Examples from Selected Countries .............................................................................................. 42

ii

3.3 Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses of Different Models .................................................... 46

4. RECOMMENDATION ON THE SCOPE OF OPERATIONAL SERVICES FOR THE LANDFILL CONTRACTOR ................................................................................................48

4.1 Operational Functions of the Proposed SWM System ................................................................ 48

4.1.1 Collection Service ........................................................................................................................ 48

4.1.2 Operation of Transfer Station ..................................................................................................... 49

4.1.3 Secondary Transport ................................................................................................................... 49

4.1.4 Processing and Final Disposal Management ............................................................................... 49

4.2 Analytical Review on the Scope of Operational Services for the Landfill Contractor ................. 51

4.4 Duration of Operational Services ................................................................................................ 57

4.5 Financial Arrangement ................................................................................................................ 58

5. OUTPUT SPECIFICATIONS .............................................................................................62

5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 62

5.2 Key Aspects for Good Performance and Operational Guidelines ............................................... 62

THE DAILY AREA OF WORK SHOULD BE KEPT AS SMALL AS POSSIBLE AND NO MORE THAN 1 HECTARE. ...........................................................................................................62

THE SURFACE OF NEWLY DEPOSITED WASTE SHOULD BE COVERED EVERY DAY WITH 15 CM THICK SOIL OR SIMILAR MATERIAL. .........................................................62

NO. 64

5.3 Performance Indicators and Monitoring ..................................................................................... 67

ASPECT ...................................................................................................................................69

BASIC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR .....................................................................................69

MONITORING FREQUENCY ...................................................................................................69

MEANS OF VERIFICATION .....................................................................................................69

ASPECT ...................................................................................................................................70

BASIC PERFORMANCE INDICATOR .....................................................................................70

MONITORING FREQUENCY ...................................................................................................70

MEANS OF VERIFICATION .....................................................................................................70

5.4 Payment Mechanism in the Contract .......................................................................................... 71

6. COST ESTIMATES ............................................................................................................73

6.1 Current Costs of SWM ................................................................................................................. 73

6.1.1 Current Cost of SWM Service in Nepalgunj Municipality ............................................................ 73

S. 74

iii

N. 74

6.1.2 Current Cost of SWM Service in Siddharthanagar Municipality.................................................. 75

6.1.3 Current Cost of SWM Service in Janakpur Municipality .............................................................. 76

S. 76

N. 76

6.2 Costs under Proposed Arrangement ........................................................................................... 77

6.2.1 Unit costs of Operational Services............................................................................................... 77

6.2.2 Base Costs of Contractual Arrangement ..................................................................................... 78

6.3 Comparison of Costs: Current Practice vs. Proposed Arrangement .......................................... 80

7. RELEVANT SECTIONS OF BIDDING DOCUMENTS ........................................................82

8. ACTION PLAN FOR MUNICIPALITIES ............................................................................ 101

9. INVOLVEMENT OF SWMTSC ......................................................................................... 103

ANNEXES: Annex-1: List of Key Persons Consulted Annex-2: Unit Costs Calculation of Operational Services

Annex-3: Quality Standards for Environmental Monitoring at the Landfill Site

iv

LIST OF TABLES: Table 1: Concise Methodology ................................................................................................... 4 Table 2: Summary of Existing Situation in Project Municipalities ...............................................12 Table 3: Issues on Private Sector Involvement in SWM ............................................................13 Table 4: Municipal SWM Generation Stream (2011-2036) - Nepalgunj Municipality ..................21 Table 5: Condition of SWM Vehicles and Equipment in Nepalgunj Municipality (Jan 2012) ......23 Table 6: Municipal Staffing in SWM Service in Nepalgunj Municipality (Jan 2012) ....................23 Table 7: Municipal SWM Generation Stream (2011-2036) - Siddharthanagar Municipality ........24 Table 8: Condition of SWM Vehicles/ Equipment in Siddharthanagar Municipality (Jan 2012) ..26 Table 9: Municipal staffing in SWM service in Siddharthanagar Municipality (Jan 2012) ...........26 Table 10: Municipal SWM Generation Stream (2011-2036) - Janakpur Municipality .................27 Table 11: Condition of SWM Vehicles/Equipment in Janakpur Municipality (Jan 2012) .............29 Table 12: Municipal Staffing in SWM Services in Janakpur Municipality (Jan 2012) ..................29 Table 13: Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses of Different Models of PSP in SWM ...........46 Table 14: Proposed Contractual Arrangement ..........................................................................53 Table 15: Proposed Service Charges, Tipping Fees for the Operational Services (2016) .........60 Table 16: Key Aspects for Good Performance and Operational Guidelines ...............................62 Table 17: Performance Monitoring for Package A .....................................................................69 Table 18: Performance Monitoring for Package B .....................................................................70 Table 19: Operational Expenditure/ Revenue of SWM Service in Nepalgunj Municipality .........74 Table 20: Operational Expenditure/ Revenue of SWM Services in Siddharthanagar Municipality .................................................................................................................................................75 Table 21: Operational Expenditure/ Revenue of SWM Service in Janakpur Municipality ...........76 Table 22: Estimated Base Costs of Contractual Arrangement-

Management Support to Package A (2016)..............................................................78 Table 23: Estimated Base Costs of Contractual Arrangement-

Management Support to Package A and Total Service of Package B (2016) ...........79

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Work Plan ................................................................................................................... 8 Figure 2: Input Schedule ............................................................................................................ 9 Figure 3: Typical Flow Diagram of Municipal SWM ...................................................................50

v

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ADB – Asian Development Bank asl – above sea level BOO – Build-own-operate BOOT – Build-own-operate-transfer BOT – Build-operate-transfer BSMC – Biratnagar Sub-Metropolitan City CBO – Community-based organization CEO – Chief executive officer CKV – Clean Kathmandu Valley – A JICA study project DBO

DSC – –

Design-build-own Design and supervision consultant

DUDBC – Department of Urban Development & Building Construction DWSS – Department of Water Supply and Sanitation EA – Executing agency EO – Executive officer EPA – Environment protection Act EPR – Environment protection rule FY

GESI – –

Fiscal Year Gender Equity and Social Inclusion

GIS GoN

– –

Geographic Information System Government of Nepal

GTZ – German Agency for Technical Cooperation HH

HRD – –

Household Human Resource Development

HW – Hazardous waste HWM – Hazardous waste management ICB – International competitive bidding INGO – International non-governmental organization IPT – Integrated property tax IS – International shopping ISWM – Integrated solid waste management IUCN – International Union for Conservation of Nature IUDP – Integrated Urban Development Project JICA – Japanese International Cooperation Agency KMC

LFG LFS

– – –

Kathmandu Metropolitan City Landfill gas Landfill site

lpcd – litres per capita per day LSGA

LSMC – –

Local Self Governance Act Lalitpur Sub-Metropolitan City

vi

MIS MLD

– –

Management information system Ministry of Local Development

MoE – Ministry of Environment MoF – Ministry of Finance MOU

MPP – –

Memorandum of understanding Municipal periodic plans

MPPW – Ministry of Physical Planning and Works MSWM – Municipal solid waste management MuAN – Municipal Association of Nepal NCB – National competitive bidding NBSM

NGO – –

Nepal Bureau of Standards and Metrology Non-governmental organization

NPC – National Planning Commission NPR

o&m PCB PCO

– – – –

Nepalese Rupee Operation and maintenance Polychlorinated Biphenyls Project coordination office

PIU – Project implementation unit PPP – Public-private partnership PPPUE – Public-private partnership for urban environment PPTA – Project preparatory technical assistance PSC – Project steering committee PSP – Private sector participation RFP

3R SLF

– – –

Request for proposal Reduce-reuse-recycle Sanitary landfill

SWM – Solid waste management SWMRMC – Solid Waste Management and Resource Mobilization Center SWMTSC – Solid Waste Management and Technical Support Center TA – Technical assistance TDF – Town Development Fund TLO – Tole and laneorganization TOR – Terms of reference TS – Transfer station UN – United Nations UDLE

USEPA VDC

– – –

Urban Development Through Local Effort United States Environment Protection Agency Village Development Committee

VOC WM WSTFC

– – –

Volatile Organic Compound Waste Management Water Supply Tariff Fixation Commission

1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

1. The proposed integrated urban development project (IUDP) is expected to improve effective, efficient and reliable delivery of municipal infrastructure and services with expanded outreach and inclusiveness in project municipalities of Dharan, Janakpur, Nepalgunj, and Siddharthanagar. After its preparatory works, the loan and grant fact-finding mission by ADB was fielded in August-September 2011 for this project and its scope was finalized. In accordance with the priorities of each project municipality, integrated urban environmental improvement programmes including surface-water drainage systems, solid waste management facilities, and urban roads and lanes will be implemented in Janakpur, Nepalgunj, and Siddharthanagar municipalities. Whereas in Dharan municipality, a water supply development subproject will be implemented.

2. According to the modality of IUDP, each of the municipalities will establish a project implementation unit (PIU), which will take the lead in project implementation, under the overall supervision and guidance of the project coordination office (PCO) in the Department of Urban Development and Building Construction (DUDBC) of the Ministry of Physical Planning and Works.

3. Regarding the solid waste management component, which is of vital importance for the improvement of urban environment, it was realized that immediately after the development of all necessary infrastructure (construction of all physical facilities including sanitary landfill site for proper final disposal management together with appropriate recycling and resource recovery facility such as a compost plant, and procurement of equipment and vehicles, etc.), the municipalities may not be capable of properly operating the facilities to the expected level. In that case, the assets coming under the ownership of the municipalities after the project period may even change into liabilities. With due consideration of these concerns, a general agreement was reached during the fact-finding mission that the civil works contract for developing the landfill site should include the operational management service part (including landfill operation) for some definite period to ensure effective and efficient operation of the total solid waste management system, so that the municipalities shall get an opportunity during this period to learn more and improve its technical capacity to manage the total SWM service thereafter in a sustainable manner.

4. Under these backgrounds, it was realized that an additional support is required to specifically formulate an appropriate contractual arrangement for operational management service by the civil works contractor of the landfill site development. An international and a national consultant was engaged for this purpose to take into account the current practice and technical capacity of each project municipality, and prepare necessary documents to assist the PIUs. This report is prepared by the consultants as part of their assignment.

2

1.2 Objectives of the Study

5. The general objective of this assignment is:

To assist project municipalities in formulating appropriate contractual arrangements for effective and efficient SWM operation services which, after review and finalization by PIUs and DSCs, can be included in the civil work contracts for development of sanitary landfill site.

6. The specific objectives (purposes) of this assignment are:

1) To draft appropriate contractual document for an effective and efficient SWM operation service by

defining the scope of services, duration, and financial arrangement; including key performance indicators and targets for performance-based

management contracts; and preparing cost estimates of the proposed arrangement in comparison to the current

costs of SWM.

2) To draft relevant sections of bidding documents (including contract documents) for further use by the PIUs and design and supervision consultants for finalization.

3) To make specific recommendations for smooth transition to the proposed arrangement

1.3 Expected Results/Outputs

7. The expected results of this assignment shall be:

- Available documents and information (particularly the PPTA consultant‟s report) reviewed and municipal staff consulted on the current solid waste management practice and technical capacity of the project municipalities of Janakpur, Nepalgunj, and Siddharthanagar;

- Some arrangements involving private sector in Nepal (such as Kathmandu Valley, Biratnagar) and in countries with similar status reviewed, and strengths and weaknesses identified;

- Scope of services (e.g. primary collection, secondary collection, transportation, final disposal, resource recovery, or a combination of these), duration and financial arrangement (service charge, tipping fee, etc.) assessed and defined;

- Key performance indicators and targets for the performance-based management contracts developed;

- Cost estimates of the proposed arrangement in comparison to the current costs of solid waste management prepared;

3

- Relevant sections of bidding documents (including contract documents) for further use by the PIUs and DSCs (to be engaged by PIUs) drafted;

- Necessary actions (implementable and time-bound) to be taken by the municipalities and others, if any, for smooth transition to the proposed arrangement identified; and

- Findings and recommendations to the key stakeholders in the municipalities and the government for obtaining a general agreement presented.

8. The outputs of this study were presented in the following reports (deliverables) as per TOR in such a way that it can be utilized to take decisions for further necessary actions:

1. Preliminary draft report 2. Draft report 3. Final report

1.4 Scope of Work

9. The scope of work of this assignment includes the following tasks:

Task 1: Review available documents and information (particularly the PPTA consultant‟s report) and consult with municipal staff on the current solid waste management practice and technical capacity of solid waste management in the project municipalities of Janakpur, Nepalgunj, and Siddharthanagar.

Task 2: Review some arrangements involving the private sector being practiced in Nepal (such as Kathmandu Valley, Biratnagar) and in countries with similar status and identify strengths and weaknesses.

Task 3: Assess and define the scope of services to be performed by the civil works contractor for landfill site development, including

the scope of services (e.g. primary collection, secondary collection, transportation, final disposal, resource recovery, or a combination of these),

duration of services, and

financial arrangement (service charge, tipping fee, etc.).

Task 4: Develop key performance indicators and targets for performance-based management contracts.

Task 5: Make cost estimates of the proposed arrangement in comparison to the current costs of solid waste management.

Task 6: Draft relevant sections of bidding documents (including contract documents) for further use by the PIUs and DSCs for working out details.

4

Task 7: Identify necessary actions (implementable and time-bound) to be taken by the municipalities and others, if any, for smooth transition to the proposed arrangement,

Task 8: Present the findings and recommendations to the key stakeholders in the municipalities and government for obtaining a general agreement, and

Task 9: Coordinate with the Solid Waste Management Technical Support Centre (SWMTSC) to keep them aware and involved with the process.

1.5 Approach & Methodology

10. Our approach for this assignment includes a mix of desk review of secondary information, field observation, discussion and consultation with practitioners, and interaction with policymakers. Our analysis and recommendations are based on the strengths and weaknesses of the existing practices and understanding gained from the above methods.

11. A concise methodology for the specific tasks is presented below (Table-1).

Table 1: Concise Methodology

Tasks Methodology

1a. Review of existing documents and information (particularly the PPTA reports).

Desk review of relevant literature and extraction of pertinent information.

1b. Consultation with municipal staff on the current SWM practice and technical capacity.

Field trip to the three municipalities to hold meetings with relevant staff. Use of checklists to guide the discussions.

2a. Review private sector participation in Nepal, particularly in SWM sector.

Desk review of relevant literature and extraction of pertinent information.

2b. Review private sector participation in other countries with similar status.

Collection and review of reports from various countries with similar status, extraction and analysis of pertinent information.

2c. Identify strengths and weaknesses of various models.

Analyse compiled information and present the strengths and weaknesses of the models in a tabular form.

3. Assess and define the scope of operation for the landfill contractor including:

(i) scope of services

(ii) duration of services

(iii) financial arrangement

Field visit to gain understanding of the present situation, discussion with municipal officials; analysis of options, and selection of the best options based on the collected information and professional judgement.

5

Tasks Methodology

4. Develop output specification including

(i) performance indicators and targets

(ii) performance measurement system

(iii) payment mechanism.

Review of existing specifications from Nepal and other countries, selection of appropriate indicators and targets based on the technical capacity of the municipalities, alignment with present monitoring system, propose suitable payment mechanism, consultation with stakeholders and finalization of the specifications.

5. Make cost estimate of the proposed arrangement and compare with current costs of SWM service.

Review of cost estimates by PPTA consultants, collection of standard rates, selection of cost lines, determination of costs.

6. Draft relevant sections of bidding documents following the scope and limitation of this study.

Review of existing procurement documents, preparation of specifications and technical matters in conformity with procurement guidelines.

7. Prepare action plan for the project municipalities for transition to the proposed arrangement with steps that are specific, implementable and time-bound.

Listing of various necessary implementable action steps, sequential ordering of the steps, assigning realistic implementation time, consultation with key stakeholders and finalization.

8. Present findings and recommendations to key stakeholders in the project municipalities and government to obtain general agreement.

Organize dissemination meetings in municipalities and/or in Kathmandu to present the findings and recommendations, solicit views from the audience, incorporate comments and suggestions, finalize the recommendations.

9. Coordinate with the SWMTSC to keep them aware and involved with the process.

Regular sharing of information with the SWMTSC and ensuring their participation wherever appropriate.

1.6 Work Plan and Input Schedule

12. The proposed work plan with time frame for carrying out activities/sub-activities in details till completion of this assignment is presented in Figure 1. The input schedule is shown in Figure 2.

13. Time frame for submission of the reports (deliverables) of this study was (as per TOR) as follows:

0. Field visit reports shall be submitted by the week following respective field visits. 1. Draft preliminary report shall be submitted by 30th November, 2011. 2. Draft report shall be submitted by 31st December, 2011. 3. Final report shall be submitted by 7th February, 2012 after receiving comments if

any, on the draft report.

14. The preliminary draft report prior to the draft report included three chapters as follows:

6

1) A chapter on Introduction describing

A brief background on the proposed integrated urban development project (IUDP) in general, and the importance and significance of this assignment for effective and efficient operational SWM services in the project municipalities of Nepalgunj, Siddharthanagar and Janakpur in particular;

Objectives (general objective and specific objectives) to be achieved by the study under this assignment;

Expected results/ outputs of the study, including deliverables to be submitted in the form of reports;

Scope of work and activities in detail as defined by the TOR provided;

Approach and methodology adopted for performing the defined activities and sub-activities to obtain the expected results/outputs; and

Proposed work plan with timeframe and input schedule of consultants for completion of this assignment following the TOR.

2) A chapter on „Analytical Assessment of Current SWM Practices and Technical Capacity in the Project Municipalities‟ describing

A review of available documents and information (particularly the PPTA consultant‟s report) related to this assignment;

Consultation with municipal staff on problems and issues of current SWM services provided by the municipalities in general, and on views/opinions and suggestions for private sector involvement in SWM service in particular; and

Municipality-wise analytical situation on current SWM practices and technical capacity based on the review of related PPTA consultant‟s report and observations during the first field visits.

3) A chapter on „Involvement of Private Sector in Solid Waste Management‟ describing

Existing situation of private sector participation in SWM services in Nepal with a background on initiatives and problems faced, policy and legislative measures for its promotion in future, and some existing arrangements with strengths and weakness;

International experiences in some other similar countries; and

Summary of strengths and weaknesses of different possible models.

7

15. A draft report was prepared after 1) incorporating comments/suggestions on this preliminary draft report, 2) assessing and defining the scope of operation services, 3) developing output specifications, the performance measurement system and payment mechanism etc. The draft report mainly included, in addition to the above 3 chapters, other four chapters as follows:

4) A chapter on „Recommendations on the Scope of Work for the Civil Contractor of Landfill Construction‟ describing

Scope of operational services; Duration of operational services; and Financial arrangements.

5) A chapter on „Output Specifications‟ describing

Performance indicators and targets; Performance measurement and monitoring system; and Payment mechanism in the contract.

6) A chapter on „Cost Estimates‟ describing

Currents costs of SWM service rendered in the municipality ; Costs under proposed arrangement; and Discussion on benefits and disadvantages.

7) A chapter on „Relevant Sections of Bidding Documents‟ following the scope and limitation of this study.

16. The final report has been prepared after 1) incorporating comments/suggestions on the draft report, 2) assessing and defining the scope of operation services, 3) developing output specifications, the performance measurement system and payment mechanism etc., and 4) 2nd field visit in the project municipalities for the purpose elaborated in the work plan. This report mainly includes, in addition to the above 7 chapters, two more chapters as follows:

8) A chapter on „Action Plan for Municipalities‟, mainly focusing on smooth transition to the proposed arrangement, and

9) A chapter on „Involvement of SWMTSC‟ following the consultants‟ coordination with the SWMTSC for its involvement in this study process and describing its expected follow-up supports to the project after completion of this study.

8

Figure 1: Work Plan

Shafiul AHMED and Ashok Ratna TULADHAR S. N.

ACTIVITIES/ SUB-ACTIVITIES

MONTHS (2011/12)

October November December January February

1 Meeting with PCO/DUDBC, SWMTSC/MLD for consultation on scope of

work and work plan.

2 Review of:

- relevant documents/ information, particularly PPTA reports,

- private sector involvement in Nepal and in similar other countries

3 Submission of work plan and preparatory work for field visits

4 Field visit-1 for meeting with municiapl staff to clarify objectives & scope of

work and field observation of current SWM service in

- Siddharthanagar

- Nepalgunj

- Janakpur, and respective field visit reports

5 Assess & define scope of operation service

6 Develop output specification, performance measurement system, payment

mechanism

7 Cost estimate of proposed arrangement compared to current costs of SWM

8 Drafting of relevant sections of bidding documents for detailing by PIU/DSC

9 Identification of necessary municipal actions for smooth transition to the

proposed arrangements

10 Field visit-2 before FR for meeting with municiapl staff to clarify costs,

bidding documents, necessary municipal action plan etc. in

Siddharthanagar, Nepalgunj and Janakpur; and respective field visit reports

11 Presentation of findings & recommndations to key stakeholders in the

municipalities & government

12 Preparation & submission of reports

12.1 Preliminary draft report

12.2 Draft report

12.3 Final report

Full-time (Field)

Input

Home Office (Intermittent)

9

Figure 2: Input Schedule

No. NAME OF EXPERT/

POSITION

MONTHS (2011/12) TOTAL PERSON-DAY INPUT

October November December January February HOME FIELD TOTAL

INTERNATIONAL

1 Shafiul AHMED 21

33 Solid Waste Management Specialist 12

NATIONAL

2 Ashok Ratna TULADHAR 21

33 Solid Waste Management Specialist 12

Full-time (Field)

Input

Home Office (Intermittent)

10

2. ANALYTICAL ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT SWM PRACTICES AND TECHNICAL CAPACITY OF THE PROJECT MUNICIPALITIES

2.1 Review of Existing Documents

Background

17. Nepalgunj, Siddharthanagar and Janakpur are secondary towns of Nepal. The estimated and projected population of the cities are given in Table 2. Out of the three project municipalities, only Janakpur is expected to cross 200,000 population by 2031. The present generation of solid waste is only about 27 ton/d for Nepalgunj and Siddharthanagar, and 44 ton/d for Janakpur. However, with the growth of the cities the amount of solid waste is expected to increase several times by 2031. The projected solid waste generation in 2031 is 80 ton/d, 96 ton/d and 157 ton/d for Nepalgunj, Siddharthanagar and Janakpur respectively.

Collection

18. The present collection of solid waste in the cities is not adequate. The reported collection efficiency ranges between 41% and 79% as shown in Table 2 below. The actual efficiency, if properly accounted, could be lower. As the cities grow in population with consequent increase in waste generation, the collection efficiency must be improved to maintain a clean and healthy environment.

19. At present the municipalities are mostly collecting solid waste from main roads. House-to-house collection is available in some parts of the cities only.

20. There is no segregation of waste. Biodegradable waste is mixed with other types of waste including hazardous or infectious waste.

21. Indiscriminate throwing of waste on roads or into drains is commonly practiced. There is also a lack of synchronization between collection and throwing of waste causing piles of uncollected waste to remain on the streets for a long time. Drains are clogged with solid waste causing stagnation and breeding habitat for disease vectors.

Secondary Transport

22. Municipalities generally provide secondary transport of wastes from main streets to the final dumping grounds. Trucks and tractor- trailers are used for this purpose. In Siddharthanagar, the municipal trucks also serve smaller lanes in parts of the city. In Nepalgunj, CBOs manage secondary transport in parts of the city. Like primary collection, the secondary collection service also requires improvement. The fleet of vehicles will need upgrading in response to increase in waste generation and operation of landfill sites.

Final disposal

23. Open dumping of solid waste is the current practice in all three cities. This poses a serious threat to the environment and public health. Properly designed and

11

operated sanitary landfills are required for the cities. In this regard, Nepalgunj and Siddharthanagar municipalities are in the process of acquiring land from private owners, while Janakpur municipality is considering a piece of land owned by a religious society (guthi).

Recycling

24. The private sector is active in recycling paper, plastic, glass and metal in all three cities. But this sector is not formalized. Further encouragement and support to this sector will improve recycling practices. In contrast, recycling of organic waste is not sufficient. Segregation of waste into organic and inorganic parts followed by recycling of the organic part through composting or bio-methanation will improve solid waste management. This will reduce the volume of waste for landfilling and produce valuable products like compost or biogas.

Private Sector Participation

25. While the private sector is active in recycling, it is not yet active in terms of providing service. In limited areas of the cities, some NGOs/CBOs provide primary collection service, and even manage secondary transport service. However, the full utilization of the private sector‟s potentials is yet to be harnessed. Initial attempts to engage the private sector in delivering SWM service met with some problems. The reasons include inexperience of the private sector and limitations of the municipalities. The municipalities, however, remain interested in building partnership with the private sector for delivering better SWM service.

Public Awareness

26. The level of public awareness about solid waste remains low in all three cities. This is evidenced by the wide-spread practice of throwing waste into drains or roads. The municipalities have attempted to raise public awareness campaign in a limited way. Strong and effective programs on public awareness creation to inform, motivate and educate people to cooperate and participate in solid waste management are necessary.

Social Inclusion

27. A multitude of people are involved in the solid waste sector including waste pickers, itinerant buyers of recyclable material, small businesses dealing in recyclables. Some of them belong to the most marginalized communities. They earn their living from solid waste and provide valuable service to the sector, but their contribution is often not recognized. While developing a more effective and efficient solid waste management in these cities, the impacts on their livelihood must be kept in mind and any adverse effects should be minimized as far as possible. The informal workers deserve support in terms of recognition, organization, income opportunity and health protection. So far the sweepers engaged by the municipalities are concerned, they are now socio-economically at better status than few years before, mainly because of raising the basic salary of lowest level staff by the Government relatively more compared to that of higher level staff. In the project municipalities, percentage of female sweepers is less

12

than that of male sweepers. For instance, in Nepalgunj (with maximum no. of sweepers) and in Janakpur, it is about 40%. And, as per government‟s rules & regulations, female sweepers get some more holidays for the same basic salary.

Table 2: Summary of Existing Situation in Project Municipalities

Aspect Nepalgunj Siddharthanagar Janakpur

Estimated Population in 2011 74,000 72,000 105,000

Projected Population in 2031 121,000 142,000 209,000

Present SW Generation (2011) ~ 27 ton/d ~ 27 ton/d ~ 44 ton/d

Projected SW Generation in 2031 ~ 80 ton/d ~ 96 ton/d ~ 157 ton/d

Collection

Primary collection is inadequate.

Only about 17 ton/d*





Transportation

Municipality provides secondary transport service in core area by picking up waste from main roads.



Final Disposal Open dumping practiced. Open dumping practiced. Open dumping practiced.

Recycling Plastics and glass recycling in limited scale by private agencies.

Plastics and glass recycling in limited scale by private agencies.

Plastics, paper and glass recycling in limited scale by private agencies.

Private Sector Participation in SWM service

Low level of private sector engagement reported. Detail data not available.

Low level of private sector engagement reported, but a bit better experienced than Nepalgunj and Janakpur. Detail data not available.

Low level of private sector engagement reported. Detail data not available.

Waste Pickers Informal waste pickers exist. Detail data not available.

Informal waste pickers exist. Detail data not available.

Informal waste pickers exist. Detail data not available.

Health Care Waste Management

No proper hospital waste management is practiced.

~ 49kg/d infectious waste is generated.

No proper hospital waste management is practiced

~91kg/d infectious waste is generated.

No proper hospital waste management is practiced

~ 60kg/d infectious waste is generated.

*Note: As reported by the municipalities (November, 2011)

13

2.2 Consultation with Project Municipalities

28. After review of available documents and information (particularly the PPTA consultant‟s report of IUDP), we interacted with the project municipalities to gain their views on pertinent issues. A questionnaire was distributed to them to collect latest basic information related to current SWM practices in addition to those provided in the IUDP reports. Subsequently we visited the municipalities and discussed the issues in detail by using a checklist. For this we met relevant officials of each municipality including CEOs, planning chiefs, SWM section chiefs, and social development officers. In addition, we met private agencies including NGOs and CBOs involved in SWM. We also observed the collection and transportation of solid waste being disposed of at the existing open dump sites. Transect walk through main roads and lanes helped us to get a general view of the existing condition of urban services including cleanliness, drainage, and road condition.

29. Table 3 presents a summary of our findings on the private sector involvement in SWM service.

Table 3: Issues on Private Sector Involvement in SWM


Institutional

Views on PSP

The Municipality has a favourable view about the private sector participation in municipal services. It is already involving private sector in vehicle parking management and bus terminal operation, but not yet in SWM service.

Although privatization of SWM leads to an improvement in effectiveness & efficiency of service, Municipality is of the opinion that its existing large number of staff must be taken care of while pursuing the process of privatization. Nepalgunj being a high growth rate city, the waste volume will continue to rise. Municipality may not be able to manage its waste alone in future. Partnership with private sector is therefore necessary.

Recycling operations are

The Municipality in general has a positive view on private sector participation in the municipal services. It believes that efficiency and effectiveness in delivering SWM services can be good improved through partnership with the private sector. However, there have been a few problems in working with the private sector in the past. Therefore, some caveats were mentioned.

There is generally a positive view on the private sector participation in the Municipality.

It was reported that the primary collection part of SWM could be contracted out to private sector. Municipality is already working on such an initiative.

It was suggested that the secondary collection part could be left as the Municipality‟s responsibility, as it requires vehicles, and private agencies may not be willing to invest in procurement of vehicles.

The Municipality‟s view is that the private sector should be involved in service delivery as much as possible, so that these services are no longer a burden to the public sector. In this way the municipality can pay due attention to

14


best done by the private sector. Dealing with the existing

workforce in a prudent manner is an important issue for initiating PPP. Municipality may choose to retain their workers but place them under the supervision of private agency. Also, implementing the PPP initiative in a small area first, then expanding based on lessons learned may be a good strategy. This way the efficiency and effectiveness gained through PPP will help Municipality take further decision.

other important issues to develop the city. It may be noted that building

partnership with private sector does not lessen the burden or responsibility of the municipality. Such partnership is used for gaining efficiency & effectiveness. The municipality’s responsibility shifts from direct operation to monitoring and management. This requires particular expertise for which the municipality must build its capacity. Also, involvement of private agencies does not mean that the municipality’s financial burden will be greatly reduced. In reality, the private agencies may require a lot of guidance and support from the municipality as well as sharing cost of services.

Experience in PPP

In several wards, street cleaning and waste collection is managed by ward level SWM committees composed of local residents. The municipality provides some manpower (workers) and materials (brooms). The Red Cross is also a partner and provides some equipment (wheelbarrows).

There is also a program on urban sanitation where the municipality is partnering with the Swiss Red Cross, Nepal Red Cross, District Offices (Agriculture and Health), and the Chamber of Commerce.

Till July 2011, a private company was engaged for routine street cleaning along 17 km of main roads within the city core area for waste collection, transportation and final disposal service. However, this contract had to be cancelled due to poor performance of the company, as it did not complied with terms and conditions of the contract agreement. Reportedly, one of the main reasons behind this problem was the low bidding of the contractor, which the municipality had to accept due to its legal bindings while awarding contract. However, detail review of this contractual

This municipality is now in contract with a private enterprise in managing a public toilet built and owned by the municipality.

Plans are also underway to contract out the cleaning, waste collection and disposal service by dividing municipal area in 6 clusters.

Preliminary plans are being prepared with a PPPUE program support of UNDP for this initiative. After some necessary decisions of the municipality board, the contracts are expected to be awarded soon. It is reported that the contracts will be for one year at first but renewable upon satisfactory service. Under these

15


agreement also shows some weak points in its terms & conditions, particularly regarding special cleaning and additional services (e.g. during festivals, special occasions etc.) expected to be performed under Municipality‟s instruction as and when required being not at all specific. This is to be taken as a good

lesson for improving terms & conditions of the contractual agreement while contracting out the landfill operation and other related functions.

There is another existing arrangement with a CBO called “Belahiya Village Samaj” for total cleaning of Belahiya area (ward no. 1), including waste collection & transportation to the final disposal site. This service has been continuing for about 5 years satisfactorily with a nominal municipal support. The Municipality only provides 3 ltrs. diesel per day and 4 sweepers. Other financial sources for sustaining this arrangement includes funds collected from socio-cultural programs and charity shows organized by the Samaj during special occasions (e.g. Bhailo in Tihar) and membership fees of the society. Door-to-door collection service is provided in limited area only, for which currently no fee is being collected.

contracts, private sector agencies will collect waste from small lanes and bring those to main streets to load into municipal trucks. The existing municipal

workers in the proposed cluster, where services will be contracted out, will be reallocated to other areas.

Readiness for PPP

The municipality has already some experience in working with CBOs, NGOs and various other organizations.

The Municipality has a PPP Committee to handle private sector participation. This committee is responsible for engagement with the private sector.

The municipality seems to be ready to engage with the private sector as evidenced by its initiatives with public toilet operation and outsourcing of SWM

16


services.

Views on landfill operation

Nepalgunj Municipality firmly believes that the operation of the landfill site should be done by a private party under the supervision of the Municipality. From the very beginning, the Municipality itself should not attempt to run this facility.

The Municipality thinks that the landfill site may be operated by a private agency during the project period. However, the municipality is concerned by the fact that civil contractors in Nepal are not experienced in operating landfill sites. This may create a problematic situation by assigning the long-term operation of landfill to a civil contractor. The Municipality thinks that landfill operation should be best left with the municipality itself for the above reason.

This risk will be minimized as IUDP will select the operator through international competitive bidding. A pre-qualification process may be adopted to allow only qualified and experienced firms to bid and exclude inexperienced firms. The bidding process will also lead to associations between international and national firms for better performance.

Municipality thinks that the landfill site should be operated in a gradual manner and with due consideration of limited municipal resources. Once the project is completed, the landfill site must be operated within the budget of the municipality. Therefore, it should be considered while designing the operational plan. Otherwise, this asset will become a liability for the municipality.

The opinion of the Municipality is that the landfill site should be operated by the private sector. The landfill could be continued to run by the private sector even after the project is over, but the asset should belong to the municipality. The Municipality thinks that the private sector will be more effective and efficient in operating the site.

As for future plans, the municipality is thinking about promoting segregation of waste and composting the organic fraction. This will extend the life of the proposed landfill facility.

Financial

17


The municipality already collects sanitation fee together with street lighting and fire brigade. In the fiscal year 11/12, service fee @ 8% of integrated property tax is being collected, and shall be increased to 10% next year. A significant part of it may be used for SWM operations once the facilities are built and the service improved. The city also receives grants from the central government, a part of which may also be used for SWM.

At present the municipality collects SWM fee of NPR 200 - 300 per household per year. The paying of this fee has been made compulsory by strictly linking with other municipal services, e.g. while giving permissions, issuing the municipal recommendation letters in various affairs by the municipality.

The municipality is against the idea of private agencies collecting service charges directly from the citizens. As reported by municipality, any additional fee collection by a private agency will appear as a system of double taxation. Therefore, the municipality wishes that service fees should be collected by the municipality itself, and then be used to engage qualified private agencies. Many financial arrangements

between the private sector and municipality are possible. The nominal service fee

collected so far is for the door-to-door pick-up service outside city core areas (i.e. individual households bringing their wastes to the vehicle on route standing at some common point at main roadside). But mainly in city core areas, for direct door-to-door collection service (i.e. waste collectors going to individual households to collect waste, which is also one level higher service), it is better that the private sector rendering this direct service

The present municipal budget as reported is about NPR 100 million per year, out of which about NPR 10 million is spent for SWM service. The revenue collection may be improved to partly absorb the additional cost of operating the new waste management facilities. Their present plans include involvement of private agencies to deliver SWM services and to authorize them to collect NPR 30/month per household. The rate for shops and commercial establishments would be more. Municipality‟s experience in some commercial areas shows that the people are willing to pay such service fee happily, if the service is good. The service fees collected

from households and institutions will only partly cover the cost of proving SWM service. The rest still has to be borne by the municipality. Therefore, thorough accounting and budgeting are required.

18


collects the fees itself for better accountability of the service provided – however as per the fee structure fixed by the municipality.

Social

The municipality thinks that creating public awareness to support effective and efficient SWM service is one of its most important functions deserving top priority. The Municipality has to play a vital role in promoting the reduction of waste at source.

The municipality actively engages with citizens and CBOs. This good practice may be further boosted to cover all wards of the city.

Janakpur Municipality has an active Social Development Section. They are trying to involve community members, women‟s groups and school children in promoting better SWM. This section works with a number of NGOs & CBOs, and even with the local Chamber of Commerce. In few areas, efforts for improvement of SWM have been made by introducing rickshaw vans for collection and assigning extra workers with some support from UN-Habitat.

The Social Development Section, however, has only two full-time staff. They do not have any ward level staff. It is expected that citizens‟ forums will be formed in each ward in future. Then the Section will be able to work through these platforms at ward level.

Legal

The municipality believes that the provisions of the local self government act (LSGA) are sufficient to make necessary by-laws. This is deemed not so difficult for the Municipality.

One of the legal problems identified by the municipality is that they are generally bound to select the lowest bidder in the bidding process of contract. This practice very often leads to the selection of unsuitable private agencies lacking in capacity to deliver services.

It appears to the municipality

The Municipality thinks that there is not much legal barrier against private sector involvement. The present laws are sufficient. Such laws also permit the Municipality to allow private sector to collect service fees from citizens. It was noted that the Municipality has not received the new SWM Act, 2068 (2011) so far.

19


that the private sector‟s motive is only profit-oriented, whereas the municipality must ensure public service. This makes engagement of private sector inherently complicated. This problem has become apparent in case of a vegetable market operation. The municipality entered into partnership arrangement with a private agency to construct and operate a vegetable market. However, their performance is unsatisfactory. The Municipality is now finding it difficult to break the contract as the private agency invested funds and needs to recover the cost. Therefore, legal safeguards should be in place in case of poor performance.

Although local self governance act (LSGA) gives the authority of passing required by-laws, it is still not an easy process for the Municipality.

Some copies of the SWM Act, 2068 (2011) have been forwarded to Janakpur Municipality.

Capacity Building Needs

The municipality needs training in landfill operation and recycling. Besides, general capacity improvement in GIS, e-bidding and procurement, accounting, and tax collection are also needed. IUDP will launch a capacity

development technical assistance for strengthening the capacity of four municipalities. This will include support to GIS, financial management and

For capacity building support, the municipality made specific request for introduction of GIS, e-bidding and procurement, accounting, and integrated tax collection system. For SWM, trainings on composting, transfer station, landfill operation and building awareness within the municipal staff were requested.

There is still not sufficient capacity in the municipality

Capacity building support will be needed on the technical and contract management aspects. They will also require support in creating public awareness.

20


revenue enhancement. to launch e-procurement. But an efficient and transparent procurement process is important. IUDP may support some initial steps to improve procurement process, particularly PPP arrangement.

21

2.3 Current SWM Practices and Technical Capacity

30. After the review of existing situation reflected in the IUDP reports, and following consultations with municipal staff and subsequent field observations, current SWM practices in the project municipalities are presented as follows.

2.3.1 Nepalgunj Municipality

Solid Waste Generation and Collection

31. Solid waste generation stream* of Nepalgunj municipality, based on IUDP report (TA 7727-NEP: Preparing the Integrated Urban Development Project), shall be as shown in Table 4, below. Municipal waste collection is reported to be 17.0 t/d in November 2011, which gives an average collection coverage of ~63% at present.

Table 4: Municipal SWM Generation Stream (2011-2036) - Nepalgunj Municipality

UGR Total

Year Proj. Pop. Effect. Pop. [kg/p/d] [t/day] [%] [t/day] [%] [t/day] [%] [t/day]

2011 74,000 81,400 0.33 26.86 62.00 16.65 24.00 6.45 14.00 3.762012 76,000 83,600 0.35 29.26 61.60 18.02 24.20 7.08 14.20 4.152013 78,000 85,800 0.36 30.89 61.20 18.90 24.40 7.54 14.40 4.452014 80,000 88,000 0.37 32.56 60.80 19.80 24.60 8.01 14.60 4.752015 82,000 90,200 0.39 35.18 60.40 21.25 24.80 8.72 14.80 5.212016 84,000 92,400 0.40 36.96 60.00 22.18 25.00 9.24 15.00 5.542017 86,000 94,600 0.41 38.79 59.50 23.08 25.50 9.89 15.00 5.822018 88,000 96,800 0.43 41.62 59.00 24.56 26.00 10.82 15.00 6.242019 90,000 99,000 0.44 43.56 58.50 25.48 26.50 11.54 15.00 6.532020 92,000 101,200 0.45 45.54 58.00 26.41 27.00 12.30 15.00 6.832021 95,000 104,500 0.47 49.12 57.50 28.24 27.50 13.51 15.00 7.372022 97,000 106,700 0.48 51.22 57.00 29.19 28.00 14.34 15.00 7.682023 100,000 110,000 0.49 53.90 56.50 30.45 28.50 15.36 15.00 8.092024 102,000 112,200 0.51 57.22 56.00 32.04 29.00 16.59 15.00 8.582025 105,000 115,500 0.52 60.06 55.50 33.33 29.50 17.72 15.00 9.012026 107,000 117,700 0.53 62.38 55.00 34.31 30.00 18.71 15.00 9.362027 110,000 121,000 0.55 66.55 54.00 35.94 31.00 20.63 15.00 9.982028 113,000 124,300 0.56 69.61 53.00 36.89 32.00 22.27 15.00 10.442029 115,000 126,500 0.57 72.11 52.00 37.49 33.00 23.79 15.00 10.822030 118,000 129,800 0.59 76.58 51.00 39.06 34.00 26.04 15.00 11.492031 121,000 133,100 0.60 79.86 50.00 39.93 35.00 27.95 15.00 11.982032 129,636 142,600 0.61 87.46 49.00 42.86 36.00 31.49 15.00 13.122033 132,773 146,050 0.63 91.52 48.00 43.93 37.00 33.86 15.00 13.732034 135,909 149,500 0.64 95.68 47.00 44.97 38.00 36.36 15.00 14.352035 140,091 154,100 0.65 100.68 46.00 46.31 39.00 39.26 15.00 15.102036 143,227 157,550 0.67 105.03 45.00 47.26 40.00 42.01 15.00 15.75

Municipal waste generationNepalgunj

Biodegradable Recyclables Others

*Reference:

Table H-12 / Vol.2 – Nepalgunj, Annex H –SWM / TA 7727-NEP: Preparing the Integrated Urban Development Project

22

Cleaning and Primary Collection

32. Highway and other main roads (Sadar Line, New Road, etc.) are daily swept very early in the morning by the municipality. Waste heaps dumped on roadsides by households and shops together with sweeping waste are picked up by tractor-trailers. During the day shift, waste is similarly collected additionally from various wards, depending on necessity, between 1:00pm and 5:00pm by deploying 2 tractor-trailers.

33. Street cleaning and waste collection service in wards 12 (Bilashpur area), 15, 16, 2, 4 and bus park is managed by ward level SWM committees in coordination with the local people. For this service, municipal support is limited to the provision of sweepers, brooms, etc. combined with support from Red Cross by providing primary collection equipment such as wheelbarrows. As regards the ward level SWM committees, women‟s groups in Ward 2 and the ex-ward chairmen in Ward 11 are involved, which makes the cleaning effective.

34. In addition, a program on urban sanitation and SWM is being launched in five communities of the municipality with support of the Swiss Red Cross in partnership with the Nepal Red Cross Society District Office, Banke, Nepalgunj Municipality, District Agricultural Development Office, District Public Health Office and Nepalgunj Chamber of Commerce & Industries.

Collection and Transportation

35. Regarding the collection and transportation service, waste heaps dumped on roadsides by households and shops are picked up by tractor-trailers together with sweeping waste. During the day shift, additional wastes are similarly collected from various wards depending necessity, between 1:00pm and 5:00pm by deploying 2 tractor-trailers 6 days a week. All solid wastes collected are transported to the existing dump site at Bulbulaiya in ward 17.

Final Disposal

36. All wastes collected by tractor-trailers are crudely dumped in a large area located near Bulbulaiya in ward no.17. This area has been used as an uncontrolled dumping site for 25 years. This is done simply by filling low lands and natural depressions with waste, and then covering the waste with soil as and when required.

Equipment and Vehicles

37. Equipment and vehicles currently being used for solid waste management service in Nepalgunj municipality are found to be in the following physical condition.

23

Table 5: Condition of SWM Vehicles and Equipment in Nepalgunj Municipality (Jan 2012)

S. N.

Type

No. of Equipment/ Vehicles Remarks Total Opera-

-ting Needing Repair

Total Depre-ciated Major Minor

1 Wheel barrow 17 17 - - -

2 Rickshaw 10 1 - - 9

3 Tractor trailer (cap.~3m3) 5 4 - 1 -

Municipal Staffing

38. The current status of staff being engaged directly in solid waste management service in Nepalgunj municipality under SWM Sub-section of the municipal Environment & Sanitation Section is presented below (Table 6).

Table 6: Municipal Staffing in SWM Service in Nepalgunj Municipality (Jan 2012)

S. N.

Position / Level

Manpower Remarks Total Perma-

-nent Tempo-rary

Con- -tract

Daily wage

SWM Sub-section/ Environment & Sanitation Section

1 Sanitation Inspector / (non-gaz. officer, adm. level-5) 1 1 - - -

Notes : *Asstt. Inspector and 1 line man presently working in revenue section

2

Asstt.San. Inspector* / (non-gaz. officer, adm. level-4) 1 1

-

-

-

3

Supervisor (Line man)+ / (non-gaz. adm. level-3)

4

-

-

4

-

4 Tractor Driver

4

2

-

2

-

5 Sweepers 97 65 6 15 11

24

2.3.2 Siddharthanagar Municipality


39. Solid waste generation stream* of Siddharthanagar municipality, based on IUDP report (TA 7727-NEP: Preparing the Integrated Urban Development Project), shall be as shown in Table 7, below. Municipal waste collection is reported to be 21.0 t/d in November 2011, which gives an average collection coverage of ~79% at present.

Table 7: Municipal SWM Generation Stream (2011-2036)-Siddharthanagar Municipality

UGR Total


2011 72,000 82,800 0.32 26.50 76.00 20.14 15.00 3.97 9.00 2.382012 74,000 85,100 0.34 28.51 75.00 21.38 16.00 4.56 9.00 2.572013 76,957 88,500 0.35 30.98 74.00 22.92 17.00 5.27 9.00 2.792014 79,000 90,850 0.37 33.16 72.00 23.88 18.00 5.97 10.00 3.322015 82,000 94,300 0.38 35.83 71.00 25.44 19.00 6.81 10.00 3.582016 85,000 97,750 0.39 38.12 70.00 26.69 20.00 7.62 10.00 3.812017 88,000 101,200 0.40 40.48 69.00 27.93 21.00 8.50 10.00 4.052018 91,000 104,650 0.41 42.91 68.00 29.18 22.00 9.44 10.00 4.292019 94,000 108,100 0.43 45.94 67.00 30.78 23.00 10.57 10.00 4.592020 97,000 111,550 0.44 49.08 66.00 32.39 24.00 11.78 10.00 4.912021 101,000 116,150 0.45 52.27 65.00 33.97 25.00 13.07 10.00 5.232022 104,000 119,600 0.47 55.61 64.00 35.59 26.00 14.46 10.00 5.562023 108,000 124,200 0.48 59.62 63.00 37.56 27.00 16.10 10.00 5.962024 112,000 128,800 0.50 63.76 62.00 39.53 28.00 17.85 10.00 6.382025 116,000 133,400 0.51 68.03 61.00 41.50 29.00 19.73 10.00 6.802026 120,000 138,000 0.52 71.76 60.00 43.06 30.00 21.53 10.00 7.182027 124,000 142,600 0.54 76.29 59.00 45.01 31.00 23.65 10.00 7.632028 128,000 147,200 0.55 80.96 58.00 46.96 32.00 25.91 10.00 8.102029 133,000 152,950 0.57 86.42 57.00 49.26 33.00 28.52 10.00 8.642030 137,000 157,550 0.58 91.38 56.00 51.17 34.00 31.07 10.00 9.142031 142,000 163,300 0.59 96.35 55.00 52.99 35.00 33.72 10.00 9.632032 147,000 169,050 0.60 101.43 54.00 54.77 36.00 36.51 10.00 10.142033 152,000 174,800 0.61 107.21 53.00 56.82 37.00 39.67 10.00 10.722034 157,000 180,550 0.63 113.14 52.00 58.84 38.00 42.99 10.00 11.312035 163,000 187,450 0.64 119.97 51.00 61.18 39.00 46.79 10.00 12.002036 169,000 194,350 0.65 126.98 50.00 63.49 40.00 50.79 10.00 12.70

Municipal waste generation


Siddharthanagar

*Reference: Table H-12 / Vol.3 – Siddharthanagar, Annex H –SWM /TA 7727-NEP: Preparing the Integrated Urban Development

Project

25

Cleaning and Primary Collection

40. For city cleaning and waste collection service within the core area, a private company (Warasi Nirman Sewa) was contracted till the end of last fiscal year 2010/11 for cleaning about 17 km of main roads twice a day. As the performance of this contractor was not satisfactory, this outsourcing attempt has been dropped. The municipality itself is currently carrying out this daily morning service. The wastes collected from the curbside in wheelbarrows are transferred into a bigger tractor-trailer temporarily stationed at the main road.

41. The whole Belahiya area (ward no. 1) is still being done very satisfactorily by a local CBO called “Belahiya Village Samaj” with a nominal support of the municipality. This nominal municipal support is limited to providing 3 liters of diesel per day and 4 sweepers. This arrangement has been continuing satisfactorily for about 5 years. Other financial sources for sustaining this arrangement includes funds collected from socio-cultural programs and charity shows organized by the Samaj during special occasions (e.g. Bhailo in Tihar). Membership fees collected by the society are also used to support this activity. The door-to-door waste collection service is provided in limited areas only. The CBO does not collect any fee from the citizens for this service.

42. In addition, the municipality is directly involved in cleaning roadside drains of various wards, and also provides door-to-door pick-up service with tractor trailers in ward nos. 6, 7, 8, 9, 12 plus some areas of other wards. Reduction of waste through house hold composting and source segregation is encouraged in these areas.


43. All solid wastes collected, including those from daily street-cleaning, roadside pick-up by the municipality, “Belahiya Village Samaj” service in ward no. 1, and from the municipal cleaning service of roadside drains and door-to-door pick-up service in ward nos. 6 -12, are being transported by tractor-trailers to the existing dump site along Danda khola river in ward no. 1.

Final Disposal

44. All the wastes collected by tractor-trailers are still dumped along the embankment of Danda Khola river in ward no. 1 near the border with India, which has been in operation for about 6 years. Although it is a crude dumping practice, efforts have been made to cover the dumped waste with soil, but not very effectively. As a result, there are occasional complaints from the police colony stationed nearby against littering and offensive odour.


45. The physical condition of equipment and vehicles currently being used for solid waste management service in Siddharthanagar municipality is presented in Table 8.

26

Table 8: Condition of SWM Vehicles/ Equipment in Siddharthanagar Municipality (Jan 2012)

S. N.

Type



Total Depre---ciated Major Minor

1 Wheel barrow (cap.~750 ltr.) 13 8 3 2 -

2

Tractor trailer (cap.~4m3) 1

1

-

-

-

3 Tractor trailer (cap.~3m3) 2 2 - - -

Municipal Staffing

46. The current status of staff engaged directly in solid waste management service in Siddharthanagar municipality under SWM Unit/ Environment Protection Sub-section of the municipal Urban Development Section is presented in Table 9.

Table 9: Municipal staffing in SWM service in Siddharthanagar Municipality (Jan 2012)

S. N.

Position / Level


-nent Tempo-rary

Con- -tract

Daily wage

SWM Unit/ Environment Protection Sub-section/ Urban Development Section

1 Sanitation Chief / (gaz. officer, adm. level-6)

1 1 - - -

2 Supervisor / (non- gaz., tech. level-1) 1

1

-

-

-

3

Driver (heavy)

1

-

-

1

-

4 Driver (light)

2

1

-

1

-

5 Sweepers 45 5 - 8 32

27

2.3.3 Janakpur Municipality


47. Solid waste generation stream* of Janakpur municipality, based on IUDP report (TA 7727-NEP: Preparing the Integrated Urban Development Project), shall be as shown in Table 10, below. Municipal waste collection is reported to be 18.0 t/d in November 2011, which gives an average collection coverage of ~41% at present.

Table 10: Municipal SWM Generation Stream (2011-2036)-Janakpur Municipality

UGR Total


2011 105,000 131,250 0.33 43.75 73.00 31.94 22.00 9.63 5.00 2.192012 109,000 136,250 0.35 47.23 72.50 34.24 22.50 10.63 5.00 2.362013 113,000 141,250 0.36 50.85 72.00 36.61 23.00 11.70 5.00 2.542014 117,000 146,250 0.37 54.60 71.50 39.04 23.50 12.83 5.00 2.732015 121,000 151,250 0.39 58.48 71.00 41.52 24.00 14.04 5.00 2.922016 125,000 156,250 0.40 62.50 70.00 43.75 25.00 15.63 5.00 3.132017 129,000 161,250 0.41 66.65 69.00 45.99 26.00 17.33 5.00 3.332018 134,000 167,500 0.43 71.47 68.00 48.60 27.00 19.30 5.00 3.572019 138,000 172,500 0.44 75.90 67.00 50.85 28.00 21.25 5.00 3.802020 143,000 178,750 0.45 81.03 66.00 53.48 29.00 23.50 5.00 4.052021 148,000 185,000 0.47 86.33 65.00 56.12 30.00 25.90 5.00 4.322022 153,000 191,250 0.48 91.80 64.00 58.75 31.00 28.46 5.00 4.592023 159,000 198,750 0.49 98.05 63.00 61.77 32.00 31.38 5.00 4.902024 164,000 205,000 0.51 103.87 62.00 64.40 33.00 34.28 5.00 5.192025 170,000 212,500 0.52 110.50 61.00 67.41 34.00 37.57 5.00 5.532026 176,000 220,000 0.53 117.33 60.00 70.40 35.00 41.07 5.00 5.872027 182,000 227,500 0.55 124.37 59.00 73.38 36.00 44.77 5.00 6.222028 188,000 235,000 0.56 131.60 58.00 76.33 37.00 48.69 5.00 6.582029 195,000 243,750 0.57 139.75 57.00 79.66 38.00 53.11 5.00 6.992030 202,000 252,500 0.59 148.13 56.00 82.95 39.00 57.77 5.00 7.412031 209,000 261,250 0.60 156.75 55.00 86.21 40.00 62.70 5.00 7.842032 216,000 270,000 0.61 165.60 54.00 89.42 41.00 67.90 5.00 8.282033 224,000 280,000 0.63 175.47 53.00 93.00 42.00 73.70 5.00 8.772034 231,000 288,750 0.64 184.80 52.00 96.10 43.00 79.46 5.00 9.242035 239,000 298,750 0.65 195.18 51.00 99.54 44.00 85.88 5.00 9.762036 248,000 310,000 0.67 206.67 50.00 103.33 45.00 93.00 5.00 10.33

Janakpur Municipal waste generation


*Reference: Table H-12 / Vol.4 – Janakpur, Annex H –SWM/TA 7727-NEP: Preparing the Integrated Urban Development Project Cleaning and Primary Collection 48. Daily street cleaning combined with roadside pick-up service is provided by the

municipality along the main roads in the morning shift between 6:30 am and 10:00 am. Five different cleaning routes are used for this purpose. Households provide waste in buckets or boxes on the curbside or the street sweepers collect from

28

door-to-door. Side roads are cleaned irregularly from which the waste is brought to the main roads for collection by tractor-trailers and tippers. However, some side roads in the core area such as those around Ram-Janaki Mandir (ward 5) are too narrow and inaccessible for the tractor-trailers. The wastes are thus swept up at the curbside or collected in tricycles and transferred to tractor-trailers and tippers temporarily stationed on main road sides. Besides, cleaning and pick-up collection service is also provided in the day shift between 1:00 pm and 5:00 pm as demanded by wards. It is reported that when the two tippers (out of 4 needing repairs) will be repaired, special cleaning services can be provided at main strategic junctions like Ramananda Chowk, Murali chowk, Kadam chowk, etc.

49. Apart from the municipal service, since the city has many historically important religious temples, a separate institution with the name “Greater Janakpur Development Council” is taking care of cleaning the temple premises. This institution has, however, no proper coordination with the municipal authority regarding solid waste management, except in some special cases.


50. The street cleaning wastes are swept up at the curbside or collected in tricycles and transferred into tractor-trailers or tippers temporarily stationed at the main roadsides and transported to a crude site near Dudhmati riverbanks in ward no. 7 and also occasionally elsewhere. Each tractor-trailer and tipper operates several trips per day. The intention seems to be to collect and transport as much SW as possible. This is possibly due to the limitation of resources. A complete area coverage approach is not followed.

Final Disposal

51. All the wastes collected at present are transported, mainly with tippers (6 cum. capacity), either to a site located near Dudhmati riverbanks in ward no. 7 at a distance of about 4 km from the city or occasionally elsewhere for final disposal. This is also a crude open dump site. The earlier crude dump site located on the southern side of Dhanusa Sagar (ward no. 4), which was operated for several years, is now no longer used.


52. The physical condition of equipment and vehicles currently being used for solid waste management service in Janakpur municipality is presented in Table 11.

29

Table 11: Condition of SWM Vehicles/Equipment in Janakpur Municipality (Jan 2012)

S. N.

Type



Total Depre---ciated Major Minor

1 Handcart* 20 20 - - - *: newly obtained from DDC, +: no more in municipaluse,

2 Tricycle+ 3 -

3

-

-

3 Tractor 7 2 2 3 -

4 Tipper (6 m3 cap.) 8 3 2 3 -

5 Excavator 2 0 - 2 -

Municipal Staffing 53. The current status of staff engaged directly in solid waste management service in

Janakpur municipality under Health & Sanitation Sub-section of the Social Welfare & Sanitation Section is presented in Table 12.

Table 12: Municipal Staffing in SWM Services in Janakpur Municipality (Jan 2012)

S. N.

Position / Level


-nent Tempo-rary

Con- -tract

Daily wage

SWM Unit/ Health & Sanitation Sub-section/ Social Welfare & Sanitation Section

1 Sanitation Chief / (non- gaz. officer, adm. level-5) 1 1 - - - ** :Level-3

# : 1 staff as assistant secretary working in ward no. 14

2 Supervisor (*non- gaz. officer, adm. level-4) 3 2* - 1** -

3 Driver (# level-4, ##level-3) 11 5#+4## - - 2

4 Sweepers 59 53 - 6 -

30

3. INVOLVEMENT OF PRIVATE SECTOR IN SWM

3.1 Existing Situation in Nepal

3.1.1 Background

54. For the effective utilization of limited national budget in utilities services, the Government of Nepal (GoN) aims to identify the kinds of investment that are suitable for private sector involvement both 1) in partnership with government, public-private partnerships (PPP), and 2) in looser forms of participation, private-sector participation (PSP). This is covered through an Act relating to “Private Sector Investment in the Construction and Operation of the Infrastructure”. The legislation, which first came into operation in the form of an Ordinance on 22nd August 2003, was rectified as an Act (Private Financing on Infrastructure Development and Operation Act, 2063) on 14th December 2006.

55. However, as regards the related policy and legislations particularly for local bodies, the government has already endorsed the so-called “Public-Private Partnership Policy, 2060 (for local bodies)” in 2003. Furthermore, to promote this policy in practice for development of local bodies, a “Public-Private Partnership Guidelines, 2061 (for local bodies)” has also been worked out by the Ministry of Local Development (MLD) in 2004. The PPP Procurement Guidelines worked out few years ago is still in draft version.

56. For municipalities in Nepal, among all municipal service deliveries, Solid Waste Management has always been a top priority issue. Cleanliness of public places and safe disposal of wastes are essential for the protection of municipal environment and public health. The Local Self-Governance Act, 2055 (1999) has made the local governments (e.g. the municipalities) responsible for management of solid waste related activities in their respective areas. The same Act and the related Rules allow the municipalities to involve the non-governmental organizations and user committees in solid waste management. The participation of private sector in SWM has been stipulated in the Act, but the procedure of involvement is not sufficiently clear and adequate.

57. Under these backgrounds, with due consideration of importance and significance of private sector involvement for effective and efficient solid waste management service in Nepal, the newly enacted Solid Waste Management Act, 2068 (2011) has dealt this issue in detail, which is summarized as follows.

3.1.2 Solid Waste Management Act, 2011

58. It is to be noted that the former SWM Act, 2044 (1987) was enacted nearly a decade before the enactment of EPA, 2053 (1996) and 12 years before the enactment of “Local Self - Governance Act, 2055 (1999)”. With due consideration of its irrelevancy in today‟s context of effective and efficient municipal service, a new Solid Waste Management Act, 2068 (2011) has been recently ratified. This new Act covers a broader scope in solid waste management sector, with the special feature for encouraging private sector involvement in solid waste management as compared to the old one of 1987.

31

59. In the new Act, private sector involvement has been legally encouraged in all aspects of solid waste management with a separate chapter (Chapter 4- Involvement of Community and Private Sector in Solid Waste Management), which elaborates the following five provisions regarding:

1. Permission for various forms of private sector (Clause 13), 2. Rendering SWM service through private sector (Clause 14), 3. Awarding contract for SWM service through competitive biddings (Clause

14), 4. Approval for construction and operation of SWM facilities (Clause 15), and 5. Management of solid waste under public private partnership (Clause 16).

60. Besides, in Chapter-10 (Miscellaneous), every local body is expected to keep the actual record of local community sector agencies involved in SWM. Such a record can include the working sector and nature of work, manpower, financial and technical resources, and other information as required by the local body.

61. The new Solid Waste Management Regulations, which is now under preparation, shall certainly help formulate necessary municipality by-laws and thus reinforce the involvement of private sector in municipal solid waste management service.

3.1.3 Some Existing Arrangements in Various Municipalities

62. International experiences on public sector involvement in solid waste management service delivery in some developing countries show that private sector participation (PSP) can improve efficiency, reduce the need for municipal investment, and share risks associated with introducing a new technology or system. In spite of these clear benefits, many municipalities have not been able to take advantage of PSP in waste management.

63. One of the popular PPP projects in Nepal is the PPP for Urban Environment (PPPUE) program supported by UNDP. Since the UNDP‟s intervention (March 2002) in this sector, a number of municipalities have been actively pursuing PPP arrangement in urban service delivery, which also includes solid waste management. Regarding solid waste management, the 2nd phase of PPPUE had supported Biratnagar and Dhulikhel cities on municipal SWM, Kathmandu Municipality to compost waste from main fruit and vegetable markets, Bharatpur Municipality to manage medical waste and to generate biogas from green waste of the wholesale vegetable market.

64. In the past, many municipalities tried to implement the partnership approach, and some of them are more or less successful. Although 31 municipalities (SWMRMC, 2008) claim to be working with private sector agencies in waste management, most of them are NGOs or community based organizations, which occasionally render solid waste management service. Among these, those implemented in Kathmandu, Biratnagar, Bharatpur, and Hetauda are more or less noteworthy.

1) In most cases, the involvement of private sector has been in the form of management contracts under which a private contractor collects waste from a certain area for a fixed fee. This is the simplest form of private sector participation

32

whereby the responsibility for waste collection or transportation is given to a private party, and it usually does not involve collection of service fee from waste generators. One benefit of this arrangement has been the reduction of waste management cost to a certain extent, but it requires effective monitoring.

2) In some municipalities, for example in Hetauda and Kathmandu, a franchising or concessionaire system has been introduced, whereby a private company is given the responsibility to collect waste as well as service fee from waste generators in a designated area such as a ward. One benefit of this form of participation has been a decrease of cost for the municipality and the service provider becoming more accountable to the people.

65. The experience with PSP so far suggests that some municipalities have been successful in involving private sector in waste management, but these efforts need to be carefully monitored and evaluated to improve their performance and scale up the involvement of private sector.

Kathmandu Valley

66. Kathmandu Metropolitan City (KMC) has privatized operational services like street sweeping, waste collection and transportation services in various areas of the city to about a dozen private companies for many years. Besides, several service contracts, franchising or concessionaire system has also been introduced, whereby a private company is given the responsibility to collect waste as well as service fee from waste generators in a designated area such as a ward. This form of participation usually results in less cost for the municipality and the service provider becomes more accountable to the people. A few years ago, although Kathmandu Metropolitan City initiated the process of inviting the private sector to establish a compost plant and operate it for a certain period under PSP form, and also signed a memorandum of agreement with a private party for this purpose, it was not successful because of the lack of support from all stakeholders.

67. Lalitpur Sub-Metropolitan City (LSMC) has also been involving communities (local CBOs and NGOs) in SWM service since many years. For example, Women Environment Preservation Committee (WEPCO), established by local women in Kupundole area of Lalitpur almost 14 years ago to address the problem of waste management in their neighbourhood, has been actively involved in collecting waste from several hundred households in Lalitpur. It is also involved in producing compost and recycled paper, generating biogas, and raising awareness on waste recycling together with assisting in establishing eco-clubs in schools. LSMC has also authorized it to collect waste collection fees, and it also generates some revenue by selling recycled paper and compost.

68. However, despite all these ongoing efforts of individual municipalities, with due consideration of the ever-growing problem of SWM in the urban areas of Kathmandu Valley as a whole, the government, under a commitment in the budget (clause 165) of the fiscal year 2009/10, has recently decided to privatize the total SWM service in a comprehensive form of public-private partnership on BOT modality with a maximum concession period of 30 years. On 20th June 2011,

33

MOUs were signed between MLD and three companies for three different packages separately, which are as follows:

1) Package-1: MOU between MLD/SWMRMC and Communication OY in association with POYRY, BIOSTE, Organic Village Pvt. Ltd. Kathmandu for an integrated solid waste management in Kathmandu Metropolitan City and selected Village Development Committees;

2) Package-2: MOU between MLD/SWMRMC and BVG India, Green Field Waste Management Company and KRYSS International Pvt. Ltd. J/V for an integrated solid waste management in Lalitpur Sub-Metropolitan City, Kirtipur Municipality and selected Village Development Committees; and

3) Package-3: MOU between MLD/SWMRMC and BVG India, Green Field Waste Management Company and KRYSS International Pvt. Ltd. J/V for an integrated solid waste management in Bhaktapur Municipality, Madhyapur Thimi Municipality and selected Village Development Committees.

69. It is expected that the implementation of the above contracts for SWM service with BOT modality shall significantly improve the existing problem in the urban areas of Kathmandu Valley in a sustainable manner on a long-term basis.

Strengths:

Besides several service contracts, franchising or concessionaire system in Kathmandu (i.e. giving a private company the responsibility to collect waste as well as service fee from waste generators in a designated area, e.g. tole of a ward) has resulted in less cost for the municipality with more accountability of the service provider to the people.

Involvement of local women communities (CBOs and NGOs) in the collection

of household wastes and resource recovery activities (such as composting, recycling paper and selling other recyclables to big scrap dealers) at small scale generating some revenues has proven to be effective in several residential areas of Lalitpur.

The simplest type of private sector involvement in the form of management

contracts, under which a private contractor collects waste from a certain area for a fixed fee and brings to a designated secondary collection point, has been beneficial to KMC and LSMC in reducing waste management cost to certain extent although it requires effective monitoring.

Key Lessons:

For the success of a PPP arrangement in SWM service, support from all stakeholders plays a vital role despite the technical feasibility and financial/viability. It has been evident from a recent case in Kathmandu. A few years ago KMC initiated the process of inviting private sector agencies to establish a compost plant and operate it for a certain period, and also signed

34

an agreement with a private party. However, it could not be materialized because of lack of support from all stakeholders.

Experience on private sector involvement in MSWM services in the municipalities of Kathmandu Valley proves that, despite the will that both parties will have and the benefits that both parties want to get, unless and until the municipal authorities take the responsibility of overall supervision, monitoring and evaluation of the performance and take actions accordingly, it cannot succeed in the long-run. It is to be noted that this may also apply to the recent effort made by the Government to privatize SWM service in urban areas of Kathmandu Valley on BOT modality.

Hetauda Municipality

70. In Hetauda too, a franchising system has been introduced, whereby a private company is given the responsibility to collect waste as well as service fee from waste generators in a designated area.

71. Prior to the present situation, city areas of Hetauda municipality were very dirty. Crude dumping was in practice throughout the area of Sukumbashi Tole. After the implementation of SWM service with private sector involvement under the initiative of the municipal „Community Development Section‟, the situation has improved a lot. Two private organisations were engaged, one of them in wards 3, 4, 10 and parts of wards 1 and 11, serving a total of 2,000 HHs (Source: Hetauda municipality, 2008). Simultaneously, another organization (Samajik Sarokar Manch) is working in wards 2, and 5, in the city area and partly in ward 1, serving a total of 900 HHs (Source: Hetauda municipality, 2008). Responsibilities of the municipal „Community Development Section‟ are street cleaning, roadside drain cleaning, removal of dead animals, procurement and maintenance of WM vehicles, recruitment & training of waste management staff, public education and promotion of recycling. This Section is actively engaged in waste segregation & minimisation programmes. It has distributed 400 compost bins of capacity ~50 kg and 500 suiro hooks for separating organic and inorganic waste (Source: Hetauda municipality, 2008). The municipality is distributing suiro hooks and compost bins with the financial assistance of UN-HABITAT and UDLE-GTZ Nepal.

72. Several years ago, Hetauda Municipality took a bold initiative to ban the use of plastic bags in the city. The Municipality‟s effort in implementing this plan in cooperation and coordination with the local NGOs and Chamber of Commerce and Industry is very encouraging.

Strengths:

Effective mobilization of local communities in reducing waste at the source through various approaches, e.g. source segregation in recyclables (using suiro hooks for plastics) and compostable; trading of recyclables with scrap dealers; composting of biowaste in household compost bins etc.

Municipality‟s supportive role in civil society's involvement in promoting waste reduction at source.

35

Good partnerships with local communities in training and community mobilisation for developing sustainable waste management.

Weaknesses:

Lack of trained personnel in the Community Development Section of the Municipality;

Inadequacy of appropriate equipment/vehicles and lack of repair & maintenance of the existing ones;

Inadequate enforcement measures;

Uncontrolled squatter settlements;

Inadequate stakeholder coordination; and

No landfill site for sanitary disposal of waste collected.

Biratnagar Sub-Metropolis

73. Prior to the present situation, city areas of Biratnagar were very dirty. After the implementation of SWM service with private sector involvement, this situation has improved a lot. Biratnagar was the first municipality to introduce the concept of involving private sector in SWM service at the municipality level, which started in 1997-98 after a proposal made by an international businessman to BSMC to enter a joint venture with his US-based company (AES Inc.). But this joint venture called BMC-AmeriCorps Environmental Services Group, however mainly because of the then unstable political situation and lack of clear government policy & legislation, ran into serious financial difficulty (Source: STIUEIP report, vol. 3, 2009) even after 6 months.

74. Subsequently, a contract with another contractor (Silt) was signed by transferring these shares to BMC-SILTES, and this contract was operational until 2007. According to the latest agreement BMC-SILTES took over the whole management of solid waste in Biratnagar. Sweepers and waste collectors working directly for BMC-SILTES were employed on a temporary basis. Workers could supplement their income by scavenging and generally by selling recyclable items to the local traders. Former municipal sweepers were employed on a permanent basis under the same terms and conditions (wages, leave or social benefits) as it were when they were employed directly by the municipality. The company was responsible for the maintenance of equipment/vehicles, with 2 own mechanics for minor repairs and an agreement with a outside workshop for major repairs. Collected waste was transported with tractors to the disposal site leased within the municipal area under the control of the company. The company kept a computer-based record of the contracted customers.

75. Based on estimate of the company, the annual SWM cost for BMC-SILTES was about NPR 10 million, out of which the municipality had paid NPR 6.7mil. as per the contract. It was meant to cover the running costs of municipality‟s own equipment and employees. The rest had to be covered with collection fees,

36

income from compost and briquette selling and support from donors. There was a Monitoring & Evaluation Committee for reporting to the Municipality‟s own Environment Committee. Monthly tariff structure was fixed as per types of customer. This arrangement established an effective partnership environment with the city, and also paved a way for introducing SWM service fees to the households, shops/ businesses and industrial areas in Biratnagar.

76. From December 2007 till July 2010, the SWM service was contracted out for a period of about 2.5 years by dividing the total municipal area in three service sectors (north, mid and south). A private company (Samajik Sudhar Tatha Batabaraniya Bikas Manch) of Dharan was the contractor for rendering the service that includes 1) street cleaning along some defined routes, 2) door-to-door collection, 3) transportation and 3) final disposal of solid waste collected in the designated dumping sites.

77. Some of the major responsibilities of BSMC under this contract agreement were: 1) roadside drain cleaning, 2) provision of 20 sweepers (with payment of monthly salaries & allowances) for each service sector in addition to others to be provided by the contractor, 3) renting maximum up to 6 tractor-trailers out of those owned by the municipality – with all related operational costs to be borne by the contractor, 4) regular monitoring of the contractor‟s performance for which municipal inspector shall be designated, 5) Coordination and cooperation with the contractor for programmes on public awareness promotion and environment protection.

78. Although local people and politicians have appreciated the work of the private sector, they were dubious mainly because of the fact that local municipal administration has been running since 2002 without the elected political representatives, adding to the problems of implementing the Local Self Governance Act, 2055 (1999).

79. At present (from March, 2011 onwards) the municipal SWM service is being contracted out for a period of 5 years till March 2016 by dividing the total municipal area as such in three service sectors (north, mid and south). The contract has been awarded to a private company (Swasthya Ra Shantika Lagi Batawaran) of Biratnagar for rendering the service including some more functions in addition to those included in the former contract, which in major covers 1) Provision of collection bins/drums at every 1km distance at main junctions along black-topped roads and lanes of the city with 50:50 investment of BSMC and the contractor; 2) Implementation of public awareness promotional programmes for developing habits on waste segregation at source; 3) collection of only general waste of health care institutions, and medical waste to be handled only under mutual understanding by mobilizing the expert for its collection & disposal management; 4) Collection of construction wastes disposed on roads and drains with 24-hour prior notice to the concerned parties; 5) Management of temporary landfill site for safe final disposal, with site location within 7 km. periphery of the city and at a distance more than 100m from settlements; 6) Management of recyclables collection depot by self or through coordination with scrap dealers, in which BSMC shall be the facilitator for technical & financial support, if any; 7) Cleaning of

37

streets (daily along black-topped roads, twice a week along gravelled roads), and roadside drains (twice a year in the months of April and September); 8) Street cleaning and waste collection to be completed within 9:00 pm – 9:00 am; 9) Cleaning in special occasions (e.g. dasain, tihar, eid etc.) and of important public places (e.g. crematoriums, open markets etc.); 10) Collection & disposal of dead animals; and 11) Provision of health protective measures (e.g. gloves, masks etc.) to the sanitation workers.

80. Some major responsibilities of BSMC under this contract agreement are: 1) Playing the role of facilitator for technical and financial support, if any, for management of recyclables collection depot by the contractor; 2) Provision of 1 tractor-trailer and 3 tricycles for each of the north and south service sectors and 1 tractor-trailer and 4 tricycles for the mid-sector with all related operational costs to be borne by the contractor; 3) Regular monitoring of the contractor‟s performance at 2 stages: 1st monitoring by the municipal internal monitoring committee following a standard format annexed in the contract agreement, and the 2nd monitoring by the monitoring committee at the municipal level with participation of all stakeholders concerned (e.g. TLOs, partner institutions, private sector etc.) also following a standard format annexed in the contract agreement; 4) Provision of 15 sweepers for each of the north and south service sectors, and 16 sweepers for the mid-sector (with payment of monthly salaries & allowances) in addition to others to be provided by the contractor; and 5) Necessary assistance to the contractor for importing necessary machinery plants and equipment from foreign countries.

Strengths of the Arrangements:

Door-to-door collection service getting more and more effective,

Programmes supported by INGOs playing a significant role in implementing PPP-activities by improving coordination with stakeholders.

Acceptance of service fees through improved customers‟ satisfaction,

Implementation of charging different service fees for different user-categories being successful, and

Creation of jobs for poor people in SWM sector by a well structured partnership with the private sector.

Weaknesses of the Arrangements:

Still poor response of the citizen towards waste minimisation,

Shortage of trained personnel by the private entrepreneur,

Lack of standardised vehicle fleet,

Inadequate stakeholders‟ coordination, and

No sanitary landfill for environmentally safe final disposal.

38

3.1.4 Analysis of Existing Situation in Project Municipalities

81. Existing situation in the project municipalities regarding private sector involvement in urban service delivery in general and in SWM service in particular, can be elaborated analytically in terms of strengths and weaknesses as follows. Strengths are to be seen as points observed in favour of PPP arrangements, and weaknesses as points making PPP arrangements relatively difficult.

Nepalgunj Municipality

Strengths:

1) That the Municipality has a favourable view about the private sector participation in municipal services is evident from the fact that it is already involving private sector in vehicle parking management and bus terminal operation.

2) Recycling operations in the municipality are best done mostly by the local scrap dealers in private sectors.

3) The municipality reportedly plans to collect a sanitation fee next year by itself, which may be enhanced in future. A part of it may be used for SWM operations once the facilities are built and the service improved.

4) The municipality has already some experience in working with CBOs, NGOs and various other organizations. There is also a program on urban sanitation where the municipality is partnering with the Swiss Red Cross, Nepal Red Cross, District Offices (Agriculture & Health), and the Chamber of Commerce.

Weaknesses:

1) The Municipality has already a large number of sweepers (sanitation workers) of permanent status involved in the city cleaning and primary waste collection job. This point must be taken care of while pursuing the process of contracting out, which otherwise can be very problematic.

2) The Municipality has not yet any experience in contracting out SWM service, and collects no SWM service fee as well.

3) Although Municipality thinks that a significant part of the sanitation fee can be spent to cover the SWM service fee, the revenue collection from this sanitation fee is expected to be far less compared to the current SWM cost. So, improving revenue collection from the already introduced service fee (including sanitation fee) for financing SWM service being provided in the business areas deserves high priority.

39

Siddharthanagar Municipality

Strengths:

1) The Municipality has already a PPP Committee to handle private sector participation, and take responsibilities regarding private sector involvement in urban services.

2) There is another existing arrangement continuing satisfactorily for about 5 years with a CBO called “Belahiya Village Samaj” for total cleaning of Belahiya area (ward no.1), including waste collection & transportation to the final disposal site. It is remarkable that despite a nominal municipal support (3 ltr. diesel per day and 4 sweepers), this arrangement is sustaining financially with funds collected from socio-cultural programs or charity shows being organized by the Samaj during special occasions (such as Bhailo in Tihar) and its membership fees.

3) The Municipality presently collects NPR 200 - 300 per household per year as SWM service fee by itself. Paying of this fee has been made compulsory by strictly linking with other municipal services, e.g. while giving permissions, issuing the municipal recommendation letters in various affairs. This fee collection rate shows an increasing trend, although not so fast, e.g. 6.4% in FY 2009/10 and 1.6% in FY 2010/11 compared to the respective previous years.

4) Collection of pollution control fee (~3.84 times that of the SWM service fee collected in FY 2010/11) was quite positive for its eventual utilization to cover the SWM cost. This fee was collected at the Nepal border to India from vehicles entering Nepal @ NPR 150 – 300 per vehicle, depending upon size of the vehicle. In FY 2011/12 however, reportedly it had to be dropped following the protest of Home Ministry that it is illegal.

5) The Municipality is against the idea of private agencies collecting service charges directly from the citizen, as it thinks that any additional fee collection by a private agency will appear as a system of double taxation. Furthermore, it wishes that service fees collected by the municipality itself can be used to engage qualified private agencies for the service delivery.

It may be noted that presently the service charge collected is only for the pick-up service outside city core areas. The municipal workers do not collect waste from door-to-door. Individual households bring their wastes to the vehicle on route standing at some common point at main roadside.

Weaknesses:

1) Despite the general positive view on the private sector participation in municipal services, the Municipality has recently experienced some problems in privatization of SWM service. The contract running till July 2011 for routine cleaning along 17 km of main roads within the city core area (including collection, transportation and final disposal service) had to be cancelled due to poor performance of the contractor, which was not improved despite several

40

public complaints and warnings given by the municipality. Reportedly, one of the main reasons behind this problem was the low-cost bidding of the contractor, which the municipality had to accept due to its legal bindings while awarding contract. However, detail review of this contractual agreement also shows some weak points in its terms & conditions, particularly regarding special cleaning services and additional services (e.g. during festivals, special occasions etc.) expected to be performed under Municipality‟s instruction as and when required being not at all specific. This is to be taken as a good lesson for improving the terms & conditions of the contractual agreement while contracting out the landfill operation and other related functions.

2) The Municipality is concerned about the private sector‟s motive being mainly profit-oriented, which makes engagement of private sector for good service delivery inherently complicated. It has also experienced a problem in case of a recent partnership arrangement with a private agency with the support of PPPUE to construct and operate a vegetable market. The major problems were reported to be 1) price escalation during construction period, due to which the private sector could not complete the construction of all facilities as per design; and 2) maintaining no cleanliness within the market premises while in operation as per agreement. However, detail review of the contractual agreement also shows some weak point of no specific mentioning of terms & conditions in case of price escalation during construction. The Municipality is now finding it difficult to break the contract, because of weak legal safeguards against poor performance.

Janakpur Municipality

Strengths:

1) The Municipality has generally a positive view on involving private sectors in municipal service delivery, so that it can pay due attention to other important issues to develop the city participation.

2) It thinks that the primary collection part of SWM could be contracted out to private sector, and it is already working on such an initiative.

3) It also thinks that the secondary collection part could be left as the Municipality‟s responsibility, as it requires vehicles, and private agencies may not be willing to invest in procurement of vehicles.

4) This municipality is already in contract with a private enterprise in managing a public toilet built and owned by the municipality.

5) Preliminary plans are being prepared to contract out the cleaning, waste collection and disposal service by dividing the municipal area in 6 clusters. It is reported that, after some necessary decisions of the municipality board, the contracts are expected to be notified soon. The contract period will be for one year at first, but renewable upon satisfactory service.

41

6) The present plans for privatizing SWM service also includes authorizing contractors to collect NPR 30/month per household. The rates for shops and businesses would be more. The Municipality thinks that revenue collection may be improved to partly absorb the additional cost of operating the new waste management facilities.

7) The Municipality is of the opinion that the landfill site should be operated by the private sector, and should be continued even after the project is over.

8) The Municipality has an active Social Development Section, which is trying to involve community members, women‟s groups and school children in promoting better SWM. This section works with a number of NGOs & CBOs, and even with the local Chamber of Commerce.

Weaknesses:

1) There has been no introduction of any fee collection for the service provided. So the proposed plan for fee collection (NPR 30/household/month needs to be improved drastically to cover up the incurring SWM operational cost significantly after completion of the proposed facilities.

The present municipal budget as reported is about NPR 100 million per year, out of which about NPR 10 million is spent for SWM service only.

2) The Social Development Section of the municipality has only two full-time staff, and presently without any ward level staff. It is expected that citizens‟ forums will be formed in each ward in future, after which this Section will be able to work through these platforms at ward level.

3.2 International Experience

3.2.1 Background

82. Solid waste management is a service for which local government is responsible. However, this does not mean that a local government or municipality has to deliver the service entirely with its own staff, equipment and fund. The private sector may be also involved in SWM service delivery. In this context, there is a reduction in government activity through the participation of private sector.

83. The motive for such arrangement is different for the private sector and public sector. For the private sector, the concern is whether it will make money. For the public sector, the concern is whether it will save money. The public sector must also consider issues like protection of public health and the environment beyond the price of service.

84. There may be various types of private sector participation in SWM. The most common types are contracting, concession, franchise and open competition. A concise description of each type is given below.

85. Contracting: The municipal government awards a finite-term contract to a private firm for the delivery of services like waste collection, street sweeping, recyclable

42

collection, waste transport, landfill operation or vehicle fleet maintenance. Such contract is awarded through a competitive procurement process. The successful winner of the contract is paid for service delivery under the terms of the contract.

86. Concession: The concession is a long-term contractual agreement that a municipality awards to a private sector firm. This may allow the firm to build a facility for waste management, transport waste, recycle materials (paper, plastic, metal, glass, etc.) from waste, or recover resources (compost, heat, electricity, carbon credit) from waste. In some cases, the firm may own and operate a facility indefinitely. In other cases, the firm may return the ownership and operation of the facility to the municipality after a specified period.

87. Franchise: The municipality awards a finite-term zonal monopoly (franchise) to a private firm to deliver solid waste collection service. This is done through a competitive procurement process. The private firm has to deposit a performance bond to the municipality and pay a licence fee. The licence fee covers the cost of monitoring by the municipality. The private firm recovers its cost and profit by charging service fee to the households and other institutions it serves. The municipality exercises control over the tariff by ensuring adequate competition and prevention of price collusion, and price regulation.

88. Open Competition: In open competition, the municipality allows qualified private firms to compete for waste collection, recycling or disposal services. In this case, individual households and establishments make private arrangement with any of the competing firms for waste management service. No firm holds a monopoly and any number of firms may compete within the same zone. Under this arrangement, one city may be served by several landfill sites competing for business from the municipality and private customers. Even surrounding municipalities may use such facilities. The local government‟s role here is to licence, monitor and regulate private firms as needed. The private firms directly bill their customers for the service they provide.

3.2.2 Examples from Selected Countries

Contracting

89. Contracting offers an excellent opportunity to involve the private sector to collect solid waste. Collection service entails low economies of scale, technological simplicity and moderate investment costs. Therefore, there is little barrier to entry by the private sector to participate in this service. Many private firms can enter this business if offered an opportunity. For example, in Lagos, Nigeria there are over 100 private contractors in collection service, mostly with only 1 or 2 vehicles.

90. Bangkok city has also introduced waste collection under private contracting, starting with three city districts in 1987. It appears that the cost per ton of waste is less for the private sector as compared to the public sector. The service by the private sector was found to be of adequate quality. However, the residents were initially unhappy because they were required to place waste at the curbside at

43

specific time each day, and the private firm only provided once-a-day pickup service, whereas the municipal trucks used to pass several times a day.

91. In Jakarta, the local government introduced waste collection by private firms in parts of the city as early as 1988. The residents expressed satisfaction with the quality of the service and the price they were paying.

92. In Khulna, Bangladesh primary collection responsibility was given to NGOs and CBOs in 1998. There was a marked improvement in the cleanliness of the city because the private enterprises started door-to-door collection with rickshaw vans. This prevented people from throwing waste on the roads or into drains. Initially it required much public awareness campaign for behaviour change, but thereafter people became habituated with the system. They were also happy with the quality of service and the fees.

93. In many developing countries the public sector suffers from excessive staff, obsolescent equipment, cumbersome procurement process, inflexible work schedules, limitations on management changes, inadequate supervision, and strong unions. Therefore, it is not able to match the efficiency of the private sector. However, the public sector, when placed in competition with the private sector, and allowed to make necessary changes, also attain efficiency close the private sector. For this reason, the ideal arrangement may be a mix of public and private service, whereby parts of a city is served by private firms and the rest is served by the public sector. This is the way Bangkok and Bogota approached the contracting of private firms.

94. Contracting is a viable option when it is possible to adequately define the outputs. Thus, contracting is suitable for discreet activities in SWM such as the operation of a transfer station or landfill facility. In Caracas a private firm operates the city‟s transfer station under contract. Similarly, in Buenos Aires and Bogota, private firms operate the sanitary landfills under contract.

Franchise

95. In 1985, private franchise of waste collection was introduced in Ibadan, Nigeria. The city was divided into ten zones for private sector participation. Six firms were found to be qualified and selected to collect waste from the zones. Each firm paid a fixed license fee. There was significant improvement in cleanliness of the zone. However, residents complained that they were not given the free choice to select the designated company, and some of the firms were found to be not reliable.

96. In Egypt, an informal sector waste collection system involving 12,000 workers existed for the past century. They used to provide waste collection service free of charge from affluent neighbourhood, and earn their living by recovering recyclable items. Consequently they avoided poor neighbourhoods where the waste had little recyclable items. Later they were encouraged to form a private company and given the right to collect waste. Their service expanded to low-income areas as all residents paid service fees.

Concession

44

97. In developing countries, municipalities must be wary of unsolicited proposals from vendors for the construction of fantastic facilities–with unsupported claims–that would earn them huge revenue by recovering resources (compost, steam, electricity). Once built, these facilities become costly urban sculpture, serving no purpose, as they are technically inappropriate and too expensive to operate. Long-term ownership is one way to avoid such hasty “build and sell” attempt. Following are some examples of better concession arrangement.

Build, own, operate and transfer (BOOT)

98. BOOT involves private sector participation in building, owning, operating and after a specified period transferring infrastructure to the public sector. In this case, the private sector provides financing for the infrastructure. They recover their investment and profit within the concession period by earning fees for their service. This is often favoured by municipalities in developing countries, but the private sector is usually willing to risk its investment in such long-term and large-scale projects. There are few successful examples of this arrangement in developing countries. There is, however, one example in Hong Kong, a city where the risk is minimal compared to any typical city of developing countries. Here several firms with proven track record in designing and constructing transfer stations were pre-qualification. The bidding document specified technical performance requirements, equipment and building maintenance requirements, etc. After a competitive bidding, a private firm received a contract for building and operating the transfer station.

Build, own and operate (BOO)

99. Under BOO, a private firm may build, own and operate a facility for indefinite period. While such arrangement is popular in the United States, it is no so common in developing countries. However, this may be a good option because if a private sector is willing to invest in such scheme, it means the fundamental risks and economic benefits have been successfully managed.

100. There is one example of BOO in Buenos Aires, where a cooperative society operates a compost plant. The municipality pays tipping fee for disposing organic waste to the facility. The government also encourages private trucking companies that haul fresh produce to the city to carry compost from the plant to the farmers on their return journey.

Design, build and operate (DBO)

101. Under the DBO option, a private sector firm is engaged in designing, building and operating a facility, but the investment and ownership remains with the local government. After a specified period, the facility may be handed over to the municipality.

Open Competition

102. In open competition system, many private agencies may be allowed to operate within one area. Each household and commercial establishment may hire an

45

agency of choice. However, this type of arrangement may lead to higher costs. Collusion is also a concern for open competition. There is one example of open competition in Ibadan, Nigeria. A private franchise was implemented in a high-income area of the city at first in 1985. After two years, the city switched it to an open competition system. A number of private companies were allowed to vie for customers within the project area. Later it was found that it is cheaper to serve a given number of customers within a zone rather than hop from area to area to serve the same number. However, as the customers were wealthy, they preferred to pay the higher cost to keep their freedom-to-choose option.

103. Another typical service for which open competition system is often selected is maintenance of vehicles. In this case, a municipality may invite quotation for a specific work, and the job may be given to the lowest bidder. For example, in Bangkok, city districts prefer to do minor repair of their fleet through the open competition system, rather than use the central garage, as this is more convenient and generally less expensive.

46

3.3 Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses of Different Models

105. The following table presents a summary of the strengths and weaknesses of different models of private sector participation in general (Table 13).

Table 13: Summary of Strengths and Weaknessesof Different Models of PSP in SWM

Model Strength Weakness Main Application

Contracting

Private companies, NGOs, CBOs can participate*

Encourages competition

Service by municipality can co-exist

Municipality‟s own efficiency may improve due to competition

Strong monitoring and supervision required

Lowest bidder may not be the best option

Municipality requires good contract management capacity

Private sector may fail to perform

Primary collection Street sweeping Recyclable collection Secondary transport Landfill operation Vehicle fleet

maintenance

Concession

Long-term contract reduces risk for the private sector

May attract private financing

May attract more competent firms

Encourages resource recovery

Encourages asset creation

Private sector may be reluctant to invest if risk not mitigated

Unsolicited proposal may be submitted

Municipality may have to eventually own and operate a facility

Landfill construction and operation

Transfer station construction and operation

Compost plant construction and operation

Franchise

Zonal monopoly reduces risk for the private sector

May attract private financing

May attract more competent firms

Some firms not able to perform (pre-qualification preferable)

Any dispute may lead to disruption of service

May reduce competition and drive out small NGOs and CBOs

Primary collection Secondary transport

Open Competition

Private firms directly accountable to customers

Customers enjoy choice of many firms

Encourages more competition

May result in higher cost

Collusion possible Difficult to monitor Non-congruity of

service area

Primary collection Secondary transport

*Note: In Nepal, NGOs and CBOs are financially in better position to compete in contracting model because of given benefits in taxes or duties, however usually without possessing adequate capacity, which is also not easy to build up in short period of time.

47

Conclusion of this Section For primary collection, the IUDP Municipalities may consider contracting out services to NGOs/CBOs as they have demonstrated their capacity for this service in Nepal and neighbouring countries. However, for good performance, strong supervision and contract management are required. The IUDP Municipalities will need assistance in boosting their capacity for contract management through hands-on training in planning and management. Engaging a support agency such as SWMTSC, or eventually a consulting firm for this purpose is recommended. For transport of waste to the transfer station, private agencies may be contracted but local condition and capacity of potential agencies should be considered. One or two zones may be contracted out on experimental basis first, but the Municipality should retain its capacity. Considering the situation of more transport of waste to the transfer station in full-fledged service period after development of all necessary facilities: 1) in Nepalgunj and Siddharthanagar, it is recommendable to contract out this service in certain zones, as the existing permanent drivers (2 nos. in Nepalgunj and 1 no. in Siddharthanagar) are inadequate; and 2) in Janakpur however, it is recommendable to operate this service by itself, as the existing permanent drivers (9 nos.) are relatively adequate. Trucks and other equipment may be leased to private agencies in case they cannot raise funds for capital investment. For the operation of transfer stations, transport to the landfill site and operation of the landfill site, contracting private agencies is the best solution at the first stage because the Municipalities lack implementation capacity in this regard. Upon the completion of a medium-term contract (say 5 years), the Municipalities may gain valuable experience in technical and management issues, and thereafter decide whether to continue contracting out for longer period or to operate the facilities themselves.

48

4. RECOMMENDATION ON THE SCOPE OF OPERATIONAL SERVICES FOR THE LANDFILL CONTRACTOR

4.1 Operational Functions of the Proposed SWM System

106. All operational functions of the total SWM system conceptualized in the project municipalities can be in general described as follows, and elaborated in a flow-diagram shown below (Figure 3).

4.1.1 Collection Service

107. The waste generated is collected by means of various modes of collection service as described below, and then transported either to the transfer station or to the final disposal site depending upon situations.

1) Street/ Public Space cleaning

108. Street/public space cleaning, although it is the most cost-ineffective part of all operational functions, has to be retained at a minimum possible level along important main roads, where wastes from street/public spaces sweeping are brought to the nearest collection point (container/bin or roadside pick-up point). Equipment to be used in general are handcarts, brooms and shovels.

2) Primary Collection

109. Primary collection is necessary usually in combination with street/public space cleaning and to serve the residential areas with narrow roads inaccessible to collection vehicles. Wastes collected from these residential areas are brought to the nearest collection point, container/bin, or directly loaded into a secondary collection vehicle parked at the main roadsides. Equipment to be used in general are handcarts, brooms, shovels power tiller, tricycle, etc.

3) Secondary Collection

Pick-up Service

110. Waste heaps accumulated at designated pick-up points on roadsides and near public spaces or even collected in waste bins are picked up and transported to the transfer station for secondary transport in bigger vehicles at a time to the long-distant landfill site. It is to be noted that the wastes by pick-up service from public collection points shall be in general always of mixed type, i.e. a mixture of recyclables, compostables and landfill waste.

4) Door-to-door Collection

111. Wastes collected from individual households/ businesses by providing door-to-door service are transported in general to the transfer station for secondary transport in bigger vehicles at a time to the long-distant landfill site. It is to be noted that the wastes collected from door-to-door service areas with good practice of source separation and household composting shall be purely landfill waste, whereas those collected from areas with very little or no such practice

49

shall be of mixed type, i.e. a mixture of recyclables, compostables and landfill waste.

4.1.2 Operation of Transfer Station

112. All fresh wastes collected from the city are transported to a transfer station located at an appropriate site on route to the final disposal site, and the incoming wastes are loaded from the collection vehicles into the secondary transport vehicles of bigger capacity for bulk transport to the distant landfill site. In Nepalese context, a transfer station has to be considered if the landfill site is about 10km or more from the city.

4.1.3 Secondary Transport

113. The bulk transport of waste in vehicles of bigger capacities from transfer station to the final disposal site is termed “secondary transport” or “long distance transport”. The secondary transport reduces the unit transport cost significantly. Equipment used in general are tippers with hydraulics for loading/unloading of big containers.

4.1.4 Processing and Final Disposal Management

114. All incoming transport vehicles loaded with solid wastes, immediately by entering the final disposal site, shall be weighed while passing over the weigh bridge. The full load (i.e. weight of the transport vehicle plus that of the loaded SW) will be properly recorded at the counter. As per operational system conceptualized in the project preparation, in general all incoming SWs will be first of all segregated in compostable and recyclables. All recyclables, after preliminary treatments (using facilities provided at the site), shall be delivered to the respective recycling industries. All compostables shall be composted at the small-scale windrow-type compost plant constructed within the site. Rest of the wastes (i.e. non-recyclables and non-compostable) shall be finally disposed of sanitarily at the landfill cells in an environmentally acceptable manner. However in practice, all SWs coming from door-to-door collection areas with good practice of source separation and household composting can be directly landfilled; and those coming from vegetable markets, after minor sorting out of recyclables at the segregation platform, can be diverted to the compost plant for composting.

115. At the final disposal site, facilities for treatment and final disposal of septage (i.e. septic tank sludge) have also been proposed. The incoming septage in suction tanker shall be treated first of all through a septage drying bed, and then furthermore at the second stage treated through a properly designed natural treatment system (e.g. constructed wetlands, reed bed treatment plant) together with the landfill leachate before discharging into the nearby drain or stream at environmentally acceptable standard.

50

Figure 3: Typical Flow Diagram of Municipal SWM

Mgmt. at source (in general)

1. Source Separation

2. On-plot Mgmt.

3. Delivery of Separated SWs to Collection/ Disposal Service

Collection Transfer Secondary Processing and

Transport Final Disposal

Primary Collection Secondary Collection

Fresh Landfill Wa Waste Waste

Compostables Residue Rejects

Landfill Waste Leachate

Recyclables Recyclables Compost

Compostables

(Composted at source, if possible) Septage

AR. Tuladhar Treated effluent discharge

Street/ Pbl. Space

Cleaning

Public Collection Point, i.e.

Container/ Bin, or

Roadside Pick-up

Point

Transfer

Station

Sanitary

Landfill

Door-to-door

Collection Compost Plant

Segregation Area

Primary

Collection

Septage Drying Bed

Leachate Treatment Plant

Kawadis, Recycling Centers/ Industries

51

4.2 Analytical Review on the Scope of Operational Services for the Landfill Contractor

116. Solid waste management service, as defined by the LSGA - 2055 (1999), is primarily a municipality‟s responsibility. Municipalities must take the responsibility for financing the SWM services. Besides, the new SWM Act – 2068 (2011) also legally encourages the involvement of communities and private sectors in all construction and operational aspects of municipal solid waste management. As regards the operational aspects, several municipalities have attempted to engage with private sectors with a mixed degree of success. Even among the project municipalities, Siddharthanagar has already gained some good as well as bad experiences with the communities and the private sector, mainly in street cleaning combined with primary collection and disposal service - although with crude dumping practices. It is worthy to be mentioned that city cleaning combined with primary collection has always been traditionally recognized as the prime responsibility of all municipalities in Nepal, whereas all other operational functions following thereafter (e.g. secondary collection, transportation, treatment & final disposal) which are necessary for the environmental SWM are even today more or less neglected. Due to this reason, most of the municipalities in general (including Nepalgunj, Siddharthanagar and Janakpur) are as of today basically equipped with manpower (e.g. sweepers, supervisors, drivers, etc.) and collection vehicles good mainly for primary management (i.e. cleaning, primary collection and crude dumping). But, all operational services related to the total SWM system conceptualized in the project municipalities are in general as follows:

1) Street/public space cleaning, 2) Primary collection, 3) Door-to-door collection and transportation to the transfer station, 4) Secondary collection from collection point to the transfer station, 5) Operation of transfer station, 6) Secondary transport of waste from transfer station to the landfill site, and 7) Operation of sanitary landfill and other waste management facilities.

117. Among the above-mentioned operational services, 1) street cleaning and 2) primary collection (for example, collection from narrow lanes by handcart to a public collection point from where it may be loaded on a vehicle) can be managed well by experienced staff at supervisory level, who can motivate and mobilize the sanitation workers (sweepers) at the job. Most of the municipalities have already been trying for this approach of partnership with NGOs and CBOs, with more or less success. Effective management of this service (e.g. proper operational route planning of the service area followed by regular supervision and monitoring) is in general lacking. On the other hand, contracting these basic city-cleaning services totally to a big civil

52

contractor for relatively a short period (say some years) may possibly create problems in institutionalization of the system after the contract is over. Therefore, these parts should be better left to the municipality for having partnership with local potential NGOs/CBOs. Besides, management at source of waste generation by adopting the 3R-principle of waste minimization combined with the handling of recyclables (in other words – waste resources management) can be better managed at the community level with the advisory support of GESI-consultant team as proposed in the IUDP-PPTA report.

118. Among the above-mentioned operational services, those directly/indirectly linked with the operation of sanitary landfill site, and which also require skilled/trained manpower (e.g. heavy equipment operator, heavy vehicle drivers, etc.) and which is new for all project municipalities are as follows:

1) Operation of transfer station

2) Secondary transport of waste from transfer station to the landfill site, and

3) Operation of sanitary landfill and other waste management facilities.

119. It is also to be noted that among all SWM facilities going to be developed in the project municipalities, sanitary landfill is the most vital one, not only because it is quite new to the municipalities, but also because there are other complementary facilities incorporated in it such as recycling centre, compost plant, septage drying bed, etc., which have to be properly operated and supervised by facility-specific trained/skilled manpower in an integrated manner. Therefore, contracting the operation of this integrated SWM site as a whole (for a definite period) to the civil contractor engaged for its construction obviously deserves top priority.

4.3 Recommendation for Contractual Arrangement

120. As regards the combination of operational services for contractual arrangement, different options are theoretically possible. However, under the above-mentioned general background of the project municipalities and with due consideration of optimum utilization of the landfill contractor (who is also going to operate the site for some definite period) and also following intensive interactions with the stakeholders (mainly SWMTSC at the central level and project municipalities at local level), the recommended option for contractual arrangement can be elaborated as shown in Table 14, below.

53

Table 14: Proposed Contractual Arrangement

Proposed Contractual Arrangement

Package Operational Services

Management support to improvement of collection services

A

1. Street/Public space cleaning

2. Pick-up service - collection from designated

public collection points (pick-up points, bins/containers, etc. at roadsides); and

- transportation to the transfer station

3. Door-to-door collection - collection from households,

businesses, etc.; and - transportation to the transfer

station Total services for operation of transfer station, secondary transport, landfill and other WM-facilities

B

4. Operation of transfer station and secondary transport management

5. Operation of sanitary landfill & other WM-facilities 5.1 Segregation & recovery of

recyclables 5.2 Composting 5.3 Sanitary landfilling (including

environmental protection / pollution control measures and monitoring monitoring) as per design and site operation manual to be prepared by DSC/Landfill Contractor

5.4 Septage treatment and disposal

121. Services in Package A may be provided as follows:

Street sweeping and public space cleaning: The municipality may continue to provide this service keeping the existing workforce in employment.

Pick-up service: This includes collection of waste from designated public collection points, and transporting the collected waste to the transfer station. This will require operation of vehicles. Therefore, the municipality may continue to provide this service, or this service may be contracted out to a capable NGO, who may operate vehicles on lease from the municipality.

Door-to-door collection: This includes collection of waste from houses and commercial establishments. NGOs/CBOs should provide this service. The collected waste may be brought to a public collection point to link with the pick-up service. If a particular locality is close to the transfer station, then the NGO/CBO may take the waste directly to the transfer station by tricycle.

54

122. Main reasons for recommending management support contract of package A are:

1) Significant investment is being made to improve the SWM service in project cities through IUDP. This includes expensive facilities such as landfill, transfer station and vehicles. However, the efficiency and effectiveness of total MSWM service delivery depends significantly on proper primary collection of solid waste. Primary collection must be improved so that all generated waste is collected and transported to the transfer station onward to the landfill site. Involvement of private sector agencies is necessary to bring effectiveness and efficiency in the collection system.

2) The recommended arrangement of various operational tasks related to various collection modes within package A for proper primary waste management, however, poses new challenges to the municipalities. They will have to assist in forming CBOs where needed, build the capacity of the NGOs/CBOs as necessary, and manage a number of such partner agencies. While the DSC and GESI components of IUDP will provide assistance to the municipalities in this regard, we feel that at present the municipalities do not have sufficient capacity to cope with the operational challenges. A management support contract of package A can be contracted out (outsourcing from municipality) to different private parties or even to the Landfill Contractor additionally to save administrative formalities to fill these gaps in improving the primary waste management part also.

123. The proposed management support contract of package A shall mainly deal with the following tasks:

1) Operational planning for city cleaning and all collection services (i.e. pick-up of waste from designated points and door-to-door collection services) at implementation level, updated as required.

2) Route planning / optimization of collection vehicles for waste transport to transfer station, including plan for their repair & maintenance, updated as required;

3) On-the-job training of potential municipal staff (mainly for providing effective city cleaning and pick-up services), and training/capacity building of potential NGOs/CBOs (mainly for providing effective door-to-door collection services);

4) Record keeping, data management, complaint recording, and setting up management information system (MIS) of all collection activities;

5) Other advisory support to municipality as and when required for enhancing effectiveness & efficiency mainly in collection service, contract

55

management to the NGOs/CBOs mainly in door-to-door collection service, standardization of services, and troubleshooting etc.; and

6) Reporting to the Municipal Solid Waste Management / Environment Committee and PPP Unit about progress of the contract service through monthly progress report, which may be used by the Committee as a base for Contractor‟s performance monitoring and evaluation.

124. Main reasons for recommending total service contract of package B can be further summarized as follows:

1) In secondary management of collected wastes (from TS onwards), the municipalities have till now no experience except that of crude dumping practices;

2) Operation of TS, secondary transport management and operation of sanitary landfill and other WM facilities are function-wise closely interlinked; and

3) There is lack of skilled/ trained manpower for proper operation of these new WM facilities going to be constructed by the landfill contractor.

125. Main reasons for recommending the management support contract of package A together with the total service contract of package B can be elaborated as follows:

1) Transfer station (proposed at a distance of ~3km on the way from the city to the landfill site, mainly for cost-effective transport of waste collected from the city to the distant landfill site) can be technically/operationally considered as a strategic point of demarcation between primary waste management and secondary waste management. Contracting total implementation of package B only (i.e. without contracting out the management support to improving collection services) could have been also a possible option, so that the municipality with the support of the NGOs/CBOs could concentrate totally on bringing all collected wastes to the transfer station and the landfill contractor could concentrate only on operational service from transfer station onwards. However, this option does not ensure that all wastes collected from the city shall be coming to the landfill site for the final disposal management, unless and until the primary waste management system will also be effective. Because, in case of not proper functioning of primary waste management, wastes collected from the city may even be diverted to elsewhere illegally instead of coming via transfer station to the landfill site. Poor primary collection means that the city will remain dirty and the landfill facility will not be used optimally. This option therefore ensures the smooth flow of waste streams throughout all operational steps of total SWM service, which is a must for proper environmental management of solid waste in the municipality.

56

2) There shall be optimum utilization of potential NGOs/CBOs for long-term sustainability of the SWM service, particularly that of collection service which is the most costly part of total municipal waste management service.

3) Municipality together with the NGOs/CBOs shall have opportunity to learn about the effective and efficient management tools of package A (which is actually lacking more or less in all project municipalities) and total operation of part B through facility-specific on-the-job training of potential municipal staff. Consequently, it shall be easier for municipality to decide on and be prepared for taking over responsibilities after the end of this proposed contract, depending upon the then situation.

Conclusion and Recommendation:,

Implementation of operational services related to package B by the private operator (i.e. landfill contractor) and those related to package A by the Municipality and/or NGOs/CBOs separately (without one combined package) will undoubtedly avoid possible conflict of interests between the operators of the two packages, e.g. Municipality trying for waste minimization and the contractor trying for increasing landfill waste. And there shall also be no possibility of the Municipality (the owner of the project) being supervised by the contractor. But at present situation of Nepalese municipalities, as such without management support for improving their primary management service, it may easily so happen that all collected waste does not enter the SLF, and contractor gets paid without getting city cleaned. So, there must be some management linkage between operations of the two packages if contracted out separately, for which the following arrangement shall deserve due consideration: o Package A operated by Municipality and/or NGOs/CBOs with the

concerned management support as per situation contracted out in separate package,

o Package B fully contracted to private sector (landfill contractor), and o One apex body (e.g. Municipal Solid Waste/ Environment Committee established as an advisory unit to the municipal board with the following

responsibilities. The proposed Municipal Solid Waste/ Environment Management Committee (under the chairmanship of EO/Mayor with recognized environment/SWM experts and advisors) shall have the main responsibilities to 1) supervise the contractor‟s work of package B and so also works under package A, 2) periodic monitor and evaluate their performances with authority to give instructions/feed backs for improvement as necessary, 3) advise to decide

57

for arrangement and duration of the proposed contractual services as per situation, and 4) advise to dispute resolution as and when required during implementation of the contractual services. It is highly recommendable to have such a committee in function (i.e. institutionalized) also beyond contractual periods of the contractors concerned.

4.4 Duration of Operational Services

126. The main objectives of engaging contractor to operate the SWM service are to improve effectiveness and efficiency, and to allow the Municipality thereby to adequately learn about proper operational management of solid waste. Minimum durations of the proposed contractual arrangement are to be recommended as follows. Thereafter, the Municipality may decide how to continue the service further with options depending upon its technical and financial capacity:

1) The management support contract of package A should start one year before completion of the landfill site and other waste management facilities, so that the proposed SWM system (starting from collection up to final disposal management) can be set in full operation thereafter. Because, during this first year, the contractor shall have mainly the managerial supporting tasks to perform for improving the existing capacity of the municipality and/or local NGOs/CBOs in primary waste management service, which is pre-requisite for good start of the total SWM system with proper final disposal management. After the start of landfill operation, this management support contract of package A shall continue further in parallel with total service contract of package B for a period depending upon decision of the proposed Municipal Solid Waste Management/ Environment Committee as per necessity.

2) The total service contract of package B includes operation of transfer station, secondary transport service (from transfer station to the sanitary landfill) and operation of sanitary landfill & other WM facilities. These operational services require skilled manpower for proper operational management of secondary transport vehicles, including proper repair and maintenance, for which the Municipality may take longer time for adequate learning of effective operations. Besides, the operation of sanitary landfill & other WM facilities going to be developed in the project municipalities deserves special attention compared to all other operational services. It is because, not only that final disposal management of solid waste is new for the municipalities, but also that there are other complimentary waste management facilities being integrated at the site. And it is also to be noted that, a sanitary landfill, no matter however good it may have been designed or constructed, may not function as expected, unless it is properly operated. Proper operation of a sanitary landfill

58

requires adequately trained/skilled manpower. Besides a landfill site requires sufficient time in running condition before all technical and operational aspects can be addressed such as preparation of tipping area/cell for site operation during rainy season and environmental monitoring related to impact on groundwater. These may not be observed within 1-2 years. Besides, other WM-facilities such as composting & recycling facilities, septage drying bed and plant for treatment of SW leachate & septage have to be properly operated by and under the supervision of facility-specific trained/skilled manpower in an integrated manner. For all these reasons, contracting the operation of this integrated waste management site as a whole to its constructor should be minimum for a period of ~ 5 years, so that the Municipality can adequately learn all aspects of proper operational management of this important site. A contract of longer period is recommendable, in case if the Municipality shall be financially capable to pay for it, for which the revenue collection improvement is a must. However longer contract period may not also be suitable with binding conditions to the same contractor for operation. To decide for a longer contract period shall be one of the main responsibilities of the proposed Municipal Solid Waste/ Environment Committee with due consideration of the technical reasons and the Municipality‟s financial situation.

4.5 Financial Arrangement

127. As regards the revenues from SWM service - in most of the developing countries and also in Nepal, the experiences have shown that full cost recovery of municipal SWM service from service charges is not possible, despite various efforts for cost reduction in the operational management. It is simply, because there are other utility services such as drinking water for instance, which obviously deserve higher priority for the general public as compared to the environmental service of SWM. For example, based on the unit cost calculation for the operational system conceptualized in the IUDP-PPTA report, total cost recovery fee for SWM service with door-to-door collection (i.e. including all incurring costs in collecting landfill waste from individual houses/businesses, transporting up to the landfill site via. transfer station, and finally treating and disposing of in an environmentally acceptable manner) would be about NPR 206 per household per month. Only the primary cost recovery fee for this service (i.e. including all incurring costs in collecting landfill waste from individual houses/businesses and transporting up to the transfer station) would be about NPR 125 per household per month. Therefore, in the project municipalities, where the introduction of SWM service fee has practically not yet started (with the exception of Siddharthanagar, however indirectly for door-to-door pick-up service), targeting for recovering the primary SWM costs within say ~5 years shall be a good strategy. It is however to be noted that direct door-to-door service

59

linked with direct collection of service fees has to be encouraged to the maximum possible extent. The proposed door-to-door collection (i.e. collection from individual households by waste collectors going door-to-door) is one-level higher service compared to roadside pick-up service (i.e. pick-up by vehicles from designated public collection points on roadsides), or even higher than other collection service (e.g. collection by vehicles on route standing at some designated points on roadside and nearby located households expected to bring their wastes to the vehicles, as presently practiced in some outer city core areas in Siddharthanagar).

128. The service fee collection from street/public space cleaning and so also from pick-up service would be very difficult, although these services account for a major chunk of direct cost to be borne by the municipality. The other secondary costs of SWM (i.e. for secondary transport, treatment and final disposal management) are always to be considered as indirect costs for the public, with which the service receivers are not directly concerned, and therefore have to be covered from other service fees, taxes, etc. So, as regards the collection service, decreasing the street/ public space cleaning service gradually and increasing the door-to-door collection linked with fee collection accordingly shall be a good technical/operational strategy supporting financial sustainability of municipal solid waste management.

129. Financial sustainability in the long-run can be achieved only through cost reductions and revenue expansions. Revenue in SWM service can be improved by working out appropriate tariff system with fee structure, which in principle should follow the four objectives of:

- cost orientation (i.e. based on unit cost calculations), - social orientation (i.e. cross subsidization and low rates for low-income

groups), - collection orientation (i.e. easy reading and collection of potential fees),

and - people‟s orientation (i.e. convincing urban dwellers to pay fees for waste

management services.

130. As detailing of tariff system with fee structure for financial sustainability in solid waste management in individual project municipalities is out of scope of this study, as a base for the proposed contractual arrangement, the ranges of rates proposed for the concerned service charges, tipping fees, etc. are elaborated in the Table 15 below for the year 2016. The rates introduced recently in Biratnagar (2011) are also reflected for comparison.

60

Table 15: Proposed Service Charges, Tipping Fees for the Operational Services (2016)

Operational

Services

Total unit operational/ production

cost

Total cost recovery service charge/

tipping fee/

Primary cost recovery service charge/

tipping fee/

Proposed service charge/

tipping fee/

Proposed rates in Biratnagar

(2011)

1. Door-to-door collection service

NPR 4217 per ton 1)

NPR 206 per hhold/business per month 2)

NPR 125 per hhold/business per month 3)

Door-to-door collection service

Households: NPR 50 – 200 (collection: 2 – 7/wk.)

Businesses: NPR 60 – 600 (collection: 7/wk.)

Hotel/Restaurants: NPR 250 – 2500 (collection: 7/wk.)

Offices: NPR 150 – 300 (collection: 6/wk.)

Educational Inst’s: NPR 250 – 800 (collection: 6/wk.) etc.

Door-to-door collection service Households: NPR 40 – 200 (collection: 2 – 7/wk.) Businesses: NPR 50 – 500 (collection: 7/wk.) Hotels/Restaurants: NPR 250 – 2000 (collection: 7/wk.) Offices: NPR 150 – 250 (collection: 6/wk.) Educational Inst’s: NPR 250 – 700 (collection: 6/wk.) etc.

2. Sanitary landfilling

NPR 604 per ton*

NPR 604 per ton

NPR 550 per ton

NPR 550 per ton

3. Septage treatment and disposal

-

-

-

NPR 250 per cbm ^

A. Selling recyclables

** ** ** **

B. Selling compost

** ** ** **

Notes: * Projected on data based on operation of SLF-Gokarna in Kathmandu (Sources : CKV/JICA study report, 2004; Centre Manual KNOW-HOW DISSEMINATION / Volume I (Administration), SWMRMC, 1991 ** Sales from the activities on “segregation & recovery of recyclables” and “windrow composting” from the incoming waste (mostly of mixed type) at the landfill site, is to be considered as incentive for promoting possible waste minimization even before final disposal management. ^ Provision of only treatment and disposal facility at the site (reference USEPA, 1999)

1) Total unit operational cost (with depreciation of equipment) for door-to-door collection up to

final disposal = 2543.48 + 1069.77 + 603.94 = NPR 4217.19 per ton Note: Cost for door-to-door collection & transport to TS in 2011 = NPR 1579.30/ton

(Annex- 2.1) Cost for door-to-door collection and transport to TS in 2016 = 1579.30 x (1+0.1)5 = NPR 2543.48/ton

61

Cost for operation of TS & secondary transport to SLF in 2011 = NPR 664.24/ton (Annex- 2.3)

Cost for operation of TS & secondary transport to SLF in 2016 = 664.24 x (1+0.1)5 = NPR 1069.77/ton

2) Total cost recovery service charge for door-to-door collection = 0.3 kg/cap/d x 5.44 (pers./hhl) x 30 days x 4217.19/1000 = NPR 206.47/hhl/month

3) Primary cost recovery service charge for door-to-door collection up to TS = 0.3 kg/cap/d x 5.44 (pers./hhl) x 30 days x 2543.48/1000 = NPR 124.53/hhl/month

62

5. OUTPUT SPECIFICATIONS

5.1 Introduction

131. Landfills are expensive facilities. It is not sensible to design and construct a costly landfill site and then not operate it as a proper sanitary landfill. If not properly operated, the facility will remain as an open dumping site despite all the efforts in designing and constructing the facility. Therefore, proper operation is essential for landfills. There should also be a monitoring system with performance indicators and targets to ensure at least a basic minimum quality in operation. Together with regular monitoring, the payment mechanism for an operating agency should be linked with its performance so that the agency strives to operate the facility at an optimum level.

132. The following sections present basic performance indicators, targets, monitoring and payment issues related with operating a landfill site.

5.2 Key Aspects for Good Performance and Operational Guidelines

133. A set of key aspects for good performance and operational guidelines are presented in Table 16. This may be used to monitor the performance of the CONTRACTOR operating the solid waste management facilities and collection/transport service.

Table 16: Key Aspects for Good Performance and Operational Guidelines

Key Aspects Operational Guidelines

Layer of waste Waste must be deposited and then compacted in thin layers of up to 300 mm thickness. Such layers may be built up to a thickness of 2 m in depth.

Area of work The daily area of work should be kept as small as possible and no more than 1 hectare.

Cover The surface of newly deposited waste should be covered every day with 15 cm thick soil or similar material.

Presence of landfill manager

A competent landfill manager with adequate skills and training should be available full-time on-site in the landfill facility to supervise day-to-day operations. S/He should be supported by experts whenever necessary.

Fire hazard

Open burning should not be permitted in a landfill site. If a fire is detected, it must be extinguished immediately. Adequate training to staff and fire extinguishing equipment in good operating condition will be maintained.

Leachate minimization

Efforts must be taken to minimize leachate generation. No biodegradable waste should be deposited in water.

Type of landfill waste

In general, biodegradable and recyclable materials should be separated, and only residual waste should be deposited in a landfill site. This will minimize the waste going into a landfill and extend its life. The target is that 90% of the biodegradable waste entering the landfill facility will be composted, and 90%

63

Key Aspects Operational Guidelines of the recyclable materials (metal, glass, plastic) will be separated.

Vermin control

Inspection for vermin should be frequent (weekly) and measures taken to control infestation. Vermin (e.g. rodents, other animals, flies, birds, etc.) are a health risk. They should not be tolerated in large numbers anywhere within a landfill site.

Litter control

Litter should be collected regularly from around the site. There should be daily patrol of premises for this purpose. Wind-blown waste (such as pieces of paper and plastic) should be collected at least once a week.

Drainage Drainage should be kept free of blockage. Routine inspection and maintenance of drains should be made. This will avoid flooding in bad weather conditions.

Preventive maintenance of equipment

There should be a checklist for preventive maintenance of all equipment. It should be based on guidelines provided by respective manufacturers. All maintenance works performed should be recorded.

Groundwater monitoring

Groundwater should be monitored to check that the leachate concentrations are diluted and are acceptable. At least as frequently as every six months, monitoring should be conducted by analyzing samples taken from borehole(s) located at downstream of the site. The samples should be measured for the parameters commonly associated with leachate pollution (e.g. pH, electrical conductivity, potassium, chloride, etc). Elevated levels of any of these against background will be indicative of a leachate plume impacting on the groundwater. This should be promptly reported to the Authority.

Leachate monitoring

As a minimum standard in routine landfill operations, the depth of leachate in the deposited waste should be regularly checked, at least twice a year. If the leachate level is found to be rising year after year, or the depth exceeds a level set by the regulatory agencies, then additional leachate control will be required including leachate extraction by pumping and treatment.

Gas monitoring

The minimum monitoring requirement for landfill gas should be to check for the presence or absence of landfill gas in wells, under buildings, and in underground ducts and chambers to ensure that flammable concentrations have not accumulated. Hand-held, spark-proof, battery-powered gas detectors may be used monthly to monitor methane and carbon dioxide. Landfill gas should be vented through vertical pipes and ignited to oxidize the methane to less potent greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide).

Record keeping

Regular records of operations should be maintained including equipment maintenance, daily operations (waste input, hours worked, materials used, etc.), environmental monitoring, personnel matters, and financial matters.

64

Key Aspects Operational Guidelines

Structural stability Daily monitoring/patrol should be conducted to observe signs of landslide, slope failure or settlement. Remedial action should be taken promptly if any danger is noticed.

Protective gear

Personnel working at the landfill facility, transfer station and during collection and transport of waste must wear appropriate protective gear. This may include overalls, working boots, gloves, dust mask, goggles, hard hats, etc.

Environmental Monitoring Guidelines

Groundwater Monitoring 134. Groundwater shall be monitored by sampling and analysis of water from

monitoring wells (constructed before site operation) at upstream and downstream of the SLF. The groundwater should be sampled and tested by a qualified water quality expert, and at a certified laboratory. Following test parameters are recommended for sampling and analysis of groundwater quality at the indicated frequencies. Quality of groundwater must comply with „Nepal Drinking Water Quality Standard‟, 2062 (Annex-3.1) if wells are being used as drinking water sources by the settlements at downstream.

No. Parameter Frequency

A. INDICATORS 1 pH (field and laboratory) Twice annually 2 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) Twice annually 3 Specific Conductivity Twice annually 4 COD Twice annually 5 Total Organic Carbon (TOC) Twice annually 6 Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3) Twice annually 7 Nitrates and Nitrites (NO3, NO2) Twice annually

B. METALS 1 Arsenic Annual 2 Lead (soluble) Annual 3 Chromium (total) Annual 4 Chromium (hexavalent) Annual 5 Mercury (Hg) Annual 6 Zinc Annual

C. VOLATILE ORGANICS, PESTICIDES and PCBs 1 VOCs Annual 2 Pesticides and PCBs Annual

135. The groundwater wells should be inspected on a regular basis (minimum every 3 months) for signs of damage. Damaged wells will be repaired or replaced as necessary. Replacement wells will be constructed adjacent to the damaged well and with the same depth.

Surface Water Monitoring

65

136. Surface water samples shall be taken and tested by a qualified water quality

expert, and at a certified laboratory at immediate upstream and downstream of the SLF (nearest surface water bodies, e.g. rivers, kholsi etc.). Recommended standard for surface water quality can be taken as „Tolerance Limit for Inland surface Water Receiving Industrial Effluent‟ (Annex-3.2). Sampling frequencies and analysis parameters should be as follows:

No. Parameter Frequency

A. INDICATORS 1 pH (field and laboratory) Twice annually 2 Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) Twice annually 3 Color Twice annually 4 Temperature Twice annually 5 COD Twice annually 6 Specific Conductivity Twice annually 7 BOD5 Twice annually 8 Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Twice annually 9 Total Organic Carbon (TOC) Twice annually 10 Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3) Twice annually 11 Oil & Grease Twice annually 12 Phenols Twice annually 13 Nitrates and Nitrites (NO3, NO2) Twice annually 14 Cyanide Twice annually 15 Total Coli form Twice annually

B. METALS 1 Arsenic Annual 2 Cadmium Annual 3 Lead (soluble) Annual 4 Chromium (hexavalent) Annual 5 Mercury (Total) Annual 6 Zinc Annual

C. VOLATILE ORGANICS, PESTICIDES and PCBs 1 Formaldehyde Annual 2 PCBs Annual

66

Leachate Monitoring (for treatment with aerator in leachate collection pond) 137. The leachate pond and the adjacent manhole shall be monitored on a

regular basis for possible leakages.

138. The effect of the aerator on the leachate will be monitored to assess its performance. An indicator of adequate aeration is the presence of Dissolved Oxygen (DO) near the surface of the pond at a concentration greater than 6.0 mg/l. This should be checked at least once a week to ensure the pond has adequate aeration and to prevent emission of odor.

139. Two samples shall be obtained from the mouth of the outlet pipe and from within the pond and tested under the same frequencies and for the same parameters as for the surface water.

Effluent Monitoring

Sampling of treated effluent shall be done at the final point of discharge of the leachate treatment facility into the inland surface water. Treated effluent shall be sampled and tested by a qualified water quality expert at a certified laboratory. Recommended test parameters and monitoring frequency are as for surface water. Recommended standard for treated and discharged effluent can be taken as „Tolerance Limit for Industrial Effluents to be Discharged into Inland Surface Waters - Generic Standard Part 1‟ (Annex-3.3), if the treated effluent is to be discharged inland surface water bodies (e.g. rivers, kholsi etc.).

Landfill Gas Monitoring 140. Landfill gas vents should be monitored every three months using an

appropriate gas analyzer unit. Records will be maintained regarding the time and date of monitoring and observed methane concentrations over the Lower Explosive Limit (LEL).

141. Periodic monitoring of the landfill administration buildings shall also be performed.

Incoming Waste Monitoring 142. Incoming wastes should be monitored for the presence of hazardous

materials or liquid wastes. Monitoring shall be by visual inspection. If it is realized that there is a serious problem in the detection of such wastes than a more sophisticated monitoring plan may need to be developed.

Public Complaints Analysis 143. The landfill operating staff should maintain a record of all complaints arriving

to the site. The record should classify the complaints by type, number, frequency and the actions taken concerning each. Examples of complaints are:

Water contamination

67

Foul smell Waste scattering Odor Vectors Noise Health problems Birds

5.3 Performance Indicators and Monitoring

144. A set of key performance indicators of MSWM services with respective benchmarks and monitoring frequencies is given below.

Door-to-door collection coverage: Door step level collection is an essential and critical point in ensuring effective SWM service. Attempt should be made to collect waste from all households and businesses of the city. The indicator for this service is the percentage of the households/businesses that are covered as compared to the total number of households/businesses. For measurement purpose, the total number of households in a service area has to be determined. The number of households under the door-to-door service may be acquired from the service providers and verified from their records of user charges. The target should be to bring 100% of the households under this service; however, the minimum acceptable level may be 75% at the beginning of the service and gradually increased to 100% within two years. The frequency of monitoring may be monthly. The Contractor in collaboration with the Municipality/Municipal Environment Committee may be responsible for monitoring.

MSW collection efficiency: Collection efficiency is an important indicator in SWM. It is the percentage of waste that is collected as compared to the total amount of waste generated (excluding source reduction). For measurement purpose, waste generation is estimated based on surveys on representative samples. Seasonal variation in waste generation must also be captured by the surveys. The amount of collected waste may be measured by the weighbridge at the landfill site. The target may be set at 100%. The frequency of monitoring may be monthly. The Contractor in collaboration with the Municipality/Municipal Environment Committee may be responsible for monitoring.

MSW recovery efficiency: Resource recovery indicates the percentage of waste that is recycled or processed as compared to the total collected waste. It may be measured by the quantity input into recycling/ processing facilities. The total waste entering the landfill site is measured at the weigh bridge. Daily logs of waste quantity entering the landfill site and various recycling facilities should be kept. Municipal solid waste typically contains 70-80% organic/ recyclable material. The aim is to remove such components and allow only inert residual material to enter into landfill cells. The target may be set as high as 80%

68

(compared to recyclable and compostable fractions entering the SLF site), so that organic and recyclable materials are removed and life of the landfill site is maximized. The frequency of monitoring may be monthly. The Landfill Contractor in collaboration with the Municipality / Municipal Environment Committee may be responsible for monitoring.

Efficiency in redressal of customer complaints: This indicator is the percentage of complaints redressed within 24 hours as compared to the total number of complaints. For this purpose, a complaint lodging system has to be in place. Customers may complain by telephone, in person, online, or letter box about missed collection, poor service, uncollected waste on the streets, etc. All complaints are to be recorded. Complaints redressed within 24 hours of lodging are to be indicated. The target may be set at 80%. The frequency of monitoring may be monthly but complaints should be tracked daily. The Landfill Contractor in collaboration with the Municipality / Municipal Environment Committee may be responsible for monitoring.

Extent of scientific final disposal: This indicator is in general, the percentage of waste that is finally disposed in the landfills that have been designed, built, operated and maintained as per prevailing standards compared to the total waste disposed after collection and recovery at landfills (including complaint landfills and other dump sites). In case of contractual service for package B, the total waste to be scientifically disposed of at the landfill cells within the landfill site developed shall be the incoming amount measured at the weighbridge minus the quantity composted and the quantity recovered as recyclables, but including the rejected amounts from compost plant and recycling facility. The target may be set at 100%. The frequency of monitoring may be monthly. The Contractor in collaboration with the Municipality / Municipal Environment Committee may be responsible for monitoring.

Cost recovery efficiency: This indicator is the percentage of annual operating cost as compared to annual SWM revenue. For measurement purpose, all costs incurred by the municipality in relation to SWM should be aggregated. Similarly all revenues earned for SWM service (earmarked property tax, charges, grants, etc.) are to be aggregated. It is essential to have separate accounting for SWM services for this purpose. Income earned by the private sector that is not passed on to the municipality should be excluded. The frequency of monitoring may be yearly. The target should be set for 100%.

145. Monitoring of MSWM services with all performance indicators is not easy for municipalities having limited resources available. Therefore, for IUDP municipalities we recommend that a few basic easy-to-use performance indicators are monitored.

146. Under the proposed contractual arrangement, there are two distinct services. Performance monitoring for basic indicators is proposed for Package A and

69

Package B as elaborated below in Tables 17 and 18 respectively. These basic performance indicators may be further rectified/simplified by PIU/DSC as per actual situations after detail designing of the total SWM system.

Table 17: Performance Monitoring for Package A

Aspect Basic Performance Indicator

Monitoring Frequency

Means of Verification

Resource input

Adequate number of qualified staff assigned

Quarterly Official notification (e.g. appointment letter)

Attendance Monthly Register book Operational Input

Operational plan for cleaning and collection services updated monthly

Monthly Report

Route plan of collection vehicles and plan for their repair/maintenance updated monthly

Monthly Report

Daily field supervision Weekly Log book Complaint register updated daily

Weekly Register book

Management information updated daily

Weekly Record book

147. Target for resource input should be full compliance with contractual agreement for personnel assignment and 100% attendance (except authorized leave). Full compliance should be targeted for operational input too.

The management support contract of Package A by the Contractor will involve assisting the Municipality and NGOs/CBOs with management tools to provide primary collection services through operational planning, route planning, record keeping, etc. (details given in section 4.3). The proposed Municipal Solid Waste/ Environment Committee will monitor whether the Contractor is performing its role by the proposed indicators. Non-compliance with any indicator will result in penalty for each violation.

Operation of the Landfill Site

148. Landfill site operation is complex and has many aspects including personnel management, equipment management, environmental protection, occupational safety, etc. Monitoring all such operations demand capacity that is beyond that of the municipalities. Therefore, the municipalities will require external support. For example, monitoring environmental parameter will require laboratory support, for which the municipalities may seek assistance from SWMTSC or other such specialized agencies. However, certain

70

physical parameters are easily observable and the municipalities may use these to monitor proper day-to-day operation of the landfill facility. Nevertheless, the proposed performance monitoring scheme elaborated below may be further rectified/simplified by PIU/DSC as per actual situations of as-built site.

Table 18: Performance Monitoring for Package B




Cleanliness of transfer station

No storage or littering of waste in the premises

Weekly Physical observation/ Register book

Access control / Site safety

1) Entry/exit of vehicles and personnel recorded 2) Control of impermissible wastes 3) Fenced premises

Monthly Physical observation/ Register book

Waste records 1) All incoming waste weighed and recorded 2) Amount composted 3) Amount of recyclables recovered

Monthly Physical observation/ Record book

Waste Placement

Biodegradable/ recyclables taken to compost plant/ recycling facility and the residual waste to landfill cell

Monthly Physical observation/ Record book

Application of soil cover

Daily soil cover applied and the amount recorded

Weekly Physical observation

Equipment Equipment maintained in operating condition with record of o&m

Monthly Physical observation/ Maintenance book

Environmental controls:

1) Surface water drainage

1) Drains in good unclogged condition

1) Weekly 1) Physical observation

2) Fire 2) No smouldering waste 2) Weekly 2) Physical observation 3) Pest and birds

3) No breeding of vectors/ animals and presence of birds

3) Weekly 3) Physical observation

4) Litter 4) No litter in premises 4) Weekly 4) Physical observation 5) LFgas vents 5) LFgas vents placed

properly 5) Weekly 5) Physical observation

6) Leachate 7) Odor 8) Dust

6) No leachate escaping to the environment 7) No offensive odor 8) No heavy dust emission

6) Weekly 7) Weekly 8) Weekly

6) Physical observation 7) Smelling 8) Physical observation

Environmental monitoring

Quality of: 1) Groundwater 2) Surface water 3) Leachate 4) Effluent

As per concerned parameters and following Environmental

Record book

71




5) Landfill gas Monitoring Guidelines

Record of social considerations

Record of: 1) Public complaints 2) Scavenging activities 3) Record of visitors

1) Weekly 2) Weekly 3) Weekly

1) Record book 2) Record book/ Physical observation 3) Record book

149. The target for the above monitoring scheme should be 100% compliance.

5.4 Payment Mechanism in the Contract

Payment for Expenditure 150. The Municipality shall pay the Contractors for the services rendered under

Package A and Package B.

151. It is recommended that payment for Package A be made on monthly basis for the first year (i.e. year before completion of all facilities including the landfill site, as waste collected by then cannot be measured in tons). This service shall mainly concentrate on management skills of the Municipality and/or NGOs/CBOs to improve their collection service. However from the second year onwards, with the operation of the weigh bridge along with development of all facilities for full-fledged service, the payment of both contract services related to Package A and Package B may be made on the basis of weight of waste collected (i.e. tons of solid waste entering the landfill facility as measured at the weighbridge by the weighbridge operator). This ensures clarity in collection efficiency and an easy basis for payment. On the operational side, good performance is ensured by adherence to performance indicators.

The initial aim is to improve cleanliness in the municipalities by high collection efficiency. Payment on the basis of weight will promote this. Attempt to intentionally increasing the weight of waste by wetting should be discouraged by proper monitoring. The other important aim of reducing the amount of waste to be managed should be introduced effectively. This will require adoption of 3R principles including segregation at source. The municipality will save money by paying less for the reduced amount of waste to be managed. Part of the savings may be used to create incentives for the citizens, NGOs and the Contractor to promote the 3R principles.

Once the citizens enjoy a clean environment and participate in waste management activities through service charges and promotional activities, a momentum for 3R will be created. We recommend that annual assessments be carried out to indicate steps for adopting 3R principles through incentives

72

(e.g. reduced service charge to citizens for source separation and bonus for the Contractor for increased composting) and deterrents (fines and penalties).

152. In linking performance with payment, it is recommended that for each of the services 5 - 10% of the claimed bill will be deducted for not reaching each of the basic indicator targets as specified above.

Revenue 153. The Contractor (landfill operator) shall be permitted to sell compost products

produced by the compost plant at the landfill site as an incentive.

154. The Contractor (landfill operator) shall be permitted to sell any recyclable materials recovered from the landfill site as an incentive.

73

6. COST ESTIMATES

6.1 Current Costs of SWM

155. The solid waste management currently being practiced in all the project municipalities are not only environmentally unacceptable, but also from technical/operational aspect not proper due to the lack of a systematic operational management plan. The collection services are provided 1) in city core areas - usually by daily regular street cleaning combined with roadside pick-up services, and 2) in outer core areas – by less frequently or as and when required street cleaning also combined with irregular roadside pick-up service at several temporary collection points. As regards the disposal service, all the wastes collected from regular street cleaning, primary collection and other special cleaning services are transported to the currently designated disposal site, where the wastes are finally disposed of simply by crude dumping practice, i.e. even without any minimum environmental protection and pollution control measure such as covering the incoming waste with soil. It is therefore to be noted that the current cost of SWM reflects only the costs for the improper management being practiced at present.

156. As regards the operational expenditure, none of the project municipalities has a financial system for recording all the costs incurred only in SWM service separately. The major regular costing items in SWM services are manpower (salary, allowances, and other social benefits), fuel (diesel and lubricants), repair & maintenance (of all SWM equipment and vehicles), and purchase of small equipment/tools and consumables (such as brooms, shovels, picks, disinfecting materials etc.). Although, the expenditures for these items are also usually recorded in combination with other municipal services, the costs incurring exclusively for SWM service could be analysed, more or less correctly, only after discussions with the concerned municipal staff. However, the fee collection from SWM service rendered (if any) could be clearly obtained, as it had a separate heading in the revenue collection such as in Siddharthanagar.

157. Despite the existing record keeping system, the analytical review and some logistical projection of data on expenditure and revenues in various headings (as provided by the municipality) shows following situations on current SWM costs of the project municipalities in the last fiscal years.

6.1.1 Current Cost of SWM Service in Nepalgunj Municipality

158. The analytical review of data on annual municipal expenditure and revenues (provided by the municipality under various headings) shows the following situation on current SWM costs of Nepalgunj municipality in the last fiscal years, for which the data are available.

74

Table 19: Operational Expenditure/ Revenue of SWM Service in Nepalgunj Municipality

S. N.

Major Cost Centers

Expenditure* FY 2009/10

FY 2010/11

(‘000 NPR) ( %) Remark (‘000 NPR) ( %) Remark

1 Salary 3,600 71.2 11,629 76.8

2 Allowances + other benefits 664 13.1 2,234 14.8

3 Fuel & other supplies^ 612 12.1 699 4.6

4 Repair & maintenance 26 0.5

5 Miscellaneous (dress, utilities) 157 3.1 574 3.8

Total operational expenditure in SWM* 5,059 100 # NPR

1082/ton 15,136

++ 100 # NPR

2975/ton^^ Revenue from service fees+ - 0%

cost recovery 54 ~ 0%

cost recovery Notes: * : Analysis based on municipal records provided. + : FY 2011/12- 8% of integrated property tax (IPT) as service fee (sanitation fee

together with str. lightning +fire brigade) being collected; In FY 012/13 proposed -10% of IPT as service fee including sanitation fee. Reportedly, 80% of the service fee accounts for sanitation fee. In FY 2011/12 already 8% of IPT is being collected as general service fee, and in the next year this service fee will be increased to 10% (85% of the service is used for SWM and 15% for street lightning and fire brigade).

++: Including due payments of last year (FY 2009/10) and salary increments, # : Fiscal year 2010/11

Average daily collection = 18.5 tons/d** Net performance days = 275 days Unit cost of current SWM practice =15136000/(275x18.5)=NPR 2975.14/ton

Fiscal year 2009/10 Average daily collection = 17 tons/d**

Net performance days = 275 days Unit cost of current SWM practice= 5059000/(275x17) = NPR1082.14/ton ^ : Includes expenditure of small equipment/tools for city cleaning in FY 2009/10 and

additionally that of repair & maintenance of equipment/vehicles in FY 2010/11. ** : Average daily collection rates assumed for fiscal years based on figures reported

by the municipality in March 2011 (~mid FY 2010/11) and in Nov. 2011 (~start of FY 2011/12)

75

^^ : Unit cost not reliable because of last year due payments ^^

6.1.2 Current Cost of SWM Service in Siddharthanagar Municipality

159. The analytical review of data on annual municipal expenditure and revenues (provided by the municipality under various headings) shows the following situations on current SWM costs of Siddharthanagar municipality in the last fiscal years.

Table 20: Operational Expenditure/ Revenue of SWM Services


S. N.

Major Cost Centers

Expenditure*

FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11

(‘000 NPR) (%) Remark (‘000 NPR) (%) Remark

1 Salary

Cost-centre

wise

distribution

similar to

FY 2010/11

not

available

4,448 83.2

2 Allowances + other benefits

3 Fuel & lubricants 245 4.6

4 Repair & maintenance 142 2.7

5 Small equipment/ tools 234 4.4

6 Miscellaneous (dress, utilities) 279 5.1

Total operational expenditure in SWM* 4,869 +

100 # NPR

1265/ton

5,348 +

100 # NPR

1111/ton Revenue fromSWM service fees* 1,207 24.79%

cost recovery 1,226 22.92%

cost recovery Total municipal operational expenditure*

NPR 50,506,306.10 NPR 54,621,004.88

Notes:

* : Analysis based on municipal records provided Revenue from SWM service fees : NPR 1,134, 040.25 in FY 2008/09

+ : Including payments to the SWM contractor – FY 09/10: NPR 1,778,695 & FY 10/11: NPR 1,989,835

# : Fiscal year 2010/11 Average daily collection = 17.5 tons/d**

Net performance days = 275 days Unit cost of current SWM practice= 5348000/(275x17.5) = NPR 1,111.27/ton

Fiscal year 2009/10 Average daily collection = 14 tons/d**

Net performance days = 275 days Unit cost of current SWM practice= 4869000/(275x14) = NPR 1,264.68/ton

76

** : Average daily collection rates assumed for fiscal years based on figures reported by the municipality in March 2011 (~mid FY 2010/11) and in Nov. 2011 (~start of FY 2011/12)

6.1.3 Current Cost of SWM Service in Janakpur Municipality

160. The analytical review of data on annual municipal expenditure and revenues (provided by the municipality under various headings) shows the following situations on current SWM costs of Janakpur municipality in the last fiscal years.

Table 21: Operational Expenditure/ Revenue of SWM Service in Janakpur Municipality

S. N.

Major Cost Centers

Expenditure*

FY 2009/10 FY 2010/11 (‘000 NPR) ( %) Remark (‘000 NPR) ( %) Remark

1 Salary 6,369 75.1

Cost

distribution

similar to

FY 2009/10

for SWM

service not

available

2 Allowances + other benefits 1,021 12.0

3 Fuel & lubricants 738 8.7 4 Repair & maintenance 8 0.1

5 Small equipment/ tools 95 1.1

6 Miscellaneous (dress, utilities) 59 0.7

7 Special cleaning (dashai, tihar) 128 1.5

8 Environment and greenery

60 0.8

Total operational expenditure in SWM* 8478 100 # NPR

2204/ton

Revenue from SWM service fees*

- 0% cost recovery

Notes: * : Analysis based on municipal records (source: Municipality‟s bulletin 2066/67 and

other reports provided)

# : Fiscal year 2009/10 Average daily collection = 14 tons/d**

Net performance days = 275 days Unit cost of current SWM practice = 8487000/(275x14) = NPR 2204.42/ton

** : Average daily collection rates assumed for fiscal years based on figures reported by

the municipality.

77

6.2 Costs under Proposed Arrangement

6.2.1 Unit costs of Operational Services

161. In order to be able to provide a cost-effective waste handling services for the public, municipality has to make constant efforts to reduce the cost of all SWM related operations. Reducing cost can be achieved if the real costs for different operational functions is regularly monitored and evaluated. The unit cost calculation actually forms a basis for decisions concerning equipment and waste handling operational procedures for development of a sustainable MSWM system in the long-run. For the purpose of serving as a base for the proposed contractual arrangement, unit costs of related operational services have been calculated for the technical/operational system with infrastructure as conceptualized in the IUDP - PPTA report and under some average conditions realistic to the project municipalities for the current year, which are as follows.

Door-to-door Collection Service

162. By door-to-door collection service, waste is collected from individual households, businesses etc. (i.e. at sources of waste generation) on route as per operational route planning of the collection service, and when the collection vehicle is full, it will be transported to the transfer station for unloading into a bigger secondary transport vehicle. The calculation for unit cost for this service in (NPR per ton) with average conditional assumptions of technical/ operational system of SWM (e.g. transfer station ~3km away from the city) shows average unit costs of operation for year 2011 as NPR 1579.30/ton and NPR 1357.39/ton (Annex-2.1) with and without depreciation of equipment respectively, which with an annual increment of 10%, shall be in year 2016, NPR 2543.48/ton and NPR 2186.10/ton respectively.

Pick-up Service

163. By pick-up service, waste is collected from roadside pick-up points (designated public collection points) on route as per operational route planning of this collection service, and when the collection vehicle is full, it will be transported to the transfer station for unloading into a bigger secondary transport vehicle. The calculation of unit cost for this service in (NPR per ton) with average conditional assumptions of technical/ operational system of SWM (e.g. transfer station ~3km away from the city) shows average unit costs of operation for year 2011 as NPR 1353.66/ton and NPR 1156.57/ton (Annex-2.2) with and without depreciation of equipment respectively, which with an annual increment of 10%, shall be in year 2016, NPR 2180.08/ton and NPR 1862.67/ton respectively.

Secondary Transport and Transfer Station Management

78

164. All the wastes collected through door-to-door service or roadside pick-up

service in smaller collection vehicles will be transported to the transfer station for unloading into a bigger secondary transport vehicle. The bulk transport of waste in vehicles of bigger capacities from transfer station to the final disposal site is termed as “secondary transport” or “long distance transport”. The calculation of unit cost for this operational management with average conditional assumptions of technical/ operational system of SWM (e.g. landfill site ~7km away from the transfer station) shows average unit costs of operation for year 2011 as NPR 664.24/ton and NPR 547.84/ton (Annex-2.3) with and without depreciation of equipment respectively, which with an annual increment of 10%, shall be in year 2016, NPR 1069.77/ton and NPR 882.30/ton respectively.

6.2.2 Base Costs of Contractual Arrangement

165. Base cost estimate of contractual service for management support to Package A in the first year is elaborated in Table 22. Costs for services from second year onwards are estimated based on unit costs calculations of operational services (see section 6.2.1) for year 2011, and projected with an annual increment of 10% for year 2016. These costs for different operational services are elaborated in the Table 23 below. It is to be noted that for the proposed contractual arrangement of operational service, direct unit costs without depreciations have been considered, as the assets (i.e. all WM facilities, equipment/vehicles, etc.) will be owned by the municipality. Besides, these costs are without any overheads. Base contractual costs are estimated without any overheads. It is proposed that payment for management support to Package A should start from the first year, and payment for total service of Package B should start from the second year (upon commencement of landfill and transfer station operation).

Table 22: Estimated Base Costs of Contractual Arrangement - Management Support to Package A (First year of service)

(2016)

Contractual

Arrangement

Management 1. Street/Public space cleaningSupport to A 2. Pick-up ServicePackage A 3. Door-to-door collection

154,000/month

Package Cost+

(NPR)

Operational Services Base Contractual

+ Tentative Estimate (2016):

Basic salary: 1 SWM manager ………… = 50,000

79

Basic salary: 1 assistant manager/ overseer………………… = 30,000 Basic salary: 3 field assistants (@ 20,000/month)…........... = 60,000 ------------- Sub-total = 140,000 Other management cost (10%) = 14,000 ------------- Total = 154,000/month

Table 23: Estimated Base Costs of Contractual Arrangement- Management Support to Package A and Total Service of Package B (Second year of service onwards)

(2016)

Service

Contractual -wise Base Contractual

Arrangement Cost+

(NPR/unit)Management 1. Street/Public space cleaning

Support to 2. Pick-up ServicePackage A 3. Door-to-door collection

4. Operation of TS & secondary transport 882.30and 5. Operation of SLF & other WM facilities

5.1 Sanitary landfilling 550.01 1,432.31 /tonTotal service 5.2 Segregation/recyclables recovery * *

of 5.3 Composting * *Package B 5.4 Septage treatment and disposal 250.00 250 /m3

Notes:

*: Sales from the activities on 'Segregation and recovery of recyclables' and 'Windrow composting'

from the incoming waste at the SLF-site, which shall be mostly of mixed type, is to be considered as

incentive for promoting possible waste minimization even before final disposal management.

B

Management Support to Pckg.A

202.44/tonTotal service of

Package B

Package Cost+

NPR/ton

Operational Services

A

+: 1) Unit costs of operational services without depreciation of equipment (Annexes- 2.1/2.2/2.3) are being

considered for contracting purpose as the equipment after procurement by the project shall be provided to

the contractor and the municipality pays for the service of the contractor.

2) Base cost for management support to package A (2016):

10% of average unit cost of collection service

= 10% x (1862.67+2186.09)/2 = NPR 202.44/ton

80

6.3 Comparison of Costs: Current Practice vs. Proposed Arrangement

166. It is to be noted that the current cost of SWM of any of the project municipalities reflects only the costs as recorded for existing collection and disposal method, which has been practiced without any technically/ operationally proper management system. The actual incurring cost of SWM service provided may be very probably higher, due to possible missing in recording of all related SWM expenditures. Besides, these costs do not obviously reflect the real costs for environmental management of solid waste, which is but a must for proper urban environmental management of any municipality as mandated by the prevailing LSGA, 2055 (1999) and EPA, 2053 (1996) and SWM Act, 2068 (2011) as well.

167. In current SWM practices of the project municipalities, as there is no clear demarcation of operational functions (e.g. primary collection, secondary collection, transfer, secondary transport, treatment and final disposal etc.), function-wise cost distribution is not possible. And, analytically it gives no idea about which operational step is relatively costly and which is relatively cheap. Therefore, cost comparison of current practices with the proposed arrangement as such shall not be meaningful.

168. In the proposed operational arrangement, by adopting cost centre-wise entry of incurring expenditures, function-wise cost distribution in SWM service can be visualized at any time, which shall make it very easy for the management to have the yearly cost comparisons and monitoring and consequently adopt appropriate improvement measures for providing cost-effective and efficient solid waste management service, e.g. through choice of appropriate operational system, equipment/vehicles, technologies etc. Besides, this cost centre-wise recording system and its regular monitoring and evaluation shall provide the Municipality a base for deciding on options for further privatization of operational services in different combinations.

169. It is also to be noted that in total operational system of any municipal solid waste management, the collection and transportation service (i.e. from waste generators to the final disposal site) is always the most costly part, which always deserves due attention for providing cost-effective and efficient SWM service. The disposal service however (processing, treatment and sanitary landfilling etc.) costs comparatively less, but deserves more attention in environmental aspects. As regards the cost in collection & transportation service, Nepalese long-year experience (e.g. in Kathmandu Valley) has shown that for a distance of about 10 km or more between the city and the landfill site, a waste transfer station in between (on route from the city to the final disposal site, and better closer to the city) can reduce the total SWM cost significantly.

81

170. As regards the costs and effectiveness of different modes of collection service, door-to-door collection is in general always more costly but better in terms of environmental impacts compared to the roadside pick-up service. Besides, fee collection for this service provided is also easier, as the public will have always the feeling of direct service rendered. Starting of charging fee for door-to-door collection service along roads going to be upgraded/ constructed by the IUDP project shall be a good strategy to convince the general public of the area about its importance. It is to be noted that roadside pick-up service is in general always somewhat cheaper but worse in terms of environmental impacts. Besides, fee collection for this service provided is also more difficult, as the public will have no feeling of service being rendered. It is therefore that for a sustainable MSWM system in terms of cost and effectiveness, there should be always efforts for increasing the target for door-to-door collection service (however combined with fee collection) in city core areas rather than roadside pick-up service or even container service. In outer core and fringe areas however, roadside pick-up service or even container service if accepted by the public (combined with nominal fees) may be good enough.

171. Although SWM cost for the proposed arrangement seems to be significantly higher than that for present practices (without or with very less fee collection), following key strategies for achieving sustainability in SWM in the project municipalities deserve due consideration:

Strategy for cost-effective SWM service (Technical Aspect) - Targeting for maximum waste resources management and

minimum collection/disposal management. - Discouraging street cleaning and pick-up service gradually, and

encouraging direct door-to-door collection linked with service fee collection.

Strategy for cost recovery (Financial Aspect)

- Targeting at covering the primary waste management cost by direct fee collection (e.g.through door-to-door service with cross-subsidized fee structure) and covering the secondary waste management cost within ~ 5 years by other service fees/taxes together with already incurring expenditures (already significant despite the existing haphazard practice) in SWM service.

82

7. RELEVANT SECTIONS OF BIDDING DOCUMENTS Bidding documents while issuing RFP for a contractual service, in general, consists of documents containing information and templates necessary for prospective firms to bid. Typically this includes: Volume I: Instructions to Bidders

Schedule of Bidding Process - with Description of Events starting from date of issue of RFP to the signing of

the Agreement Instructions to Bidders - starting from Introduction (Project Background) to General Instructions to

Bidders on RFP Documents, Preparation and Submission of Proposals, Opening and Evaluation of Proposals, Notification of Successful Bidder etc.

Criteria for Qualification and Evaluation - with sectionwise elaboration of all aspects related to the Criteria for

Qualification and Evaluation, including various templates in Appendices for Letter for Proposal, Power of Attorney for Signing of Proposal, Power of Attorney for Lead Member of Consortium, Details of Bidder, Experience of Bidder, Financial Capability of Bidder, Bid Security, Letter of Undertaking for Adherence to Technical Specifications, Technical Proposal, Financial Proposal etc.

Volume II: Draft Contractual Agreement

- with ARTICLE-wise elaboration of various terms and conditions of Contractual Agreement, and

- various related SCHEDULES, starting from “Scope of Services” to “Letter of Authorization”

Municipalities shall follow GoN and ADB procurement guideline as appropriate. Standard formats as prescribed by the guidelines will be used except sections that are specific to a particular bid. In the following sections, some relevant sections of contract document (Draft Contractual Agreement and Scope of Services) specific to the bid are presented as samples for the proposed services of Package A and Package B together. Waste collection/transportation vehicles and heavy equipment for landfill operation procured through IUDP project shall be provided by the Municipalities to the Contractors for rendering the services under certain conditions to be elaborated in SCHEDULE 3 and SCHEDULE 5. It is also to be noted that, depending upon whether to contract out these packages separately or combined together, bidding documents may have to be modified and

83

complete finalized by PIU and DSC as per situation at the time of contractual administration. For instance, if Package A and Package B are contracted out separately, it shall be one of the obligations of the Municipality (under ARTICLE 3) to mention minimum waste delivery to the transfer station/landfill site (average figure calculated based on collection targets and safety factors etc. related to Package A service on daily or monthly basis) in order to ensure the Service Provider of Package B about the minimum level of service to be provided and corresponding financial investment to be made. However, it may not be necessary in case if the two packages are outsourced to the same contractor.

84

DRAFT CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT

85

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ARTICLE 1: DEFINATIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS ARTICLE 2: OBLIGATIONS OF THE SERVICE PRO ARTICLE 3: THE MUNICIPALITY‟s OBLIGATIONS ARTICLE 4: ENVIRONMENT ARTICLE 5: PAYMENT TERMS ARTICLE 6: LABOUR AND LABOUR REGULATIONS ARTICLE 7: FORCE MAJEURE ARTICLE 8: EVENTS OF DEFAULT AND TERMINATION ARTICLE 9: DISPUTE RESOLUTION ARTICLE 10: GENERAL SCHEDULE 1: SCOPE OF WORK SCHEDULE 2: PERFORMANCE SECURITY SCHEDULE 3: INDEMNITY BOND FOR EQUIPMENT / VEHICLES SCHEDULE 4: FORMAT FOR APPROVAL OF DAILY ACTIVITIES SCHEDULE 5: REPORT ON VEHICLE / EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE 6: PENALTIES

86

DRAFT CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT

This AGREEMENT mutually agreed and entered into on this [ _______ ] day of _______(month), _________ (year) at __________________________(Name of the place, where the agreement is executed),

BETWEEN

__________________Municipality; hereinafter referred to as “the Municipality” which expression shall unless repugnant to the context include its successors and assigns), OF THE ONE PART,

AND

________________________________________________(Name and registered office address of the selected bidder); hereinafter referred to as “the Service Provider” which expression shall unless excluded by or repugnant to the context include its successors and permitted assigns, OF THE OTHER PART.

WHEREAS:

A. Management of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) is an obligatory function of municipalities, and ________Municipality is presently carrying out these functions.

B. The Municipality invited competitive proposals from eligible bidders vide Tender Notice No._____. dated _______to carry out services for Management Support to Improvement of Solid Waste Collection Services (Package A) and Total Operation of Transfer Station, Secondary Transport, Landfill and other Waste Management Facilities (Package B). (hereinafter referred to as “the Project”).

C. In response thereto, the Municipality has received proposals from several bidders and after evaluation thereof, has accepted the proposal submitted by the Service Provider.

D. The Municipality hereby grants and authorises the Service Provider to implement the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

NOW THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH AS FOLLOWS:-

87

ARTICLE 1

DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS

1.1 Definitions

In this Agreement, the following words and expressions shall, unless repugnant to the context or meaning thereof, have the meaning hereinafter respectively ascribed to them hereunder:

“Agreement” means this Agreement, and includes any amendments hereto made in accordance with the provisions hereof.

“Applicable Law” means all laws, including Solid Waste Management Act, 2011 and the new Solid Waste Management Regulations as soon as it will be endorsed, in force and effect as of the date hereof and which may be promulgated or brought into force and effect hereinafter in India including judgments, decrees, injunctions, writs or orders of any court, as may be in force and effect during the subsistence of this Agreement and applicable to the Project/the Service Provider.

“Applicable Permits” means all clearances, permits, authorisations, consents and approvals required to be obtained or maintained by the Service Provider under Applicable Law, in connection with the Project during the subsistence of this Agreement.

“Compliance Certificate” means the certificate to be obtained by the Service Provider in the format set out in Schedule 4 of this Agreement.

“Contract Value” shall mean the Service Fee payable by the Municipality to the Service Provider during the Agreement Period.

“Force Majeure” means an act, event, condition or occurrence as specified in Clause 8.

“Letter of Commencement” means the letter issued by the Municipality to the Service Provider to commence the work envisaged under the Agreement

“Management Plan” means the plan for the implementation of the Project, duly signed by the Municipality in token of its approval.

“Material Adverse Effect” means a material adverse effect on (a) the ability of the Service Provider to exercise any of its rights or perform/discharge any of its duties/obligations under and in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement and/or (b) the legality, validity, binding nature or enforceability of this Agreement.

“Parties” means the parties to this Agreement and “Party” means either of them, as the context may admit or require.

“Termination Date” means the date specified in the Termination Notice as the date on which Termination occurs.

88

“Termination Notice” means the notice of Termination by either Party to the other Party, in accordance with the applicable provisions of this Agreement.

“Termination” means early termination of this Agreement pursuant to Termination Notice or otherwise in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement but shall not, unless the context otherwise requires, include expiry of the Agreement by efflux of time at the end of [total no of years] years from the date of this Agreement.

1.2 Interpretation

In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires,

(a) any reference to a statutory provision shall include such provision as is from time to time modified or re-enacted or consolidated so far as such modification or re-enactment or consolidation applies to, or is capable of being applied to any transactions entered into hereunder;

(b) references to Applicable Law shall include the laws, acts, ordinances, rules, regulations, notifications, guidelines or bylaws which have the force of law;

(c) the words importing singular shall include plural and vice versa, and words denoting natural persons shall include partnerships, firms, companies, corporations, joint ventures, trusts, associations, organisations or other entities (whether or not having a separate legal entity);

(d) the headings are for convenience of reference only and shall not be used in, and shall not affect, the construction or interpretation of this Agreement;

(e) the words "include" and "including" are to be construed without limitation;

(f) any reference to day, month or year shall mean a reference to a calendar day, calendar month or calendar year respectively;

(g) the Schedules to this Agreement form an integral part of this Agreement as though they were expressly set out in the body of this Agreement;

(h) any reference at any time to any agreement, deed, instrument, license or document of any description shall be construed as reference to that agreement, deed, instrument, license or other document as amended, varied, supplemented, modified or suspended at the time of such reference;

(i) references to recitals, Articles, sub-articles, clauses, or Schedules in this Agreement shall, except where the context otherwise requires, be deemed to be references to recitals, Articles, sub-articles, clauses and Schedules of or to this Agreement;

(j) any agreement, consent, approval, authorisation, notice, communication, information or report required under or pursuant to this Agreement from or by any Party shall be

89

valid and effectual only if it is in writing under the hands of duly authorised representative of such Party in this behalf and not otherwise;

(k) any reference to any period commencing “from” a specified day or date and “till” or “until” a specified day or date shall include both such days or dates;

ARTICLE 2

OBLIGATIONS OF THE SERVICE PROVIDER

2.1 In addition to and not in derogation or substitution of any of its other obligations under this Agreement, the Service Provider shall have the following obligations

(a) The Service provider undertakes to handle all activities and responsibilities as given under Schedule 1 Scope of Work of this agreement.

(b) The Service Provider shall within ____ days of the date of signing of the Agreement, obtain license for works to be carried out in accordance with this Agreement. Upon issue of such license, submit a copy thereof to the Municipality. The Municipality shall then issue the Letter of Commencement of work to the Service Provider.

(c) The Service Provider shall provide an indemnity bond as per Schedule 3 of Rs. [insert amount] [Rupees (______)] for the equipment and vehicles provided by the Municipality.

(d) The Service Provider shall create a grievance redress cell, where in the public and official should be easily accessible to give complaints.

(e) The Service Provider shall obtain Compliance Certificate

(f) Upon termination of this Agreement, deliver to the Municipality, the equipment and vehicles in good and operable condition, normal wear and tear excepted. The service provider shall provide a monthly report on the maintenance activities undertaken on the equipment/vehicles provided by the Municipality.

2.2 Performance Security

(a) The Service Provider shall, for due and punctual performance of its obligations relating to the Project, deliver to Municipality, simultaneously with the execution of this Agreement, a bank guarantee from a scheduled bank acceptable to the Municipality, in the form as set forth in Schedule 2, ("Performance Security”) for a sum of Rs. [insert amount] [Rupees (insert amount in words)]

(b) The Performance Security shall be kept valid for the contract period and ____ months thereafter.

2.3 General Obligations

90

The Service Provider shall:

(a) procure all Applicable Permits under Applicable Laws for the purpose of carrying out its obligations at its own cost and expense, and be in compliance thereof at all times during the period of this Agreement.

(b) comply with Applicable Laws at all times during the period of this Agreement

(c)ensure that all aspects of the Project shall conform to the laws pertaining to environment health and safety;

(d) not sub-contract any part or whole of its obligations without express approval from the Municipality.

2.4 Performance Targets

During the contract period, the service provider must meet all the following Performance Targets:

[insert performance targets]

ARTICLE 3

THEMUNICIPALITY’s OBLIGATIONS

3.1 In addition to and not in derogation or substitution of any of its other obligations under this Agreement, the Municipality shall have the following obligations:

(a) Provide the necessary support to the Service Provider as outlined in Schedule 1 Scope of Services of this agreement.

(b) Approve plan provided to the Service Provider once the Service provider incorporates all the points discussed/agreed upon at the time of negotiation.

(c) Provide equipment and vehicles to the Service Provider as per guidelines outlined in Schedule 1 – Scope of Services

3.2 General Obligations

The Municipality shall:

(a) where appropriate, provide necessary assistance to the Service Provider in securing Applicable Permits;

(b) Register with the local office of the Labour Department and obtain certificate of registration;

(c) observe and comply with all its obligations set forth in this Agreement;

91

(d) resolve disputes, if any, between the Service Provider and the generators of MSW in the Project Area through amicable means or arbitration.

ARTICLE 4

ENVIRONMENT

4.1 Protection of the Environment

The service provider shall take all reasonable steps to protect the environment in the project area and to limit damage and nuisance to people and property resulting from pollution, noise and other results of the Services. The service provider shall ensure that air emissions and surface discharges from the project area shall not exceed the values prescribed by Applicable Acts, Regulations, including the new Solid Waste Management Regulations as soon as it will be endorsed.

4.2 Indemnification by the Service Provider

The service provider shall indemnify and hold harmless the local body/government departments against any fines or penalties imposed under the Applicable Law in respect of environmental laws.

ARTICLE 5

PAYMENT TERMS

5.1 Payment of Service Fee

(a) Subject to the provisions of this Agreement and in consideration of the Service Provider undertaking to perform and discharge its obligations in accordance with the terms, conditions and covenants set forth in this Agreement, the Municipality agrees and undertakes to pay to the Service Provider a service fee of Rs. [Insert Amount ][Rupees (insert amount in words)] per month (“Service Fee”) for one year for Package A service of Management Support to Improvement of Solid Waste Collection Sevices, and thereafter pay per tonnage of waste recorded at the weighbridge at the rate agreed between the Service Provider and the Municipality. (b) The Service Provider shall be required to submit bills and Compliance Certificate by the _______ day of every month along with a Vehicle maintenance report. The Municipality upon verification of the same shall release payments to the Service Provider after taking into account any deductions / fine / penalties imposed by the Municipality within _____ days. In case of dispute, the undisputed amount will be paid and the disputed amount will be verified and if found in order shall be paid along with the bills for the following month.

92

(c) All payments to the Service Provider shall be made by way of account payee cheque drawn in favour of the Service Provider, and payable at _______

ARTICLE 6

LABOUR AND LABOUR REGULATIONS

6.1 Labour

The Service provider shall, unless otherwise provided in the Contract, make his own arrangement for all staff and labour, local or other

6.2 Compliance with Labour Regulations

During continuance of the Contract, the Service provider and his sub-service providers shall abide at all times by all existing labour enactment and rules of the Government of Nepal.

ARTICLE 7

FORCE MAJEURE

7.1 Definition of Force Majeure

"Force Majeure" means an event which is beyond the reasonable control of a Party and which makes a Party's performance under this Contract impossible or so impractical as to be considered impossible under the circumstances, including but not limited to:

(i) act of God (such as, but not limited to, fires, explosions, earthquakes, drought, tidal waves and floods);

(ii) war, hostilities (whether war be declared or not), invasion, act of foreign enemies, mobilisation, requisition, or embargo;

(iii) rebellion, revolution, insurrection, or military or usurped power, or civil war or terrorist attack or sabotage;

(iv) riot, commotion, strikes, go slows, lock outs or disorder.

7.2 Effect of Force Majeure Event

Subject to right to terminate the Contract, no Party to this Contract shall be considered in default or in contractual breach to the extent that performance of obligations is prevented by a Force Majeure event.

7.3 Service Provider’s Responsibility

93

Upon occurrence of any Force Majeure event which may affect performance of the Service providers‟ obligations, it shall promptly notify the owner, and shall endeavor to continue to perform its obligations as far as reasonably practicable. The Service provider shall also notify the Municipality of any proposals to overcome the constraints caused by an event, including any reasonable alternative means for performance, but shall not effect such proposals without the consent of the Municipality.

7.4 The Municipality’s Responsibility

Upon occurrence of an event considered by the Municipality to constitute Force Majeure and which may affect performance of the obligations of the owner, the owner shall promptly notify the Service provider and shall endeavour continuance of such obligations by itself or by any other agency decided at that time, as far as reasonably practicable.

7.5 Extension of Time

Any period within which a Party shall, pursuant to this Contract, complete any action or task, shall be extended for a period equal to the time during which such Party was unable to perform such action as a result of Force Majeure.

7.6 Payments

During the period of their inability to perform the Services as a result of an event of Force Majeure, the Service provider shall be entitled to continue to be paid under the terms of this Contract, as well as to be reimbursed for additional costs reasonably and necessarily incurred by it during such period for the purposes of the Services and in reactivating the Service after the end of such period.

ARTICLE 8

EVENTS OF DEFAULT AND TERMINATION

8.1 Events of Default

Event of Default means either Service Provider Event of Default or Municipality Event of Default or both as the context may admit or require.

a. Service Provider Event of Default

(i) The Service Provider has failed to adhere to any other performance obligations under the Agreement; and the same has not been remedied for more than [insert number of days];

(ii) Penalty amounts as payable by the Service Provider is equal to or greater than ___% of the Contract Value;

(iii) The Service Provider has repudiated or abandoned the Project;

94

b. Municipality Event of Default

Any of the following events shall constitute an event of default by the Municipality ("Municipality Event of Default”), unless caused by a Service Provider Event of Default or a Force Majeure Event:

(i) The Municipality has failed to make any payments due to the Service Provider and more than ___ days have elapsed since such default;

(ii) The Municipality has failed to adhere to any other performance obligations under the Agreement; and the same has not been remedied for more than ___ days of receipt of notice thereof issued by the Service Provider;

8.2 Penalties

In case of a Service Provider Event of Default or non - performance of its obligations or not meeting the performance targets set out in Clause 2.4, then the Municipality shall deduct penalty amounts as set out in Schedule 6 from the monthly payments due to the Service Provider.

8.3 Termination due to Event of Default

a. Termination for Service Provider Event of Default

Without prejudice to any other right or remedy which the Municipality may have in respect thereof under this Agreement, upon the occurrence of a Service Provider Event of Default, the Municipality may terminate this Agreement by issuing a termination notice setting out the underlying Event of Default and the termination date. The Service Provider shall continue to perform its obligations under the Agreement till Termination Date.

b. Termination Payments

Upon Termination of this Agreement on account of Service Provider Event of Default, the Service Provider would not be entitled to any compensation from the Municipality and the Performance Security shall be forfeited.

Upon Termination of this Agreement on account of Municipality Event of Default, the Service Provider would be entitled to the payments due from the Municipality and the Performance Security shall be released. In addition, the Municipality shall pay an additional compensation of __% per month of the amount due to Service Provider till the date of payment.

95

ARTICLE 9

DISPUTE RESOLUTION

9.1 Amicable Settlement

The Parties shall use their best efforts to settle amicably all Disputes arising out of or in connection with the Contract or its interpretation.

9.2 Reference to Adjudicator

If any dispute arises between the owner and the Service provider in connection with, or arising out of, the Contract or the provision of the Services, whether during carrying out the Services or after their completion, the matter shall be referred to the Adjudicator within [____] days of the notification of disagreement of one Party to the other. The Adjudicator shall give a decision in writing within [____] days of receipt of a notification of a dispute.

9.3 Performance to Continue During Dispute

Performance of this Contract and all obligations hereunder shall continue during any Disputes or any Dispute resolution mechanism. However, payment due or payable by the Municipality to the Service provider shall be withheld on account of a pending reference to any Dispute resolution mechanism, to the extent that such amount of the payment is subject of such Dispute. All undisputed amounts must continue to be paid in the manner specified.

ARTICLE 10

GENERAL

10.1 Governing Law and Jurisdiction

This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of Nepal and appropriate courts of Nepal.

10.2 Amendments

This Agreement and the Schedules together constitute a complete and exclusive understanding of the terms of the Agreement between the Parties on the subject hereof and no amendment or modification hereto shall be valid and effective unless agreed to by all the Parties hereto and evidenced in writing.

10.3 Intent and Effect

Each of the Parties hereto undertakes to fully and promptly observe and comply with the provisions of this Agreement.

96

10.4 Non-Waiver

No omission or delay on the part of any Party in requiring a due and punctual fulfillment by any other Party of its obligations hereunder shall constitute, or be deemed to constitute, a waiver of any of such Party‟s rights to require such due and punctual fulfillment and in any event shall not constitute or be construed as a continuing waiver and/or as a waiver of other or subsequent breaches of the same or other (similar or otherwise) obligations of such other Party hereunder or as a waiver of any remedy.

10.5 Binding Effect

Subject to the terms and conditions hereof, this Agreement is binding upon and shall ensure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective successors and permitted assigns.

10.6 Invalid Provisions

If any provision of this Agreement is held to be illegal, invalid, or unenforceable under any present or future Law, and if the rights or obligations under this Agreement shall not be materially and adversely affected thereby, (a) such provision shall be fully severable; (b) this Agreement shall be construed and enforced as if such illegal, invalid, or unenforceable provision had never comprised a part hereof; (c) the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and shall not be affected by the illegal, invalid, or unenforceable provision or by its severance here from.

10.7 Additional Documents

Each Party hereto shall promptly execute and deliver such additional documents and Agreements as are envisaged in this Agreement and any other Agreement or document as may be reasonably required for the purpose of implementing this Agreement, provided that no such document or Agreement shall be inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this Agreement

10.8 Counterparts

This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in two counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but both of these shall together constitute one and the same instrument.

10.9 Notices

All notices, requests, demands and other communications made or given under the terms of this Agreement or in connection herewith shall be in writing and shall be either personally delivered, transmitted by postage prepaid registered mail (confirmed and writing by postage prepaid registered mail), and shall be addressed to the appropriate party at the following address or to such other address or place as such Party may from time to time designate:

97

To the Municipality at: _____________________

To the Service Provider at: _______________________

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE PARTIES HAVE EXECUTED AND DELIVERED THIS AGREEMENT AS OF THE DATE FIRST ABOVE WRITTEN.

For and on behalf of the Municipality by: Name: Designation: Signature:

For and on behalf of Service Provider by: Name: Designation: Signature:

Witness:

Witness:

SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED:

SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED:

98

SCHEDULE 1

SCOPE OF SERVICES

[sample Scope of Services is given below. This needs to be reviewed and finalized by PIU and DSC engaged by the Municipality as per actual situations at the time of contract administration]

Finalisation and Agreement on the Technical Plan:

The Technical Plan provided by the successful bidder as a part of Part I-Technical Proposal would be reviewed by the PIU/Municipality during negotiations. The Bidder is expected to incorporate the points emerging from these discussions and submit a revised Technical Plan to the PIU/Municipality covering these points within 2 weeks of signing of contract.

While the PIU/Municipality would support the successful bidder by providing the necessary information available at its disposal, the successful bidder is expected to use his experience to make an independent assessment of the town to ensure that the Technical Plan is complete in all aspects with respect to ensuring the final objective of the contract of ensuring an effective and efficient SWM service.

Package A: Management Support to Improvement of Solid Waste Collection Sevices

1) Operational planning for city cleaning and all collection services (i.e. pick-up of waste from designated points and door-to-door collection services) at implementation level, updated as required.

2) Route planning / optimization of collection vehicles for waste transport to transfer station, including plan for their repair & maintenance, updated as required;

3) On-the-job training of potential municipal staff (mainly for providing effective city cleaning and pick-up services), and training/capacity building of potential NGOs/CBOs (mainly for providing effective door-to-door collection services);

4) Record keeping, data management, complaint recording, and setting up management information system (MIS) of all collection activities;

5) Other advisory support to municipality as and when required for enhancing effectiveness & efficiency mainly in collection service, contract management to the NGOs/CBOs mainly in door-to-door collection service, standardization of services, and troubleshooting etc.; and

6) The Municipal Solid Waste Management/Environment Committee and PPP Unit shall be reported about progress of the contract service through monthly

99

progress report, which may be used for the Service Provider‟s performance monitoring and evaluation.

Package B: Total services for Operation of Transfer Station, Secondary Transport, Landfill, and other Waste Management Facilities

1) Weighment

The Service Provider shall receive waste vehicles at the weighbridge and record pertinent information such as date, vehicle number, laden weight, empty weight, net weight, entry and exit time of vehicle.

2) Acceptance and Rejection of Solid Waste

Solid Waste shall be accepted at the Transfer Station and Landfill anytime during the day between ______AM and ________PM.

The Service Provider shall not accept any impermissible wastes as defined in the site operation manual provided.

3) Segregation

Incoming waste shall be segregated into biodegradable, recyclable, and residual fractions. Only residual waste shall be taken to landfill cells.

4) Production of Compost

The Service Provider may adopt any process to convert biodegradable waste into compost that is fit for sale and complies with applicable laws.

Incoming septage may be co-composted at the compost plant.

The compost may be tested by appropriate authority.

5) Operation of Facilities

All facilities shall be operated in an environmentally safe manner as per site operational manual provided.

Weighbridge: Calibration certified by the manufacturer/certifying agency renewed yearly, operated according to manufacturer‟s guidelines;

SW Inspection Area: Properly operating leachate drains; no cracks in reinforced cement concrete (RCC) platform.

Compost Platform: Properly operating leachate drains; no cracks in reinforced cement concrete (RCC) platform.

Drainage: All drains unclogged; no waterlogging in the premises

100

Leachate Collection: All leachate going to leachate treatment facility; no clogging of leachate pipes; no stagnation; no overflowing;

Leachate Treatment: Maximum period of shutdown 24 hours; no untreated leachate to be released to the environment

Internal Roads: All roads should be in good maintenance and without potholes; appropriate signage to be placed.

Lighting: Minimum 20 lux in operating hours.

Fencing and Access: The premises are to be fenced all around; access to be restricted to authorized vehicles and personnel; all entry and exit of vehicles and persons to be recorded.

6) Record keeping: All records such as mentioned in the Site Operational Manual shall be maintained by the Service Provider.

7) The Municipal Solid Waste Management / Environment Committee shall be reported about progress of the contract service through monthly progress report, which may be used for the Service Provider‟s performance monitoring and evaluation.

101

8. ACTION PLAN FOR MUNICIPALITIES The IUDP will introduce a number of changes in the SWM service in the three municipalities. These include door-to-door waste collection service by NGOs/BCOs, payment of service charges by the beneficiaries, segregation of waste at source, operation of transfer situation, sanitary landfill and recycling. These are major changes to the present practices. We are recommending the following action steps for a smooth transition to the proposed operations.

Action Steps

Goal: To ensure a smooth transition from the present mode of SWM practices to the proposedoperations.

Objective Activity Lead Role Time

Ensure public support 1. Prepare a project brief outlining the objectives, implementation mechanism, roles of various actors, budget, expected outcomes, etc. This should be available in local language and distributed widely. 2. Hold public consultations to clarify all aspects of the project and request public support for improving SWM services. 3. Hold briefing session with local press media for wider dissemination. 4. Respond promptly to queries from the public.

PIU Manager Support: EO/ SWM Chief

6 months before service operation starts

Ensure support from municipality staff

1. Hold meeting with municipal staff to explain the project‟s objectives and mode of operation. Dispel any mistrust or fear of losing employment. Clarify the role of staff under new system.

EO Support: SWM Chief/ PIU Manager


Formation of Solid Waste Management/Environment Committee*

1. Hold Board meeting to explain the project‟s objectives, importance/ significance of the Committee, its responsibilities, and mode of SWM operation.

EO Support: SWM Chief/ PIU Manager


Formation or Activation of PPP unit

1. Form or activate the PPP unit under coordination of a PPP focal person with all responsibilities related to executing PPP projects.

EO Support: PIU Manager

6 months before service operation

102

2. Hold meeting of the PPP unit to explain the proposed operational system and the private sector‟s role. 3. Secure advice from the Committee and endorsement from the Municipal Board.

starts

Policy decisions* 1. Hold Board meeting to secure decision on giving permission to NGOs/CBOs to provide SWM services. 2. Secure decision to allow NGOs/CBOs to collect service charge from the public. 3. Fix service charge

EO Support: PIU Manager


Formation of CBOs 1. Divide the city into community units or neighborhoods. 2. Hold public meeting in each unit to form CBO. 3. Give recognition to the CBOs

PIU Manager Support: SWM Chief


Capacity building of NGOs/CBOs

1. Select potential NGOs/CBOs and distribute service area. 2. Train NGOs/CBOs on their roles, responsibilities and service standards.

PIU Manager Support: SWM Chief


Public awareness 1. Work with DSC/GESI to develop a public awareness package. 2. Prepare a plan for public awareness communication involving municipality/ schools/ social clubs/ CBOs/ NGOs. 3. Continue holding awareness campaigns.

6 months before service operation starts and continue through the project period

* Note: These activities may be carried out together, depending upon situation, as they are both concerned with policy matter decisions of the Municipal Board.

103

9. INVOLVEMENT OF SWMTSC The SWMTSC is an agency at the national level, specifically mandated to provide technical support to SWM sector in the country. The SWM Act, 2068 (2011) clearly defines the role of SWMTSC. In compliance with the provisions of the Act, SWMTSC can play the following important roles in the three IUDP municipalities of Nepalgunj, Siddharthanagar and Janakpur. 1. Improving linkage with the municipalities: The SWM Act has expanded the scope of SWMTSC throughout Nepal. However, many municipalities still perceive the Center as an agency for Kathmandu valley only. Therefore, it is recommended that SWMTSC representatives visit the three municipalities to brief the officials about the provisions of the Act, clarify their role and range of services, and elicit the needs of each municipality. The three municipalities under IUDP present a unique opportunity to the Center to improve its outreach and credibility since a full range of SWM services are being rolled out there.

2. Monitoring and evaluation of technical aspects: SWMTSC can extend assistance to the municipalities through the proposed Municipal SWM / Environment Committee in monitoring and evaluation of landfill operations including that of transfer stations and compost plants also beyond the proposed contract periods. SWMTSC can also review contracts prepared by the municipalities to outsource services to the private sector and advise them about any required improvement. Similarly the Center may provide advisory support for contract management whenever required.

3. Cost recovery: The Act has provisions for SWMTSC to assist municipalities in fixing and collection of service charges. The three municipalities are expected to begin door-to-door waste collection service under IUDP. Fixing charges for households and commercial establishments is an important step to achieve cost recovery. Cross subsidy to ensure services to low-income households is also necessary. In this regard, SWMTSC may extend –technical supports either with own staff if possible or with external experts.

4. Disseminate innovative technology: The Act entrusts SWMTSC to document and disseminate information on innovative and appropriate technology in SWM. The municipalities under IUDP are going to introduce innovations in terms of management (e.g. citywide partnership with NGOs/CBOs) and technology (transfer stations, sanitary landfills, compost plants) in larger scale. Such cases may provide important lessons for other municipalities of Nepal. Observation, documentation and dissemination of innovations in the three municipalities by SWMTSC will be beneficial to the SWM sector of Nepal.

5. Public participation in SWM: Public participation is essential for effective SWM. People must support through their efforts in segregating waste at source, paying service charges, taking part in CBO activities, monitoring services and motivating all to participate. For this purpose public awareness campaign is necessary and the Act has included this as one of the roles of SWMTSC. The Center can help the municipalities in implementing public awareness campaigns with their package (under development). Additionally, the Center may launch mass awareness campaign through national electronic and print media.

104

Annex- 1

List of Key Persons Consulted

Nepalgunj Municipality

S.N. Name Position/ Designation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Karna Bahadur K.K Shailendra Kumar Maharjan Bhupati Khatri Raja K.C. Krishna Prashad Joshi Narayan K.C. Dipesh Shrestha

D. Engineer/ Planning Chief (Focal Person) Engineer/ Planning Section Chief/ Revenue Section Chief/ Finance Section Chief/ Community Development Section Chief/ Administration Section Representative/Solid Waste Management Sub-section


S.N. Name Position/ Designation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Tika Dutta Rai Shailendra Prashad Shrestha Yem Lal Pandey Bibeka Khanal Ram Prashad Bika Sekhar Nath Panthee Rajesh Amatya

Chief Executive Officer Chief/ Planning Section (PIU Manager) Engineer/ Planning Section (PIU Engineer) Chief/ Administration Section Officer/ Revenue Section Chief/SWM Unit (Environment Protection Sub-section) Computer Operator/ Administration Section

Janakpur Municipality S.N. Name Position/ Designation

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11

Durga Bahadur Khadka Birendra Kumar Yadav Parameshor Jha Ranjita Jha Shital Chaudhary Kaladhar Ray Jamuna Bhujel Rakesh Yadav Lalan Karna Sunita Yadav Gopal Jha

Chief Executive Officer Acting Executive Officer/Planning Chief (Focal Person) Revenue Officer Chief/ Community Development Section Administrative Officer Accountant/ Finance Section Officer/ Community Development Section Engineer/ Planning Section Chief/ SWM Unit (Health & Sanitation Sub-section) Community Development Section Greater Janakpur Development Council

105

List of Key Persons Consulted

Kathmandu

S.N. Name Position/ Designation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11 12 13

Girija Pd. Gorkhali Buddhi Sagar Thapa Parag Kayastha Dwarika Shrestha Sunita Shrestha Khaga Raj Adhikari Dr. Sumitra Amatya Ramhira Pathak Dipendra Oli Kishore Lal Manadhar Surya Man Shakya Pawan Lohani Dr. Bhusan R. Shrestha

Joint Secretary/ DUDBC Project Director/PCO(DUDBC) Deputy Project Director/PCO(DUDBC) Deputy Project Director/PCO(DUDBC) Engineer/ PCO(DUDBC) Engineer/ PCO(DUDBC) Executive Director/ SWMTSC Engineer/ SWMTSC Legal Officer/ SWMTSC Senior Project Officer/ PPPUE Deputy Team Leader/ ADB PPTA Project Financial Management Expert/ ADB PPTA Project GIS Expert/ ADB PPTA Project

106

a1:aa37Annex- 2.1: DOOR TO-DOOR COLLECTION SERVICE: CALCULATION OF AVERAGE COST PER TON (City - Transfer Station)

1. CAPITAL COST PER YEAR 4. AVERAGE OPERATIONAL COST PER HOUR/DAY

TYPE OF CAPITAL LIFE SPAN Depr. Interest COST ITEMS FACTOR PRICE HOUR

EQUIPMENT OUTLAY Standard Performance per yr. per yr. Total 4.1 Fuel per Hour ltr 4.00 74.50 256.99

4.2 Lubricants per Hour ltr 0.090 380.00 29.49

1.1 Regional 1200000 10.0 11.4 105589 48000 153589 4.3 Tires (km per set / price per set) 50000 103194 10.75

1.2 Local 0.0 4.4.1 Spares Int.(unit=% on inv.for 1872 h) 0.00 0.0 0.00

1.3 TOTAL 1200000 11.4 105589 48000 153589 4.4.2 Spares Reg.(unit=% on inv.for 1872 h) 0.75 10.0 48.08

INTEREST RATE IN % 8.00 4.5.1 M & R (transport equipment) 1.00 2.5 16.03

4.5.2 M & R (container / skip) 0.10 13.8 0.00

2. CAPITAL COST PER DAY 4.6 Insurance xxxxx xxxxx 0.00

2.1 Capital Cost per Year 153589 4.7 Other xxxxx xxxxx 2.00

2.2 Rate of Readiness (% ) 85 4.8 PERSONNEL xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx

2.3 Performance Days (Gross) 310 4.8.1 Driver 1.0 12230.00 96.80

2.4 Other Deductions (% ) 21 4.8.2 Helper 2.0 11290.00 178.72

2.5 Performance Days (Net) 245 4.8.3 Sweeper 10610.00 0.00

2.6 Capital Cost per Performance Day 626.64 4.9 Average Rate of Availability % 75 xxxxx xxxxx

3. AVERAGE PERFORMANCE PER DAY 4.10 TOTAL OPERATING COST PER HOUR 638.85

TIME PER ROUND TRIP IN MINUTES 4.11 Time per Roundtrip (hrs) 3.63

3.1 Refuel, Disposition, etc.(minutes) 15 4.12 Operating Cost per Roundtrip (NRS) 2321.14

3.2 Distance (km) 3.00 4.13 Roundtrips per Day (see 3.11) 1.7

3.3 Average Speed (km/h) 20.00 4.14 OPERATING COST PER DAY 3833.07

3.4 Trip Out (minutes) 9

3.5 Loading Time / Picking up 150 5. AVERAGE COST PER TON

3.6 Trip Back 9 5.1 Capital cost per day 626.64

3.7 Waiting 30 5.2 Operating Cost per Day 3833.07

3.8 Discharging 5 5.3 TOTAL COST PER DAY 4459.72

3.9 TOTAL 218 5.4 TON per Roundtrip (see 3.14) 1.71

3.10 Average Working Hours per Day 6.0 5.5 Number of Roundtrips 1.7

3.11 Number of Roundtrips per Day 1.7 5.6 TON per Day 2.8

3.12 Gross capacity in CBM (*) 6.0 5.7 TOTAL COST PER TON 1579.30

3.13 AVERAGE FILLING RATE % 95 Remarks: TOTAL COST PER TON (w/o depreciation) 1357.39

3.14 LOOSE DENSITY [t/cbm) 0.30 1. Interest = Interest rate on 50% of original capital outlay

3.15 TON per Roundtrip 1.7 2. Cost of personnel includes salaries, allowances, holidays etc.

3.16 TON per DAY 2.8 3. Deduction of time for holidays, illness etc. of personnel are considered in "Average Rate of Availability"

Status: 2011 Status: 2011

107

Annex- 2.2: PICK-UP SERVICE: CALCULATION OF AVERAGE COST PER TON (City - Transfer Station)

1. CAPITAL COST PER YEAR Status: 2011 4. AVERAGE OPERATIONAL COST PER HOUR/DAY Status: 2011



4.2 Lubricants per Hour ltr 0.100 380.00 34.45










2.4 Other Deductions (% ) 21 4.8.2 Helper 0.0 11290.00 0.00

2.5 Performance Days (Net) 245 4.8.3 Sweeper 2.0 10610.00 167.95




















108

Annex- 2.3: TRANSFER STATION & SECONDARY TRANSPORT MANAGEMENT : CALCULATION OF AVERAGE COST PER TON (Transfer Station - SLF Site)

1. CAPITAL COST PER YEAR 4. AVERAGE OPERATIONAL COST PER HOUR/DAY



1.1 International 4.2 Lubricants per Hour ltr 0.120 324.00 34.39










2.4 Other Deductions (% ) 21 4.8.2 Helper* 2.0 11290.00 178.72

2.5 Performance Days (Net) 245 4.8.3 Sweeper 0.0 10610.00 0.00




















* Two helpers will have the reponsibility of assisting the driver in loading/unloading and transfer station management as well.

109

Annex-3.1: National Drinking Water Quality Standard, 2062 (2005)

S. N. Category Parameters Units Concentration

Limits Remarks

1

Physical

Turbidity NTU 5(10) 2 pH 6.5-8.5* 3 Color TCU 5(15) 4 Taste and Odor Non-Objectionable 5 TDS mg/L 1000

6 Electrical conductivity(EC)

us/cm 1500

7

Chemical

Iron mg/L 0.3(3) 8 Manganese mg/L 0.2 9 Arsenic mg/L 0.05

10 Cadmium mg/L 0.003 11 Chromium mg/L 0.05 12 Cyanide mg/L 0.07 13 Fluoride mg/L 0.5 – 1.5* 14 Lead mg/L 0.01 15 Ammonia mg/L 1.5 16 Chloride mg/L 250 17 Sulphate mg/L 250 18 Nitrate mg/L 50 19 Copper mg/L 1

20 Total Hardness mg/L as CaCo3 500

21 Calcium mg/L 200 22 Zinc mg/L 3 23 Mercury mg/L 0.001 24 Aluminum mg/L 0.2

25 Residual Chloride mg/L 0.1-0.2*

in systems using

chlorination 26 Microbiological E.- Coli MPN/100ml 0 27 Total Coliform MPN/100ml 0 in 95% samples

Source: MPPW/ GoN, 2062 (2005)

* These values show lower and upper limits ( ) values in parenthesis refers the acceptable values only when alternative is not available.

110

Annex-3.2: Tolerance Limits for Inland Surface Waters Receiving Industrial Effluents in Nepal

S.N. Parameters Unit Ambient Standard

1. Total suspended solids mg/l 30 – 200

2. pH °C 5.5 - 9.0

3. Temperature mg/l 40 (within 15 m downstream)

4. BOD, 5 days at 20°C, maximum mg/l 30

5. Oils and grease, maximum mg/l 10

6. Phenolic compounds, maximum mg/l 1.0

7. Cyanides, maximum mg/l 0.2

8. Sulphides(as S), maximum mg/l 2.0

9. Total residual chlorine mg/l 1.0

10. Fluorides(as F), maximum mg/l 2.0

11. Arsenic (as As), maximum mg/l 0.2

12. Cadmium (as Cd), maximum mg/l 2.0

13. Hexavalent Chromium (as Cr), maximum mg/l 0.1

14. Lead (as Pb), maximum mg/l 0.1

15. Mercury (as Hg), maximum mg/l 0.01

16. Zinc (as Zn), maximum mg/l 5.0

17. Copper (as Cu), maximum mg/l 3.0

18. Silver (as Ag), maximum mg/l 0.1

19. Ammoniacal nitrogen, maximum mg/l 50

20. COD, maximum mg/l 250

Source : NBSM, 2044 (1987)

111

Annex-3.3: Tolerance Limits for Industrial Effluents to be Discharged into Inland Surface Waters Generic Standard (Part I)

Characteristics Tolerance Limit

Total Suspended solids, mg/L, Max 30-200

Particle size of total suspended particles Shall pass 850-micron Sieve.

pH 5.5 to 9.0

Temperature Shall not exceed 400 C in any section of the stream within 15 meters down-stream from the effluent outlet.

Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) for 5 days at 20 degree C, mg/L, Max 30-100

Oils and grease, mg/L, Max 10

Phenolic compounds, mg/L, Max 1

Cynides (as CN), mg/L, Max 0.2

Sulphides (as S), mg/L, Max 2

Radioactive materials:

a. Alpha emitters, c/ml, Max 10 -7

b. Beta emitters, c/ml, Max 10 -8

Insecticides Absent

Total residual chlorine, mg/L 1

Fluorides (as F), mg/L, Max 2

Arsenic (as As), mg/L, Max 0.2

Cadmium (as, Cd), mg/L, Max 2

Hexavalent chromium (as Cr), mg/L 0.1

Copper (as Cu), mg/L, Max 3

Lead (as Pb), mg/L, Max 0.1

Mercury (as Hg), mg/L, Max 0.01

Nickel (as Ni), mg/L, Max 3

Selenium (as Se), mg/L, Max 0.05

Zinc (as Zn), mg/L, Max 5

Ammonical nitrogen, mg/L, Max 50

Chemical Oxygen Demand, mg/L 250

Silver, mg/L, Max 0.1 Source: MoE/ GoN