SWM PPP Tookit-Volume-II

Public Private Partnerships
Knowledge Series
Toolkit for Public Private Partnership frameworks in Municipal Solid Waste Management Volume II Case studies of PPP projects
Prepared by
ICRA Management Consulting Services Limited INDIA
with support from The GOI ADB PPP INITIATIVE Mainstreaming PPPs in India www.pppindia.com
Government of India Ministry of Urban Development
Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Economic Affairs
GoI-ADB-PPP Initiative
Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs
Disclaimer
This Toolkit for Improving service delivery in Municipal Solid Waste Management in India through Public Private Partnerships is part of a Knowledge series on Public-Private Partnership being developed by the Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Government of India (DEA) and Ministry of Urban Development Government of India (MoUD). It has been put together with technical assistance and funding support from the Asian Development Bank (ADB) as part of the ADB-GoI-PPP Initiative. ICRA Management Consulting Services Limited (IMaCS), commissioned by the ADB has prepared this Toolkit on the basis of extensive external consultations. IMaCS have taken due care and caution in preparing the contents of this Paper. The accuracy, adequacy or completeness of any information contained in this Paper is not guaranteed and DEA, MoUD and ADB are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of such information. The contents of this Paper should not be construed to be the opinion of the DEA, MoUD and ADB. DEA and MoUD are not liable for any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages of any kind whatsoever to the subscribers / users / transmitters / distributors of this Paper. This Toolkit shall not be reproduced in any form, other than those intended by DEA, MoUD and ADB, and without prior written permission.
Volume II Case studies of PPP projects
Contents
ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT ................................................................................................................................. 1 1. INTEGRATED SWM HYDERABAD ........................................................................................................... 3 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 2. HYDERABAD CITY AN OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................. 3 MUNICIPAL SWM SYSTEM IN HYDERABAD...................................................................................................... 4 MSWM VALUE CHAIN AND MANAGEMENT IN HYDERABAD ................................................................................ 5 PROPOSED PPP PROJECT FOR INTEGRATED SWM ............................................................................................ 9 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES .............................................................................................................. 17
INTEGRATED SWM GUWAHATI........................................................................................................... 18 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 GUWAHATI CITY AN OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................ 18 MUNICIPAL SWM SYSTEM IN GUWAHATI ..................................................................................................... 19 PROJECT NEED INTEGRATED MSWM SYSTEM ............................................................................................ 20 PROCUREMENT PROCESS ........................................................................................................................... 26
3.
PROCESSING AND SANITARY LANDFILL BANGALORE .......................................................................... 30 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 BANGALORE CITY AN OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................... 30 MUNICIPAL SWM SYSTEM IN BANGALORE.................................................................................................... 31 INTEGRATED PROCESSING AND DISPOSAL SYSTEM PPP FORMAT ..................................................................... 34 PROCUREMENT ........................................................................................................................................ 37 CHALLENGES AND NEW INITIATIVES ............................................................................................................. 40
4.
PROCESSING AND SANITARY LANDFILL COIMBATORE ........................................................................ 42 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 INTRODUCTION TO COIMBATORE CITY .......................................................................................................... 42 MUNICIPAL SWM SYSTEM IN COIMBATORE .................................................................................................. 43 INTEGRATED PROCESSING & DISPOSAL NEW INITIATIVE ON PPP FORMAT ........................................................ 46 PROCUREMENT PROCESS ........................................................................................................................... 48
5.
PROCESSING AND SANITARY LANDFILL RAJKOT .................................................................................. 53 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 INTRODUCTION TO RAJKOT CITY .................................................................................................................. 53 MUNICIPAL SWM SYSTEM IN RAJKOT .......................................................................................................... 54 PROCESSING AND DISPOSAL ON PPP FORMAT ............................................................................................... 59 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................................... 64
6.
PROCESSING JAIPUR ............................................................................................................................ 65 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 INTRODUCTION TO JAIPUR CITY ................................................................................................................... 65 MUNICIPAL SWM SYSTEM IN JAIPUR ........................................................................................................... 66 WASTE PROCESSING ON PPP FORMAT ......................................................................................................... 71 PROCUREMENT PROCESS ........................................................................................................................... 72 CONCLUSION & KEY LEARNING ................................................................................................................... 75
7.
COLLECTION AND TRANSPORTATION CHENNAI .................................................................................. 76 7.1 7.2 7.3 INTRODUCTION TO CHENNAI CITY................................................................................................................ 76 MUNICIPAL SWM SYSTEM IN CHENNAI ........................................................................................................ 77 COLLECTION AND TRANSPORTATION FIRST ROUND OF PRIVATISATION ............................................................. 78
7.4 7.5 8.
COLLECTION AND TRANSPORTATION SECOND PHASE OF PRIVATISATION ........................................................... 84 CONCLUSION AND KEY LEARNING ................................................................................................................ 90
COLLECTION AND TRANSPORTATION DELHI ....................................................................................... 92 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 INTRODUCTION TO DELHI CITY .................................................................................................................... 92 MUNICIPAL SWM SYSTEM IN DELHI ............................................................................................................ 93 COLLECTION AND TRANSPORTATION ON PPP FORMAT .................................................................................... 96 CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................................... 101
9.
SWM SYSTEM IN SINGAPORE .............................................................................................................. 102 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 INTRODUCTION SINGAPORE ................................................................................................................... 102 MUNICIPAL SWM SYSTEM IN SINGAPORE................................................................................................... 102 PPPS IN SWM SINGAPORE ................................................................................................................... 106 CONCLUSION AND KEY LEARNING .............................................................................................................. 108 SWM SYSTEM IN MALAYSIA ............................................................................................................ 110 INTRODUCTION MALAYSIA .................................................................................................................... 110 SWM SYSTEM IN MALAYSIA .................................................................................................................... 110 CORPORATIZATION OF SWM SERVICES ...................................................................................................... 113 CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................................... 114
10. 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4
Exhibits
EXHIBIT 1.1 POPULATION OF HYDERABAD URBAN AGGLOMERATION .................................................................................. 3 EXHIBIT 1.2 DETAILS OF MANPOWER FOR PROVISION OF SWM SERVICES IN GHMC DEPARTMENT ........................................... 4 EXHIBIT 1.3 SOURCE OF WASTE GENERATORS IN HYDERABAD CITY .................................................................................... 4 EXHIBIT 1.4 MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE CHARACTERISTICS IN HYDERABAD CITY ..................................................................... 5 EXHIBIT 1.5 WASTE COLLECTED AND TRANSPORTED TO DISPOSAL SITE IN HYDERABAD CITY.................................................... 6 EXHIBIT 1.6 WASTE GENERATION IN DIFFERENT ZONES UNDER GHMC ............................................................................... 7 EXHIBIT 1.7 MINIMUM ASSURED WASTE TO PRIVATE PLAYER BY GHMC .............................................................................. 8 EXHIBIT 1.8 COMPLIANCE RATE OF MSW RULES IN GHMC AREA ...................................................................................... 9 EXHIBIT 2.5 KEY PROCUREMENT MILESTONES FOR SELECTION OF PREFERRED BIDDER IN GUWAHATI CITY ............................... 26 EXHIBIT 3.6: COMPLIANCE RATE IMPROVEMENT IN SWM SERVICES AFTER PPP PROJECTS ....................................................... 36 EXHIBIT 3.8 RISK SHARING BETWEEN BMP AND PRIVATE OPERATOR .................................................................................. 40 EXHIBIT 4.1 POPULATION GROWTH TREND IN COIMBATORE CITY ..................................................................................... 42 EXHIBIT 4.2 DENSITY PATTERN IN COIMBATORE CITY ..................................................................................................... 42 EXHIBIT 4.3 DETAILS ON MANPOWER FOR SWM SERVICES IN COIMBATORE CITY ................................................................ 43 EXHIBIT 4.4 SOURCES OF WASTE GENERATORS IN COIMBATORE CITY ............................................................................... 43 EXHIBIT 4.5 PHYSICAL COMPOSITION OF MSW IN COIMBATORE CITY............................................................................... 44 EXHIBIT 4.6 COMPLIANCE RATE OF MSW RULES PRIOR TO PPP INTERVENTION IN COIMBATORE ........................................... 45 EXHIBIT 4.7 PRIVATE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR WASTE COLLECTION IN COIMBATORE CITY ......................................................... 46 EXHIBIT 4.8 KEY PROCUREMENT MILESTONES FOR SELECTION OF PREFERRED BIDDER IN COIMBATORE ................................... 48 Volume II Case studies of PPP projects
EXHIBIT 4.9 RISK SHARING BETWEEN CMC AND PRIVATE OPERATOR ............................................................................... 52 EXHIBIT 5.1 HIERAACHY FLOWCHART FOR THE PROVISION OF MSWM SERVICES IN RAJKOT CITY............................................ 54 EXHIBIT 5.2 DETAILS ON MANPOWER FOR PROVISION OF SWM IN RAJKOT ........................................................................ 55 EXHIBIT 5.3 DETAILS OF MANPOWER UNDER PRIVATE CONTRACTS FOR SWM SERVICES IN RAJKOT ......................................... 55 EXHIBIT 5.4 SOURCE OF WASTE GENERATION IN RAJKOT CITY ......................................................................................... 55 EXHIBIT 5.5 PHYSICAL COMPOSITION OF MSW GENERATION IN RAJKOT CITY..................................................................... 56 EXHIBIT 5.6 DETAILS ON TRANSPORTATION FLEET FOR SWM SERVICES IN RAJKOT CITY ........................................................ 58 EXHIBIT 5.7 PROJECT COMPONENTS OF WASTE PROCESSING ON PPP FORMAT IN RAJKOT CITY ............................................. 59 EXHIBIT 5.8 COMPLIANCE RATE FOR MSW RULES IN RAJKOT CITY AFTER PPP INTERVENTION ............................................... 61 EXHIBIT 5.9 INNOVATIVE APPROACH IN PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION IN RAJKOT.................................................................... 61 EXHIBIT 5.10 CALORIFIC VALUE AND COMMERCIAL MARKET FOR CONVENTIONAL FUELS ........................................................ 63 EXHIBIT 5.11 CHARACTERISTICS OF GREEN COAL PRODUCED AT RAJKOT PROCESSING PLANT ................................................ 63 EXHIBIT 6.1 AREA AND POPULATION IN JAIPUR REGION ................................................................................................. 65 EXHIBIT 6.2 MANPOWER FOR PROVISION OF SWM SERVICES IN JAIPUR CITY ..................................................................... 66 EXHIBIT 6.3 SOURCES OF WASTE GENERATION IN JAIPUR CITY ........................................................................................ 67 EXHIBIT 6.4 PHYSICAL COMPOSITION OF MSW GENERATION IN JAIPUR CITY...................................................................... 68 EXHIBIT 6.5 WASTE TRANSPORTATION BY PRIVATE PLAYERS IN VARIOUS ZONES OF JAIPUR CITY ............................................ 69 EXHIBIT 6.6 PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE WITH JMC FOR MSW TRANSPORTATION .............................................................. 70 EXHIBIT 6.7 PROJECT COMPONENTS OF WASTE PROCESSING PROJECTS (2 NOS.) ON PPP IN JAIPUR CITY ................................ 71 EXHIBIT 6.8 COMPLIANCE RATE OF MSW RULES AFTER PPP INTERVENTION IN JAIPUR CITY.................................................. 72 EXHIBIT 6.9 KEY PROCUREMENT MILESTONES FOR SELECTION OF PREFERRED BIDDER IN JAIPUR CITY...................................... 72 EXHIBIT 6.10 TRACK RECORD OF WASTE TO ENERGY PROJECTS IN INDIA ........................................................................... 75 EXHIBIT 7.1 POPULATION PROJECTIONS FOR CHENNAI CITY............................................................................................. 76 EXHIBIT 7.2 MANPOWER FOR PROVISION OF SWM SERVICES IN CHENNAI CITY .................................................................. 77 EXHIBIT 7.3 SOURCES OF WASTE GENERATION IN CHENNAI CITY ..................................................................................... 78 EXHIBIT 7.4 PHYSICAL COMPOSITION OF MSW GENERATION IN CHENNAI CITY .................................................................. 78 EXHIBIT 7.5 KEY PROCUREMENT MILESTONES FOR SELECTION OF PREFERRED BIDDER IN CHENNAI PHASE I ........................... 80 EXHIBIT 7.6 KEY PROCUREMENT MILESTONES FOR SELECTION OF PREFERRED BIDDER IN CHENNAI PHASE II .......................... 85 EXHIBIT 7.7 FINANCIAL QUOTES BY BIDDERS FOR SWM SERVICES IN CHENNAI CITY ............................................................ 85 EXHIBIT 7.8 WASTE GENERATION IN PACKAGE 1 AND 2 FOR PPP PROJECTS IN CHENNAI CITY ............................................... 86 EXHIBIT 8.1 POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS IN DELHI CITY .............................................................................................. 92 EXHIBIT 8.2 WASTE GENERATION (TPD) IN DELHI CITY ................................................................................................. 93 EXHIBIT 8.3 PHYSICAL COMPOSITION OF MSW IN DELHI CITY......................................................................................... 93 EXHIBIT 8.4 CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF MSW IN DELHI CITY ....................................................................................... 94 EXHIBIT 8.5 DETAILS ON COMPOST PLANTS IN DELHI CITY .............................................................................................. 95 EXHIBIT 8.6 DETAILS OF DISPOSAL SITES IN DELHI CITY .................................................................................................. 95 EXHIBIT 8.7 SEGREGATION BENCHMARKS FOR PRIVATE PLAYER IN DELHI ............................................................................ 99
Abbreviations
ADB APCF BOT BOOT CPF CPHEEO C&T CPCB CDM CER DEA DTDC DPR DSCR Eurostat EOI FIRR GOI GHG IIPDF ICE IMTF IPFA JNNURM LOI MOF MOUD MOEF MNES MOA MSWM MRTS MT NGO NUSP NPV O&M PFI PPP Asian Development Bank Asia Pacific Carbon Fund Build Operate Transfer Build Own Operate Transfer Community Participation Fund Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organisation Collection & Transportation Central Pollution Control Board Clean Development Mechanism Certified Emission Reductions Department of Economic Affairs (India) Door-to-door-collection Detailed Project Report Debt Service Coverage Ratio Statistical Office for the European Countries Expression of Interest Financial Internal Rate of Return Government of India Green House Gas India Infrastructure Project Development Fund Information, Communication, Education Inter-Ministerial Task Force International Project Finance Association Jawaharlal Nehru Urban Renewal Mission Letter of Intent Ministry of Finance Ministry of Urban Development (India) Ministry of Environment & Forests (India) Ministry of Non-Conventional Energy Sources (India) Ministy of Agriculture (India) Municipal Solid Waste Management Mechanised Refuse Transfer Station Metric Tones Non-Government Organisation National Urban Sanitaion Policy Net Present Value Operations & Maintenance Project Finance Initiative Public Private Partnership
PIM PIOP RFQ RFP RDF RMU SPCB SLNA SPV TA TPD TCLP ULB UIDSSMT UNFCCC VGF
Project Information Memorandum Project Implementation & Operations Plan Request for Qualification Request for Proposal Refuse Derived Fuel Risk Management Unit State Pollution Control Board State Level Nodal Agency Special Purpose Vehicle Technical Assistance Tones per Day Toxicity test for leachates Urban Local Body Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme for Small and Medium Towns United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Viability Gap Funding
About this document

This document covers Volume II of the Toolkit for Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) in Municipal Solid Waste Management (MSWM) and is an effort to document and analyse select PPP projects awarded in the MSWM space till date. The projects have been selected from different parts of the country to get a better appreciation and insights into factors and considerations while developing and implementing PPP projects. It is emphasised here that this report is a compilation of these case studies; its analysis and conclusions does not purport to be either a comment, opinion or criticism of any actual practice or decisions referred to in them, but is intended to provide insights and glean possible lessons for replication. There are in all ten case studies that have been profiled as part of this exercise; Eight drawn from the Indian context and Two international case studies from Singapore and Malaysia. The Eight case studies from the Indian context fall in five categories: a) Two cases in Integrated Solid Waste Management case from Guwahati and Hyderabad, b) Three cases in Waste processing and Disposal from Bangalore, Coimbatore and Rajkot, c) Two cases in Transportation and Collection from Chennai and Delhi and d) One case in Waste processing in Jaipur. The Two case studies from the international context from Singapore and Malaysia profile the overall SWM system in these contexts. The Singapore case provides an overview of an approach to unbundle and structure multiple PPP contracts for Collection/Transportation and Waste Incineration. The Malaysian experience showcases an experience in Corporatisation of services as a pre-cursor to initiating PPPs in the sector. A summary of the key findings from these case studies is as follows: 1. Commitments relating to waste quantity and quality: Given that baseline information on waste quantity and quality tend to be sketchy, it is critical for ULBs to take this risk by assuring a committed Minimum assured Quantity or have a two part tipping fee with a fixed portion and a variable portion, where the fixed portion (paid irrespective of quantity of waste handled) insulates the Operator from Waste Availability risk. Clarity on Land availability and certainty of meeting concessioning authoritys obligations: Earmarking and making available land prior at the stage of bidding is critical. In one of the PPP projects profiled, the concessioning authority could make available only 50% of the land committed as part of the project. Such deviation from agreed contractual obligations post commencement tends to create uncertainty and opens the project for protracted negotiations which can be long and painful. In general, the ULB or the greater the certainty of the Concessioning Authority meeting its obligations, the greater its ability to enforce the private operator to meet his part of the obligations. Political commitment and policy continuity: Political commitment and support is critical for PPP projects. Since PPPs require buy-in from a wide range of stakeholders, political commitment early one helps engage with other stakeholders in a more effective manner. Further signaling policy clarity and continuity through an over-arching PPP legislation or Policy improves risk perception among potential bidders. Strong political commitment was a key factor in successful implementation of waste collection and transportation PPP in Chennai Corporation, which was one of the earliest PPPs in the sector. Strong political commitment helped overcome employee resistance and also win wider public support for the project. Effective Communication and Engagement with a wider set of stakeholders: It is critical to have a holistic communication plan to consult and engage with a wider set of stakeholders. Structured IEC activities to involve community with informal workers (rag-pickers), residents etc and internal stakeholders like sanitary workers, employees is extremely crucial during the early stages of the PPP project. This is crucial to overcome apprehensions among workers/employees and helps in smooth implementation/transition of 1
2.
3.
4.
activities to the private player. Further, taking into account community initiatives and addressing such overlaps can play a constructive role. For instance, in Guwahati, a separate Guwahati Waste Management Society was created to involve rag-pickers, residents, RWAs, NGOs etc. for primary collection of the waste even as the PPP project in MSWM was conceptualized. 5. Need for well defined transition process/duration it is imperative to initiate steps in developing service handover management competencies, else the teething problems occurring during the early stages can cause significant pains that can create an unfavorable image early on which may become difficult to resolve. For instance, inadequate transition planning in Chennai Corporation between an earlier PPP contract and takeover of the system by a new player, created significant challenges in service delivery during the transition period. Need to focus on Outcomes rather than Inputs: PPPs should be structured to monitor and focus on outcome based indicators rather than input based factors and in this regard, very often ULBs may need to provide choice of technology. Very often the tendency to define the input specifications very tightly can constrain innovation and competition that can potentially trigger greater efficiency and better service delivery. For instance, rather than restrict a particular type of waste processing, it may be useful to have all proven waste processing technologies to compete with output specifications, rather than carry out a bidding on the basis of a specific technology. Allowing flexibility in the nature of waste processing led to the private operator innovate in creating a whole range of products from processing the waste.
6.
Finally, developing and implementing a PPP project should not be done in isolation but as part of a holistic sectoral strategy that takes into account the issues and gaps that need to be addressed through the PPP project. PPPs rarely happen by default and require structured and systematic preparatory efforts. We hope that the projects showcased in this document provide useful insights in this direction.
1.
1.1
Integrated SWM Hyderabad

Hyderabad City an overview
Hyderabad Urban Agglomeration (HUA) is the sixth largest in India, with a population of 57.5 lakh in the year 2001. Hyderabad is one of the fastest growing metropolitan cities in the country with a decadal growth rate of 32%. It has established itself as a centre for sunrise industries such as information technology and accounts for 10% of IT exports of the country. The urban agglomeration radiating out of Hyderabad is spread over an area of 778.17 sq km and consists of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (MCH), 12-peripheral municipalities, Secunderabad Cantonment, Osmania University and other areas. The population of HUA has increased from 43 lakh in 1991 to 57 lakh in 2001. The growth of population was more than 50 % during 1981-91 and 27% during 1991-2001. However, several well established urban components of the city are located well beyond the Urban Agglomeration. The details of population of HUA and other constituents of Hyderabad Metropolitan Area are given in Exhibit 1.1 below: Exhibit 1.1 Population of Hyderabad Urban Agglomeration
Source: CDP, Hyderabad Hyderabad Urban Agglomeration leads in literacy in Andhra Pradesh, with 78.51% in 2001. Male literacy in the agglomeration is approximately 83.76%, while female literacy is considerably lower at 72.90%. In a fast globalizing world, it is essential for Hyderabad to offer world-class services to attract global investments. The global companies consider not only the investment climate and economic potential of cities while making investment and location decisions but also the quality of services offered by cities. In this context, it is imperative that Hyderabad has not only a good investment climate, but also world-class urban services comparable to other cities. However, the city is experiencing a severe strain on its infrastructure, due to rapid urbanization, unplanned growth and industrial development. The city is deficient in service delivery and trails other Indian metropolitan cities on most service delivery outcomes.
1.2
Municipal SWM system in Hyderabad
1.2.1 SWM Department:

The Solid Waste Management department in the city is headed by the City Health Officer (CHO), who is responsible for all health programs and is assisted by various assistant city health officers, medical officers, sanitary officers, public health inspectors & sanitary inspectors for discharging the MSWM functions effectively. Table below summarizes the details on the staff members: There were around 4,118 regular sanitary workers other than some 15,984 private sanitary workers for provision of MSWM services in the city. Exhibit 1.2 Details of manpower for provision of SWM services in GHMC department S. No Nature of Work 1 Chief Medical Officer of Health 2 Assistant Medical Officers of Health 3 Sanitary Supervisors 4 Head Sanitary Jawans 5 Sanitary Jawans 6 Sanitary workers regular staff 7 Sanitary workers private staff Source: GHMC Officials Number 1 15 65 38 187 4,118 15,984
1.2.2 Waste Generation

The MSW generation estimated by the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (herein after GHMC) is significantly high at around 3,800 TPD. It is estimated that there are some 15.23 lakh households in the city with total population of around 70 lakh. Exhibit 1.3 below highlights the discrete sources of waste generators in the city. Exhibit 1.3 Source of Waste Generators in Hyderabad City Source Domestic Households Commercial Establishments & Hotels Street sweeping & drain cleaning Hospitals Vegetable and other Markets TOTAL Source: GHMC Officials S. No 1 2 3 4 5 Waste Generated (TPD) 1,675.41 989.80 494.40 30.97 609.40 3,800 % 44.09 26.09 13.01 0.82 16.04 100
Further, the estimated physical and chemical composition of MSW generation in the City is shown in Exhibit 1.4 below:
Exhibit 1.4 Municipal Solid Waste Characteristics in Hyderabad City At Transfer Station (%) Physical Characteristics 1 Biodegradable 46.07 2 Recyclable 40.66 3 Inert/Reject 12.74 4 Bio Medical Waste 0.53 Chemical Characteristics 1 pH 6.64 2 Total Moisture 46.10 3 Fixed Carbon 12.27 4 Volatile Matter 45.54 5 Calorific value 1,720.90 Source: Estimates by GHMC during April-May, 2008 S. No Type of Waste At Disposal Site (%) 50.36 36.77 12.26 0.61 6.72 45.56 10.21 39.71 1,457.27
1.3
1.
MSWM value chain and management in Hyderabad

Source storage & segregation Storage of waste at source is one of the important recommendations of Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF). It is however, observed that storage and segregation at source is generally absent in Hyderabad, and people in general are not aware of the benefits of developing such a practice. However, some households (around 10 to 15%) store the un-segregated waste in open containers and dispose off the same at the community collection points. Moreover, solid waste generated from the major markets in the city lack adequate storage facilities. MSW Collection The conventional garbage clearance before the initiative1 of Clean Hyderabad 2006-07 program at GHMC suffered from the following limitations: o The overall garbage clearance mechanism was based on a general, ad-hoc monitoring of localityspecific needs, with no means to quantify the actual work being done. There were no foolproof means of monitoring whether the garbage clearance machinery (personal as well as equipment) was working at maximum. Garbage clearance in a specified area was intensified only on the basis of a perceptible increase in the garbage load /or on receipt of public complaints about unbearable stench /and of potential health hazards. Particular attention to prompt garbage clearance was given at places only where there was noticeable accumulation of wet or decomposable/putrid material. Extra effort at garbage clearance in specific areas/ localities, including fumigation was prompted by the need to take prevention action against the outbreak of disease born by flies, mosquitoes, and other insects.
2.
Thus, as long as there were no specific complaints from the citizens of a particular locality, it was generally assumed by the GHMC that the garbage clearance apparatus was working reasonably well. However, in order to improve the existing system, GHMC has implemented a systematic and sustainable approach to efficient municipal solid waste management under the Clean Hyderabad 2006-07 programme. Under this programme, GHMC has privatized a large part of its garbage clearance operations, which covers around 75% of the municipal area, catering to over 31 lakh residents. These composites, multi-component and season-specific operations include sweeping of roads and removal of
1
Source: India Urban Portal & Leading Practices Catalogue, 2007 (Mega Cities, Poised for Change) 5
road silts, removal of rubble, debris and stagnant water, cleaning of shrubs and tree guards on road margins lifting of all types of solid waste. In privatized areas, the SWM services rendered by the Health and Sanitation Department involve street cleaning, including daily sweeping and other sanitary measures from 6 am to 2 pm, on all days of the week and collection and transportation of garbage daily from 7 am to 3 pm on all days of the week. The initiatives include: 3. Door-to-door collection of garbage Hyderabad is one of the first metropolises in India to have introduced a cent per cent, door to door collection. The system includes following steps o o o o o o 4. 5. The residents deliver the garbage to the shubrak (tricycle puller) directly. The residents also commit to pay a small amount to the subrak. The shubrak segregates the garbage into biodegradable and non-biodegradable waste and put them into two separates compartments in to the tricycle. The biodegradable waste is dumped into bins placed at transit centre The garbage is shifted in dumper placer vehicle from the transit center bin points to a specified transfer station. At the transfer station, the garbage is transferred to 10 ton/ 25 ton capacity trucks and garbage compactor vehicles with the help of specially designed hoppers. The 25 ton capacity trucks and garbage compactor vehicles carry the garbage from the transfer station to specified landfill sites.
Privatization and Outsourcing of sanitation Under the privatization program, the private operators are divided into day cleaning units and night cleaning units. Bulk garbage clearance In addition to the vehicles earmarked for the pinpoint program, the GHMC has a special complement of trucks, tippers, dumper bins, compactors & loaders dedicated exclusively for clearance of bulk garbage at hospitals, hotels, and slaughter houses etc. Resident welfare association scheme in colonies The resident welfare Association (RWA) scheme is a GHNC-colony partnership program, under which the GHMC provides a tricycle free of cost to the RWA The maintenance of the tricycle is the responsibility of the RWA. Womens Neighborhood Community Scheme in Slums The NHC is a GHMC-slum partnership program under which the Corporation provides a tricycle free of cost to NHC. The NHC engage an operator for door-to-door collection and transportation of garbage to a designated collection point. Introduction of IT enabled SWM system A computer system along with a UPS unit and a printer is installed at each of the eight locations at vehicle parking places/ work sheds, transfer stations and dump yards. The cost of installing a computer system at each of the above location was Rs 40,000. Therefore, for all the eight locations together the total investment was of Rs. 3.2 lakh.
6.
7.
8.
The new initiative has resulted in meaningful utilization of existing transfer stations, tracking of vehicle breakdowns, and empowering administration with management information system on fleet management and compliant monitoring and redressal. Exhibit 1.5 below highlights the quantity of waste collected and transported to the disposal sites in the city: Exhibit 1.5 Waste Collected and Transported to Disposal Site in Hyderabad City S. No 1 2 3 Disposal Site MSW from Transfer Stations to Jawaharnagar Shamshiguda disposal site BHEL site at BDL Quarters Quantity, TPD 2,618 100 45 6
Fathullaguda MSW from 4 circles directly to Jawaharnagar TOTAL Source: GHMC Officials
4 5
100 200 3,063
The city is divided in 5 (five) zones with 18 circles and 76 sanitary wards. Exhibit 1.6 below outlines the waste generation in each of the zones with number of sanitary workers under GHMC and private operators for waste collection and transportation under Clean Hyderabad 2006-07 program. Exhibit 1.6 Waste Generation in different Zones under GHMC Area LB Nagar Kapra East Uppal Gaddiannaram Kukatpally Serilingampally West RC Puram & patancheruvu Alwal Qutubullapur North Malkajgiri Seconderabad Rajendra-nagar South Hyderabad Centre Hyderabad TOTAL Source: GHMC Officials 9. Circle 3 Circle 1 Circle 2 Circle 14 Circle 11 & 12 Circle 13 Cirlcle 16 Circle 15 Cirlcle 17 Circle 18 Circle 6 Circle 4 & 5 Cirlce 7,8,9 & 10 Waste Generation MT 185 124 78 27 335 128 22 59 118 152 900 74 1600 3802 No of Workers GHMC 144 52 98 177 26 8 81 36 42 564 46 1120 1724 4,118 Private 1535 515 318 2063 1054 198 396 747 432 1200 306 2347 4873 15,984 Total 1679 567 416 0 2240 1080 206 477 783 474 1764 352 3467 6597 20,102
Street Sweeping The Corporation has a road length of 7,158 km and has privatized nearly 75% of its street sweeping operations through service contracts. It is estimated that around 6,871 km of road length is covered under daily sweeping program, hence, compliance rate of around 96%.
10. Secondary Storage The GHMC has provided community bins in the city for storage of municipal solid waste. There are around 3,080 bins of 3.0 cum capacity and around 189 bins of 1.5 cum capacity placed at discrete locations in the city. Further, the GHMC had taken initiative to set up transfer stations to minimize the transportation cost to the landfill site. There are 3 (three) existing transfer stations including Imbulin transfer station near MG Bus stand, Tankbund transfer station near snow world, and Yousufguda transfer station near krishnakanth park. All these three transfer stations are spread over in around 1.0 acre of land each. However, under the Integrated MSWM system, five more transfer stations are proposed and lands have been identified at Kapra, Seriligampally, Gandhamgudha, Samshiguda, and Fathullaguda. 11. Waste Transportation The GHMC had introduced containerized system & refuses collector machines for MSW transportation. The Corporation owns around 110 vehicles including dumper placer, open tippers, compactor, and 10T & 25T tippers other than the vehicles provided by the private contractors. 12. MSW Processing The GHMC has encouraged waste to energy plants and signed MoU/Agreements with two firm namely (a) SELCO International Ltd and (b) RDF Power Projects Ltd. for the supply of MSW. GHMC Volume II Case studies of PPP projects 7
has provided 10 acres of municipal land on 30 years lease to SELCO with an annual lease rent of 5% of the registered value of land. Exhibit 1.7 below shows the minimum waste commitment to private players by GHMC: Exhibit 1.7 Minimum assured waste to private player by GHMC Firm SELCO International Ltd. RDF Power 700 TPD Rs 25 per ton Rs 47.2cr Projects Ltd. Assured MSW 700 TPD Royalty by Project Cost Rs 34.0cr 10 acres land on 30 years lease by GHMC 26 acres of Land acquired by Private player on 4
th
Land for the project
Contract Signing 24 May, 1997 18

th th
Private firm Rs 25 per ton
May, 2000,
then Supplementary MoU signed on 18 May, 2006.

th
November, 2005
13. MSW Disposal The GHMC has a large parcel of 350 acres of land for dumping activity at "Jawahar nagar" site. However, this disposal site is not an engineered landfill site, instead mixed waste from the city is generally haphazardly disposed of all over the site with no earmarking of site was waste disposal. The site is around 37 km away from the main city and is in operations since 2004. The MSW received from the three transfer stations is 2,618 TPD and another 200 TPD is received directly from Malkagiri, Alwal, Kapra, and Secundrabad circles. The disposal site is equipped with 5 bull dozers and 4 excavators for spreading of soil and related activities. Prior to development of Jawahar nagar disposal site, the city waste was used to get dumped at following sites: o The Gandhamguda site is located at 30 km from the city and was commissioned during 1995 and was operated till 1999-2000. It is estimated that around 2.8 lakh cub m of waste is accumulated at this disposal site. The site is spread over an area of 20 acres out of which 10 acres has been allotted to SWLCO International ltd. for RDF based power plant. The Fathullaguda disposal site is spread over an area of 45.75 acre and around 100 TPD of solid waste from LB Nagar and Uppal Kalan circles is being disposed at this site. The site is operational since 1993 and residential areas are located around 1-1.5 km. The Shamshiguda disposal site is in operation since 1999, with an area of 23.7 acres and is located about 2 km from Shapur junction near Yellammabanda. An area of 7.65 acres is covered with solid dump waste and it is estimated that about 100 TPD of solid waste is being dumped.
The graph below outlines the compliance rate of MSW Rules collectively in all 5 zones (18 circles) of the Hyderabad city prior to development of an Integrated MSWM system on PPP format:
Exhibit 1.8 Compliance rate of MSW Rules in GHMC area
Source: IMaCS Analysis
As evident from the chart, the Corporation has managed to achieve reasonable compliance rate with MSW Rules in areas like waste collection and transportation and street sweeping by engaging discrete private contractors for different wards/circles in the city. However, there are still significant gaps in provision of MSWM services especially in components like introduction of source storage & segregation, door-to-door collection, waste processing and scientific disposal of waste with development of engineered landfill site.
1.4
Proposed PPP project for Integrated SWM
As per the estimates of the cost of procurement of tools, equipment, vehicles and construction of treatment and disposal facilities, the DPR suggested that the corporation would need Rs 434.51crore to put the entire MSWM system in place. As the City of Hyderabad is a one million plus covered under JnNURM scheme, it is entitled to get 35% grants from Government of India, 15% grant from the state and find its own 50% to avail of the benefits. To bring in the capital investment from the private sector and obtain operational efficiencies, the corporation floated the idea of engaging private developer on suitable PPP format for 50% capital investment requirement, ideally to be funded by GHMC in the MSWM system. Exhibit 1.9 below summarizes the evolution of the PPP intervention for provision of MSWM services, starting from involvement of private sector in only sweeping and partly in collection and transportation to an Integrated Municipal Solid Waste Management system with single player accountability for all the components in the MSWM value chain. Exhibit 1.9 Evolution of PPP intervention in MSWM services in GHMC Item Scope contracts of 1996-97 Only for road sweeping, and waste collection & transportation 1997-99 Contract reform for sweeping and C&T into Day Units for areas and Night 2000-06 Increased intervention: around 75% of the municipal sweeping area and for C&T PPP 2007-08 Integrated Municipal SWM system with end to end responsibility and accountability of a single private operator including. 9
Item
1996-97 (C&T)
1997-99 Units for roads Waste to energy project for 700 TPD MSW on PPP format SELCO with
2000-06 managed by private workers agreement with RDF Projects Ltd for waste to energy project for waste processing of 700 TPD For sweeping and C&T Procured through technical capacity and past experience at a fixed defined price unit for a which equal of C&T
2007-08 (Collection & transportation) Road sweeping Transfer Stations O&M Processing & disposal facilities Closure of dumpsites Procured through twostage open competitive
Procurement Process
Lowest bid for a monthly rate for work a given of in quantity
Procured through technical capacity and past experience at a fixed price for a defined unit which represents equal quantity of work For processing of waste royalty by SELCO to GHMC @ Rs 25 per ton of waste supplied.
bidding based on technical and financial capacity of the private firms on of the bidding MSW parameter received at
specified areas
represents quantity of work For processing
Tipping Fee per ton of disposal site @Rs 1,431 per ton of MSW.
waste royalty by RDF Projects Ltd. to GHMC @ Rs 25 per ton of waste GHMC. supplied by
Coverage the project
of
27 covering
areas
Planning for entire city by dividing into day and night units. About 60% of total work is contracted out.
Planning for around 75% of the municipal area by dividing into day and night units.
Entire GHMC five zones; starting with two zones and based on to the be performance
around 40,000 population and a distance of 27 km
expanded to all five zones. And processing of the MSW except already committed 1,400 TPD to two separate plants.
Provision penalties
for
Penalty linked to unsatisfactory work at 2% of the contract amount
Penalties based on performance monitoring system using detailed input and output criteria For RDF processing commissioning to be achieved within 18 months of allotment of land. Any delay from 0-6 months, penalty equal to cost of lifting 10% of the required MSW plus royalty payable. In case of failure to achieve commissioning within 2 years, then event of default leading to termination.
Comprehensive well laid
and down
performance standards and penalties in the contract agreement in line service with standard level
benchmarks by MoUD. Attached as annexure to this case study. 10
Item
1996-97
1997-99
2000-06
2007-08
In case of gap in attaining full capacity of the plant, penalty @Rs 20 per Mt of MSW supplied by GHMC Monitoring system Limited role of community, weak municipal monitoring Role of communities made more extensive with informal committees, computerized monitoring with the Daily Deduction System Stringent of performance Project Agency separate monitoring with selection Independent Monitoring through
competitive bidding. Source: IMaCS analysis; Interaction with GHMC officials, Mehta Meera (1999), review of PPP
11
1.4.1 Scope of Work for Private Operator

Activity/Component Description/Location
Primary collection activity including 1. Entire GHMC area All 5 (five) zones door-to-door collection 2. Initially only two zones East and West zone of GHMC to be handled over for implementation 3. Subject to successful implementation in these two zones, and meeting the performance requirements as certified by the Independent Engineer, GHMC shall extend the services to other zones in a phased manner. Secondary collection activity in East and West zones and transportation of the same to designated transfers stations 1. Entire GHMC area All 5 (five) zones 2. Initially only two zones East and West zone of GHMC to be handled over for implementation 3. Subject to successful implementation in these two zones, and meeting the performance requirements as certified by the Independent Engineer, GHMC shall extend the services to other zones in a phased manner Up-gradation, operation and maintenance and management of existing Transfer Stations Existing Transfer Stations: 1. East Zone Fatullaguda 2. West Zone Shamshiguda 3. Lower tank bund, Yousufguda, Imliban
Development, operation and maintenance of additional transfer stations Development, operations and maintenance of landfill facility Transportation of MSW from all the transfer stations to the designated treatment & disposal facilities Reclamation/ reuse of dumpsites
Fathullaguda, Shamshiguda, Gandhamguda, Rajendranagar, Kapra 1. Existing Jawaharnagar 2. Proposed Choutuppal (Nalgonda District), Lakdaram (v), Patamcheru (Medak District) For the entire GHMC area
Jawarharnagar, Gandhamguda, Shamshiguda, Fatullaguda
1.
Concession Period The Concession is granted to Concessionaire for a period of 25 years from the date of COD - T&D and extendable thereafter on mutual agreement between the GHMC and Concessionaire. In the event of Termination, the Concession Period shall end with the Termination Date. Concessionaire has certain post-closure obligations for the Landfill, which it shall continue to fulfill for 15 years after the expiry of the active landfill period of 25 years. Procurement Process Exhibit 1.10 table below highlights the crucial activities & corresponding timelines achieved for engaging a private operator:
2.
12
Exhibit 1.10 Key Procurement Milestones in selection of Preferred Bidder Key Dates Bidding Process RFQ Submission date Total 2 firms submitted Application October, 2008 RFP Bid document sale (Rs 25,000 per RFP) Total 2 firms short-listed for Second Stage of Bidding M/s Ramky Enviro Engineers Ltd. M/s Gujarat Environment Ltd. 11 November, 2008 24 November, 2008
th th
Key Bid Process Milestones Two-stage bidding (Bidder with Highest Premium per MT to Authority)
Pre-bid meeting Bid Submission date (Bid Security Rs. 8.97crore)
Both the firms were selected on technical evaluation 21 February, 2009 10 March, 2010
th st
Concession Agreement Signing Appointment of Independent Project Monitoring Firm
As outlined above, the GHMC followed two-stage bidding process and the complete process of engaging a private developer for ISWM was completed within 6 (six) months, which reflects efficiency and corporation involvement to a significant extent.
1.4.2 Technical & Financial Parameters as per RFP document

1. Technical Criteria The technical bid was evaluated by a technical committee empowered by GHMC on the following parameters. Bidders scoring 60 marks and above would only be considered for the next stage of evaluation. S. No 1 2 Evaluation Parameters Net worth of Rs. 175crore as on 31 Mar, 2008 Experience in Collection & Transportation of MSW in the last two years Up to 5 lakh tons of MSW More than 5 and up to 10 lakh tons of MSW More than 10 and up to 15 lakh tons of MSW More than 15 lakh tons of MSW 3 Experience in treatment/processing of MSW/hazardous waste/ 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20 biomedical waste etc. by any approved technologies specified in applicable laws such as MSW Rules 2000 Up to 5 lakh tons of MSW More than 5 and up to 10 lakh tons of MSW More than 10 and up to 15 lakh tons of MSW More than 15 lakh tons of MSW 4 Experience in Construction/ Operation & Maintenance of scientific landfill facility as per applicable laws such as MSW Rules 2000 Up to 5 lakh tons of MSW Volume II Case studies of PPP projects 5 13
st
Max. Marks 10
S. No
Evaluation Parameters More than 5 and up to 10 lakh tons of MSW More than 10 and up to 15 lakh tons of MSW More than 15 lakh tons of MSW
Max. Marks 10 15 20 6 6 6 6 6 100
Approach & Methodology for undertaking the assignment Technologies proposed to be implemented, Process Flow Chart and Material Balance Statement Details of infrastructure proposed, Resource Utilization Statement Overall Layout Plan, Implementation Schedule and O&M Scheme Environment, Health & Safety Policy and Strategy TOTAL
2.
Financial Criteria the financial proposals of technical qualified bidders to be opened. The Tipping Fee in the form of per ton of MSW received at the gate of the disposal facility shall be the sole bidding parameter for selection of the Bidder. As the Tipping Fee covers three main components of work, break-up of tipping fee for each of the component shall be as below: o o o Primary and secondary collection & transportation of waste up to transfer station 40% of the quoted tipping fee Transfer station management and transportation of waste from transfer station to the processing facilities 20% of the quoted tipping fee Treatment and disposal 40% of the quoted tipping fee
3.
Selection Criteria The Bidders adjusted as responsive and obtaining 60 marks and above in the Technical Bid would be deemed as Technically Qualified Bidders. The Financial Bids of only the Technically Qualified Bidders would be evaluated for selecting the preferred bidder. Technically Qualified Bidder quoting the Lowest Tipping Fee to the Authority shall be declared as the selected Bidder.
1.4.3 Bidders & Financial Offer

1. 2. M/s Ramky Enviro Engineers Limited (REEL) Tipping fee of Rs. 1,449 per ton of MSW M/s Gujarat Environment Limited Tipping fee of Rs. 1,680 per ton of MSW
Finally after negotiations between GHMC and REEL, the final tipping fee was accepted at Rs. 1,431 per ton of MSW.
1.4.4 Financial Structure of the Project

Total Project Cost Rs 434.91crore Grant under JnNURM Scheme of GOI (35%) Rs 152.22 crore Grant share by Government of Andhra Pradesh (15%) Rs. 65.24 crore Capital investment by Private Player (50%) Rs 217.46crore
14
Key Obligations of Private Player:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Bid Security of Rs 8.97crore to be submitted along with Technical Proposal. Performance Bank Guarantee (PBG) of Rs 18.0 to be submitted on or before concession signing. Non-adjustable and non- refundable project development charge of Rs 3.0crore to the GHMC. Make its own arrangements for water supply during the construction and operation phase Adherence to construction requirements as per the approved project DPR ,BIS, MSW Rules All insurances to be purchased & maintained by due reinstatement, in respect of project facilities. Weighing of MSW at Transfer Station(s) (for input MSW) & Landfill (for inert from processing). Sale and/or Distribution of compost/mature & energy and other recyclables. Pay all applicable taxes, duties and outgoings, including utility charges relating to project facilities.
Key Obligations of GHMC:

1. The total project cost of Rs 500crore as per DPR is eligible for grants under JNNURM scheme, around 35% of this total cost and another 15% share by GoAP, and the same will be made available to the Concessionaire. In the event the grants are not obtained under the JnNURM scheme GHMC would be responsible for providing equivalent grants contributing to 50% (35% of JnNURM + 15% of GoAP) of the eligible project cost. Provide power connections to the transfer stations and treatment & disposal facilities. However, usage charges and distribution arrangements, as well as back-up to be made by concessionaire. Road connectivity to the transfer stations and treatment & disposal facilities by GHMC. Handover all existing infrastructure like dumper bins, vehicles, transfer station to concessionaire on an asis-where-is basis.
2. 3. 4.
Key features of Concession Agreement

1. Increment/Adjustment in the Tipping Fee o o The base tipping fee shall be increased annually, without compounding, by 5% thereof. In addition to the annual revision, the applicable base tipping fee shall be adjusted and revised annually on April 1 of each year to reflect the variation in WPI occurring between the first week ending of January and the week ending or immediately after January 1of the year in which such st revision is undertaken. The revision shall be undertaken such that on every 1 April every year (the date of revision), the base tipping fee applicable shall be adjusted and revised to reflect 60% rate of inflation occurring during the aforesaid period. The formula for determining the tipping fee due and payable shall be as Tipping Fee = z + {z(WPIb/WPIa)-z}0.6, where z is the basic tipping fee. In the event of allocation of agreed other 3 (three) new Sites other than land available at Jawaharnagara disposal site to the Concessionaire by GHMC for establishment of processing and disposal facilities there would be no escalation in Tipping Fee to be paid by GHMC (for any of the components) if the sites are located within a distance of 60 Km from the center of the city centre being recognized as GHMC office located at Tank Bund. However if the sites are located at distance greater than 60 km fee towards Transfer station management and transportation of waste from 15
o o
transfer station to the processing facilities (20% of the Tipping Fee)shall be increased on pro-rata basis of the distances involved. 2. Fiscal benefits of processing by-products & CDM o o 3. All fiscal benefits and incentives accruing in respect of or on account of the Project including carbon credits /CERs under Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) will go to concessionaire Concessionaire is free to sell power/compost & other by-products generated from the processing plant to any buyer in accordance with Applicable Law.
Independent Project Engineer (IPE) o o IPE shall be a third party agency (consulting engineering firms or body corporate), to be appointed within 6 (six) months of concession signing through an open competitive bidding process. GHMC shall pay the Independent Engineer all fees, costs, charges and expenses, however, GHMC and Concessionaire shall share this expense equally on a 50:50 basis. GHMC shall recover the pro-rated costs from amounts payable to the Concessionaire.
4.
Payment from Post Closure Performance Account (PCPA) o GHMC would withhold 10% of the Treatment Disposal revenues receivable from GHMC. This amount shall be held in escrow towards post-closure obligations. The amounts shall be utilized for the purpose of Post-Closure obligations only, and released to the Concessionaire in equal quarterly installments during Post-closure period, and to be detailed out in the escrow agreement with the bankers. In an event of Termination due to any reason whatsoever, the amounts in the escrow account will be appropriated by GHMC to be utilized towards post closure obligations.
o 5.
Dispute Resolution Mechanism o o Resolved through an Adjudicator appointed by the GHMC Fee/costs to be shared equally between GHMC and the Concessionaire
6.
Termination Payment for Force Majeure Event o o o Non-Political Event, GHMC shall pay 90% of debt due less insurance for assets under operator Indirect Political Event, GHMC shall pay 110% of the Adjusted Equity Political Event, GHMC shall pay in case of GHMC Event of Default Termination before COD, Payment = Debt due + 120% of Equity by operator till termination Termination after COD, Payment = Debt due +150% of adjusted value of Equity on termination
7.
Concessionaire Event of Default o o o o o Failed to achieve COD T&D within 30 months of the Effective Date; Failed to achieve any of the Project Milestones beyond 180 days of the Scheduled Milestone Date The equity holding of the concessionaire in case of SPC formation, is less than 51% of the paid up capital of the SPC through-out the concession period. Material Breach of any of its obligations under the Contract and not remedied for > than 60 days Resolution for voluntary winding up passed y the shareholders of the concessionaire company.
8.
GHMC Event of Default o o Material Breach of any of its obligations under the Contract and not remedied for > than 60 days GHMC has unlawfully repudiated the Contract or expressed its intention not to be bound by that
16
1.5
Project Implementation Issues

st
The concession agreement was signed on 21 February, 2009 and the integrated SMW project was supposed to take off in July, 2009 but the city municipal workers went on strike on July 6, 7 and 8 claiming that the agreement between REEL and GHMC was detrimental to their interests. The GHMC unions were opposing the handing over of collection and transportation of garbage to Ramky on the apprehension that once the private operator would start operations, the municipal workers will be diverted to activities like road sweeping and drain cleaning than the desired collection and transportation work. The strike by the unions forced the state government to keep the agreement on hold and the project implementation was kept in abeyance due to objections and concerns raised by municipal worker unions. However, after holding consultations with union leaders, the municipal administration and urban development (MA&UD) department had issued a memo permitting pre-construction works in January 2010. Another issue which stuck the project implementation was refusal by Centre government to release its share of Rs 152crore under JNNURM on the grounds that the state has already exhausted its allocation for seven years apart from additional allocation of Rs 100 crore as per the Planning Commission Directive. In view of this, the state government has agreed to bail out the GHMC by giving funds and bear the project cost (including Centres contribution) if the central government does not allocate funds for the project under JNNURM.
17
2.
2.1
Integrated SWM Guwahati

Guwahati City an overview
Guwahati is a part of Kamrup District and is situated between 25.43 and 26.51 North Latitude and between 90.36 and 92.12 East Longitude. Located on the banks of the Brahamaputra River, it is the largest commercial, industrial and educational center of the N-E region. Guwahati is situated on the banks of river Brahmaputra with its cardinal points as 26010 north latitude and 92049 east longitude. It is located towards the South- Eastern side of Kamrup district, which is surrounded by Nalbari district in the North, Darrang and Marigaon districts in the East, Meghalaya State in the south and Goalpara and Barpeta districts in the West. The Guwahati Metropolitan Area (GMA) covers a jurisdiction of 264 sq km and comprises of Guwahati Municipal Corporation Area, North Guwahati Town Committee, Amingaon. As per Census 2001, the population of Kamrup district is 25, 15,030, contributing to 9.44% of the state population; Kamrup is the most populous district of the state. Also among the districts of Assam, Kamrup shows the maximum decadal growth rate (28.73%) during 1991-2001. The total population covered under the Guwahati Metropolitan Area as per 2001 census is 8, 90,773. The population of Guwahati has grown almost 6.5 times between 1971 and 2001. The municipal limit of the city during the period increased from 43.82 sq km in 1971 to 216.79 sq km in 2001 Exhibit 2.1 Population growth trends in Guwahati City Census year Population (nos.) Decadal growth (%) Source: Census of India, CDP Guwahati 1981 2,68,945 48.5% Population (GMCA) 1991 584,342 48.5% 2001 809,895 37.9%
The population projections analysis carried out in the CDP of Guwahati estimates projected population of 1,752,668 and 2,578,310 in the year 2021 and 2031 respectively. The population density of Guwahati has been steadily increasing as shown in the graph. The density of 3741 is moderate. One of the factors accounting for the rapid growth in population has been migration from other areas to the GMA region. The corporation has a council of 60 elected ward councilors and is headed by a Mayor and the Commissioner is the corporation. executive head of the
Source: City Development Plan, Guwahati City Population Density Trends
18
2.2
Municipal SWM system in Guwahati
2.2.1 SWM Department

The responsibility of managing solid waste generated within the city is vested on the five engineering division of Guwahati Municipal Corporation (herein after GMC). However, no separate solid waste management department exists in the city and the total provision for solid waste management services is controlled and supervised by the engineering division directly. For operational purposes the entire area of the Corporation is divided into 23 zones consisting of 60 wards, comprising of 3 to 5 ward in each zone. Each zone is headed by a Zonal Engineer (Assistance Engineer). Inspectors and supervisors who oversee the daily activities assist the zonal engineers. The Zonal Engineers work under Divisional engineers, each division having 4-5 zones. The engineering department addresses major programmes such as construction & maintenance, building licensing, and SWM activities including drain cleaning. There are in total around 1,100 conservancy staff in the city dedicated for the provision of MSWM services including road sweeping, collection, transportation and disposal of solid waste.
2.2.2 Quantity and Quality of Waste Generated

The waste generation estimated by the GMC is 400 TPD (2007) based on the per capita waste generation and population in the city. Exhibit 2.2 below outlines the solid waste projections in the city as indicated in the CDP, Guwahati City. Exhibit 2.2 Waste Generation Projections in the Guwahati City Year 1991 2001 2010 2025 Actual / Projected Population (lakh) 6.46 8.9 12.5 22.15 Estimated Generation (kg/day/person) 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.8 Estimated quantity of MSW generated (TPD) 193.8 311.5 500.0 1772.0 Source: CDP, Guwahati City
Exhibit 2.3 Physical Characteristics of MSW in Guwahati City S. No 1 2 a. b. c. 3 Inert/Reject Type of Waste Biodegradable Recyclable paper glass plastic 20.0 Weight per MT 312.0 68.0 40.0 7.2 20.8 Percentage 78.0% 17.0% 10.0% 1.8% 5.2% 5.0% Source: CDP, Guwahati City 19
2.2.3 MSWM system prior to PPP Intervention (2007)

i. Source storage & source segregation the concept of source storage and source segregation was largely absent and people were totally ignorant of the significance and necessity of segregation of solid waste. ii. MSW Collection there was no system of door-to-door collection in the city and frequency of solid waste collection was on an average twice a week from dedicated waste depots. It is estimated that around 60% of the municipal solid waste generated in the city was collected and disposed off. iii. Secondary Storage MSW storage depots were used to collect the municipal solid waste. Generally the households dispose off their waste in the community bins placed at the end of the streets. On an average the spacing between the collection bins was maintained at an average distance of 190 meters. There were around 220 numbers of collection bins across the city. iv. Waste Transportation The GMC had around 75 vehicles of various types and capacities for transportation of waste. Usually the vehicle for waste transportation to the disposal site used to make 3 trips per day and the total capacity of all collection vehicles per day is around 160 ton in one trip. . v. MSW Processing There was no treatment and processing facility available in the city for conversion of waste /or extraction of recyclable before final disposal to the dumping sites. All solid waste collected within the city was used to get disposed off in the open dumping ground. vi. MSW Disposal The disposal site was at Sachhal, Narangi road about 5 km away from the city center. However, due to poor management, the site was posing as a severe nuisance in terms of odor, mosquito and fleas. The situation further worsens in rainy season. Further, the area was gradually encroached by rag pickers and others, making it difficult to manage the waste. In view of these problems and the presumption that the older landfill in the city would soon create great problems; the site was closed to avoid further problems. The dumping operation following the closure of the Sachhal site was temporarily shifted to a small piece of land near the proposed landfill at Garchug
2.3
Project Need Integrated MSWM system
With the onset of the population explosion in Guwahati, the quantum of MSW generation has also considerably increased. The existing scene in waste management before integrated MSWM system, displayed an array of problems, including low collection coverage, irregular collection services, open dumping, burning and the handling and control of informal waste picking or scavenging activities. Apart from growing urban infrastructure leading to indiscrete disposal of solid waste, lack of proper solid waste management system, Guwahati city has a characteristic low-lying topography and mountains on all sides, which has created a worse situation for solid waste accumulation and management. The situation is further worsened by the floods every year. There is no proper system for collection, transportation, disposal, and treatment processes for solid waste. Therefore it was imperative that a scientific and an integrated approach should be adopted to tackle the solid waste problem.
20
To order to develop an integrated system, GMC initiated the preparation of a Detailed Project Report (DPR) for MSWM system. The DPR was submitted for approval under Jawaharlal Nehru Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) as Guwahati is one of the 65 mission cities under the Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India (GoI) JNNURM programme. Exhibit 2.4 below outlines the discrete components of the MSWM project with broad cost estimates and approved cost under JNNRUM programme. The detailed item-wise cost of different components are presented in the DPR and such minimum specifications as indicated have to be met to access Grants for respective items. Exhibit 2.4 Cost estimated for SWM components under approved SWM DPR for Guwahati City S No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Particulars Collection & transportation Site development (including road access) Composting facility Sanitary landfill Common facilities Interest during construction Margin money for working capital Contingencies Resource Mobilization Pre-operative cost Total Source: GMC Total Amount (lakh) 593.90 2,819.46 854.88 487.18 84.26 43.82 58.00 71.32 22.43 132.35 5,167.60 3,634.47 71.32 Approved Cost (lakh) 593.90 2,071.77 600.00 213.22 84.26
2.3.1 Project Contours Integrated MSWM system

The proposed integrated solid waste management system project has the following components: 1. Primary collection of MSW Door-to-Door collection of MSW to be implemented. MSW to be transported in closed/covered vehicles. 2. Transportation of MSW After collection, MSW will be transported in the closed/covered vehicles to the processing and disposal site at Boragaon. It is expected there will be 125 incoming trucks to bring in 500 TPD of Mixed MSW and about 12-15 trucks for bringing 57 TPD of biomass at project site 3. Project Site development in Guwahati, 24.12 ha of land has been allocated for the development of integrated waste management facility. In line with the approved project DPR, the development of the proposed facility comprises of construction of RCC retaining wall of 8m Height around the periphery of land to be developed as sanitary landfill and soil fill up to 8m in the remaining area at the slope of 1:3 as elevated surface area on which processing plants & power plant are to be developed. Volume II Case studies of PPP projects 21
4.
Processing and disposal of MSW MSW is to be processed for energy recovery before final disposal into landfill site. Only inert or processing rejects to be land filled which is to be in range of 20-30% of total waste transported to the site. Processing and disposal site is to be developed at Boragaon and would comprise of the following: a. RDF Plant to handle 500 TPD MSW mixed MSW to be converted into Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) in the RDF Plant. b. Compost plant to handle 50 TPD of organic waste Organic components of MSW segregated during RDF process will be treated in the compost plant to produce manure. c. Power Plant Power Plant boiler will be fed with the 180 TPD of RDF having calorific value in range of 2500-2800 Kcal/kg and 57 TPD of biomass, up to the limit laid as per MNRE Policy/ guidelines to use supplementary fuel for such plants as fuel and will generate 6 MW of electricity. At project site RDF plant is to be designed to handle 500 TPD of mixed MSW, Compost Plant to handle 50 TPD of organic & green waste and Power plant to generate 6 MW of electricity using 180 TPD of RDF & 57 TPD of biomass as a fuel.
2.3.2 Policy on Primary Waste Collection System Community Participation

Objective To create a self-sustainable model driven by community participation for integrated MSW management, with participation of waste generators, waste pickers, municipal officials and other stakeholders through awareness creation, motivation-training programs. Approach The overall responsibility of implementing the waste collection activity lies with Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) named Guwahati Waste management Company Private Limited (GWMCL), created to implement the project. However to supervise the activities as well to have smooth co-ordination with different stakeholders, a society in the name of Guwahati Waste Management Society (GWMS) is to be formulated which would have representation of urban local bodies, Residential Welfare Associations, women groups/ associations, and other stakeholders. Activities / Scope of work Door-to-door collection of MSW from units (households, institutions & commercial establishment). Sweeping of roads /streets and de-silting of drains in Guwahati municipal limits. Roles/Responsibilities of GMC Facilitate the formation of GWMS and also actively participate during the functioning of GWMS. Ensure participation of their staff; CSI/SI/Supervisors of each ward for creating awareness on project. Identify & provide space for secondary collection point in consultation with GWMCL Identify & provide space for parking of Rickshaws Support if required for O&M of secondary collection points in consultations with GWMCL. Authorize GWMCL to take punitive measures against litterers, as per the applicable law.
Roles/Responsibilities of GWMCL
22
Formulate GWMS having representation of RWAs, NGOs, CBOs, ward councilors or any other agencies/individuals shown interest to address MSWM issues in consultation with GMC. Provide one containerized Rickshaw & handcart at level of one unit covering 200 households. Provide other equipments; iron tubs, spade, shovel etc for drain de-silting and street sweeping. Ensure regular waste transportation to landfill site either itself /or through selected private entity. Financial support for initial 6 months to the selected implementing agency .The amount of such shall be restricted to Rs 30 per house hold or less and no support for commercial establishments. Authorize through GMC, any selected agency to directly collect collection fee from waste generators. Extend support in creating Public awareness through local cable network, newspaper & other means. GWMCL in consent with GMC shall take punitive measures against the defaulters/ litterers
Roles/Responsibilities of Implementing agency For each ward, a suitable implementing agency to be selected through an open process. Implementing agency shall employ its workers for carrying out the waste collection tasks. Shall mention the equipments requirements and the required additional financial support. Selection of the implementing agency would be on the basis of least support requirements. Implementing agency will be responsible for O&M of the provided equipments. After three year period, GWMCL will examine and would suitably replace the required equipments. Implementing agency will be responsible for overall management from selection, monitoring, payments of salary (as per rules) of workers /involved staff. Ensure DTDC in segregated form through appropriate means suitable to the locality. Deposit the collected waste in segregated form (dry and wet) in designated bins provided. Ensure drain de-silting (up to 2 feet depth) of the area at least once in week. Responsible for transportation of waste of silt to Secondary Collection Points. Provide the detailed P&L sheet to GWMCL and after 6 months of initiation of project deposit 10% of monthly amount collected from generators in bank account of GWMCL. Provide monthly status report to GWMCL. The report needs to be approved by GWMS.
Roles/Responsibilities of GWMS Supervise the activities of implementing agencies with the objective of overall cleanliness in the city Assist GWMCL in the selection of suitable implementing agencies, if required. Resolve any disputes between GWMCL, GMC, RWAs, NGOs and other stakeholders with respect to the scope of activities mentioned above.
2.3.3 Incorporation of SPV and minimum equity requirement

SPV with the name Guwahati Waste Management Company Private Limited (GWMCL) was set up to develop the project on integrated MSWM system. The aggregate equity shareholding of the Consortium members/Sole Applicant, in the issued and paid up capital of the SPV shall not be less than 76% during the Construction Period and for 10 years following Commercial Operations Date and 51% during the balance remaining Operation Period; Volume II Case studies of PPP projects 23
Additionally, in case of a Consortium, the Lead Member would commit to hold a minimum equity stake equal to 51% of the aggregate shareholding of the Consortium in the SPV at all times during the Concession Period. GMC or the Person nominated by it shall have right during the Terms to check compliance with above parameters at any point of time after GWMCL is taken over by the Successful Bidders(s). Non-compliance with this condition may result in Termination of this Agreement as GWMCLs Event of Default. GWMCL shall not pass any special resolutions mentioned in the companies Act 1956 without prior written approval from the GMC. GWMCL should not be converted in to Public Limited Company, Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) and partnership, proprietorship etc.
2.3.4 Concession Period

The concession period is defined as 20 (twenty) years from Commercial Operations Date (COD). The construction period is maximum of 2 (two) years. Project Aspect Waste collection & transportation Processing of waste Power generation Landfill facility Timeline for commencement 6 months from issue of LOI 1 year from issue of LOI 2 years from issue of LOI 1 year from issue of LOI
The exact timelines to be firmed up in consultation with the selected developer
2.3.5 Estimated Project Cost

Total Estimated Project Cost at the time of implementation Project Cost as mentioned in the DPR Total Project Cost approved under JNNURM Rs 102.0 Crore Rs. 51.67 Crore Rs. 36.34 Crore (70%) Source: Approved DPR cost
2.3.6 Terms of Release of Grant by GMC

During Project Implementation It is envisaged that actual project cost shall be higher that approved cost under JNNURM. Such difference in the costs (Differential Costs) is to be funded by the Developer from his own funds. The terms of release of grants shall be as follows: 1. The developer would be required to fund project to the extent of 20% of such differential costs first.
Volume II Case studies of PPP projects 24
2. Thereafter, Grants disbursement would be as follows: a. GWMCL shall submit monthly statements and bills of the activities completed during the preceding month, of an amount that is over and above its contribution of initial 20%; b. The Project engineer would check the activities for compliance with the JNNURM DPR and allow the release of Grants that shall be as follows: Grant Disbursement = Bills Approved * (Approved Cost) (Approved Costs + 80% of Differential Cost) Thus, in essence, Bidder would have to apply his part of funds in parallel.
Additional Capital Funds for Sanitary Landfill GMC understand the need for development of additional cells in sanitary landfill after exhaustion of phase-I of landfill. To support the GWMCL, GMC shall provide additional support for development of additional cells of sanitary landfill. The bills / invoice for such additional amount shall be raised by GWMCL along with monthly Tipping Fees statement and GMC shall release the payment along with same.
2.3.7 Project Structuring (PPP)

1. The Project has been structured in PPP format. 2. Accordingly, a SPV with the name Guwahati Waste Management Company Private Limited (GWMCL) has been set up to develop the project structure. The successful developer has to acquire the equity holding of the SPV, GWMCL for implementing the Project 3. GMC shall lease the Site to GWMCL at a nominal lease rental [of Re. 1/- per square meter per annum] for the Term for which GMC shall execute the Land Lease Agreement with GWMCL together with the execution of Concession Agreement. The lease rental shall be paid in advance for a period of Three years by GWMCL .The lease rental shall remain fixed for the entire Term and shall not be subject to any escalation. 4. The different fractions of MSW are to be processed through composting plant, Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) Plant and Power Plant and the inert are to be disposed off in the Sanitary Landfill Facility (SLF). 5. Bidding Parameter Lowest Evaluated Levellised Power Tariff (Tariff based bidding process for procurement of Power on Long Term Basis from Integrated MSWM Project) For the RDF plant & Power Plant portion, there will not be any grant component and recovery of capital and operational expenses is through sale of power at the rate arrived upon subsequent to the Bidding parameter.
25
6.
However, for the other project components, sources of revenues are well defined as follows: a. Door-to-door segregated collection of MSW: Capital Grants funding under JnNURM and service charges from households in line with policy formulated by GMC; b. Transportation: Capital Grants funding under JnNURM and fixed Tipping fees (Rs. 130 per Ton of MSW with 4% escalation every year) from GMC in line with Concession Agreement finalized with GMC; c. Processing: Capital Grants funding under JnNURM for composting, however, developer to fund the entire capital requirement for RDF and power plant. Revenues would be from sale of Compost as well as power. d. Disposal: Capital Grants funding under JnNURM
2.4
Procurement Process
Exhibit 2.5 below outlines the key milestones achieved during the procurement process:
Exhibit 2.5 Key Procurement Milestones for Selection of Preferred Bidder in Guwahati City
Key Dates Bidding Process October 15, 2007 November 28, 2007
Key Bid Process Milestones Two-stage bidding (Bidder with Lowest Tipping Fee per MT from Authority) Publication of Expression of Interest (EOI) EOI Submission Date (Application Fee INR 10,000)
14 EOIs were received in the First Stage February, 2008 RFP Bid document sale (@INR 15,000)
Total 9 firms were short-listed for Second Stage March, 2008 Pre-bid meeting
Only Financial Bid Evaluation in Second Stage of Bidding April 18, 2008 October 29, 2008 Bid Submission date Concession Signing date
2.4.1 First Stage Pre-application criteria

1. Financial Criteria: Minimum average annual turnover of Rs 20.0 Crore in last three financial years; AND Minimum average net worth of Rs 10.0 Crore in last three financial years; AND Profitability in the last three years.
26
2. General Infrastructure Criteria As developer/contractor in last 5(five) years Implementation experience in BOT/EPC/Self owned basis of at least one project (including ongoing) of minimum of Rs 15.0 Crore in the Infrastructure sector in last five years. In case of ongoing projects, minimum of Rs 15.0 Crore threshold investment on the date of submission of EOI has to be certified through a Statutory Auditor; AND Infrastructure sector would include amongst other MSW, Roads, Bridges, Canals Housing, Water, Sewerage, Drainage, Transportation etc.
2.4.2 Second Stage Bid Evaluation

1. Step I: Responsiveness Check The Non-Financial Bids submitted by Bidders/ Bidding Consortium shall be initially scrutinized to establish Responsiveness. Subject to Clause 2.14.3, any of the following conditions may cause the Bid to be considered Nonresponsive, at the sole discretion of the Procurer/Authorised Representative Bid not meeting any of the conditions mentioned in the Bid documents; or Applicable Board Resolutions, not being submitted; or Bid not accompanied by a valid Bid Bond; or Bid not accompanied by a demand Draft of Rupees 15,000/- towards the RfP fees; or Bid not signed by authorised signatory in the manner and to the extent indicated in this RfP; Non submission of Power of Attorney; or Bid validity being less than that required as per RfP documents; or Bid not containing Bidders Undertakings as per formats in the RfP document; or Bid being conditional; or Any request for change in composition of a Consortium or change from Bidding Company to Bidding Consortium or Change in Ownership has not been permitted by the Procurer/ Authorised Representative. Bids having Conflict of Interest 2. Step II: Evaluation of Financial Bids Computing Levellised Tariffs The Quoted Tariffs (Rs. Per kWh) of each of the Bidders for each Contract Year for the term of EPA, shall be discounted up to the assumed commissioning date of the entire Contracted Capacity mentioned in next point below, by applying the discount factors and such aggregate discounted value for the term of the EPA shall be divided by the sum of such discount factors so as to calculate the Levellised Tariff of each Bidder; The Levellised Tariff shall be calculated by assuming uniformly for all Bidders that entire Contracted Capacity has been commissioned on the date which is COD of the Project. The
Bidders are required to quote tariffs for a period of 20 years from COD of Unit. For the purposes of actual payment, the tariff for the Contract Years beyond the 20 years from the COD of the Unit shall be the Quoted Tariff of the 20th year from the COD of the Unit with applicable escalation; The discount rate for levellised tariff shall be the rate notified by the CERC applicable on
the day which is seven (7) days before the Bid Submission Date 3. Step III: Successful Bidder Selection The Levellised Tariff calculated shall be ranked from the lowest to the highest and the Bidder with lowest Levellised Tariff shall be declared as the Successful Bidder and the Letter of Intent shall be issued to such Successful Bidder.
2.4.3 Selected Bidder and Financial Offer

Finally, M/s Ramky Enviro Engineers Ltd was the preferred bidder and the final per unit of power was INR 4.00
2.4.4 Financial Structure of the Project

Total Project Cost Rs 102.0 Crore Grant under JnNURM Scheme (70% of Approved DPR project cost) Rs 36.24 Crore Capital investment by Private Player Rs 65.66 Crore
2.4.5 Key obligations of GWMCPL

Bid Security of Rs 1.0 Crore to be submitted along with Bids. Performance Bank Guarantee Rs 5cr along with LOI acceptance; reduced to Rs 2.5cr after COD. Supervision Fee to IDCAL2 for period start from construction till the COD; 1% of landed project cost. Weighing of MSW at processing site/ landfill site. Sale and/or Distribution of compost/mature & energy and other recyclables. Ensuring maximum inert disposal of < than 30% (of input waste at transfer station) in the land fill Pay annual land lease rent Rs 1 per sq. m of land provided on lease by GMC, effective from COD
IDCAL Infrastructure Development Corporation of Assam Limited, Project Management Consultant JV of IL&FS and Government of Assam Volume II Case studies of PPP projects 28
2.4.6 Key obligations of GMC

Timely manner grants for approvals, permissions and authorizations to concessionaire GMC shall pay tipping fee of Rs 130 per ton of waste for transportation with 4% annual escalation GMC shall be responsible for Post Closure activities related to the Landfill site after its closure
2.4.7 Key features of GMC BOOT concession agreement

i. Event of Default GWMCPL Failed to achieve Date of Commissioning beyond 90 days of the expiry period. Failed to make any payments to GMC and more than 60 days have elapsed of such default In breach of any obligations under the agreement and not remedied for more than 60 days Equity holding is not in line with the clauses in the concession agreement
ii. Event of Default - GMC Material Breach of any obligations under agreement & not remedied for more than 60 days Unlawfully repudiated the Agreement or otherwise expressed its intention not to be bound by the Agreement. iii. Termination Payment for Force Majeure Event Non-Political Event, GMC shall pay 90% of debt due less insurance for assets under operator Indirect Political Event, GMC shall pay 110% of the Adjusted Equity Political Event, GMC shall pay in case of GMC Event of Default Termination before COD, Payment = Debt due + 120% of Equity by operator till termination Termination after COD, Payment = Debt due +150% of adjusted value of Equity on termination
29
3.
3.1
Processing and Sanitary Landfill Bangalore

Bangalore City an overview
Bangaluru, the Capital of Karnataka, is the fifth largest metropolitan city in the country. Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) was established in 2007 after the amalgamation of surrounding areas with erstwhile Bangalore Mahanagar Palike (BMP). It is well known nationally and internationally as a destination of choice for IT/ITES and Biotechnology sectors. Bangaluru grew at a much faster decadal rate of 37.7% compared to aggregate population growth rate of 17.25% in the country (1991-2001), and the population of City increased from 41.30 lakh to 56.86 lakh. Bangaluru is situated in the southeast of Karnataka, at an average elevation of 920m above mean sea level and is positioned at 12.97oN, 77.56oE. Exhibit 3.1 below shows the population growth and illustrates sharp spurts in population growth in the decades 1941-51 and 1971-1981. The population forecast estimates by BBMP indicate that the population will be around 95 lakh in 2013, around 250.5 lakh in 2037, and will cross 370 lakh by 2047. The main decisionmaking body of BBMP is the Council, comprising elected representatives, while the administrative wing headed by the Commissioner looks after the day-to-day operations. Further, the City is divided into eight Zones comprising 198 wards. BBMP manages delivery of SWM services in all 198 wards which falls under its limits. The distribution of total population of around 65.95 lakh and total number of households of around 25.18 lakh in each of the eight zones are tabulated as shown: Exhibit 3.1 Population & Households in various Zones in Bangalore City
30
As per the 2001 census, the slum population in the BBMP area was 4.3 lakh, and the total number of slums was 542. The key population indicators as per the 2001 census indicate the literacy rate of 86% and the sex ratio of 906 in the City.
3.2
Municipal SWM system in Bangalore

The Solid Waste Management department of BBMP is headed by Deputy Commissioner (Health). The key officials include Engineer-in-Chief, Executive/Assistant/Environmental Engineer. They are assisted by Environmental Officers & Health Inspectors in discharging solid waste management services effectively in their respective zones. There are 100 Environmental Officers and 200 Health Inspectors handling the supervisory portions. Furthermore, BBMP employs around 4,300 employees including supervisors and operators (poura karmicas). Exhibit 3.2 below summarizes the BBMP manpower involved in the MSWM activities other than the outsourced contracts: Exhibit 3.2 BBMP Manpower for provision of SWM services S. No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BBMP Employees Departmental Head Deputy Commissioner, Health Engineer-in-Chief SWM department Assistant & Environmental Engineer Environmental Officers Vehicle Divers/ CO-drivers Health Inspectors Supervisors & Operators (poura karmicas) Quantity (nos.) 1 3 34 64 200 200 4300
Source: BBMP

The MSW generation in the City, estimated by the Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (herein after BBMP) is around 3,500 TPD, with 85 per cent (~3,000 TPD) waste collection efficiency. The CMC has set up automated weighing system at all integrated processing & disposal sites to capture vehicle entry linked with central server, which records the total MSW collected in the City and the break-up of waste generators is as follows: Exhibit 3.3 Sources of Waste Generation in Bangalore City S. No 1 2 Types of Waste Generators Households Markets & hotels Estimated quantity of MSW generated (TPD) 3,150 158
31
Commercial establishments/offices Total
192 3,500 Source: CDP for Bangalore City
The City Development Plan estimates the quantity of waste generation of around 5,000 TPD by the year 2031, based on the population growth forecasts and the per capita waste generation estimates of approximately 400 gm/day. Further, the estimated physical composition of MSW generation in the City is as below: Exhibit 3.4 Physical Composition of MSW generation in Bangalore City S. No 1 2 3 Type of Waste Biodegradable Recyclable Inert/Reject Weight per MT 1,645 1,120 735 Percentage 47% 32% 21%
3.2.3 Identification of Service Delivery Gaps MSWM system

i. Source segregation mostly segregation of recyclable waste is partially practiced by households/commercial establishments for sale to kabadiwalas (waste purchasers). Rest of the recyclable material is disposed of by the residents along with domestic waste in a mixed form. The compliance in regard to segregation of recyclable waste was reported to be around 10.0 per cent. ii. MSW Collection At present, this activity is jointly taken care by BBMPs employees as well as through Contractors. BBMP employs about 4,300 employees (including Supervisors and Poura Karmicas). Apart from this, around 80 contractors with 11,300 employees are involved in Collection and Road sweeping activities. This includes 400 people, belonging to several SHGs, still continuing as Contractors who were previously working in outside areas of BMP. In the core area representing BMP, around one-third packages (~16 nos.) are operated & managed by BBMP itself, and rest two-third packages (~32 nos.) are being outsourced to private service providers. The compliance rate for primary collection in the BBMP area is around 85 per cent. iii. Street Sweeping The Corporation has a road length of around 1,400 km and BBMP has undertaken cleaning of most of the streets on a day to day basis. Most of the streets are cleaned daily or on alternate days and very few streets in low density areas are covered less frequently. The compliance rate of this activity was around 77 per cent.
32
iv. Secondary Storage In the Core area representing BMP, secondary collection involves compactors and is being outsourced to contractors having around 68 compactors. However, non-core City areas use dumper containers of 2 Ton capacity as part of Secondary system. In total, BBMP possess 120 dumper containers and 29 dumper placers as outlined in the table. v. Waste Transportation The BBMP has got 68 owned tippers other than 88 hired vehicles to supplement them. Additionally, contractors use around 313 tippers as part of the existing contracts involving waste transportation. The BBMP has installed GPS system in the transportation fleet which helps in locating the vehicle as well as to deploy them to places of requirement thereby improving its utilization and turnaround time. The processing facility at Doddaballapur, located at 70 km from the City, had led to issues with contractors in transporting long distances. This has been overcome now with dumping in temporary sites and then transferring through a fleet of bigger vehicles by another vendor. This initiative of BBMP has also resulted in substantial saving in transportation costs by using less number of vehicles. The table below outlines the infrastructure for collection & transportation of MSW owned and outsourced by BBMP: S. No 1 2 3 4 Description Tipper Vehicles Dumper Placer Compactors Mechanical Sweeper BBMP owned 68 29 Nil NIL 68 6 Contracted 313 by contractors; and 88 Hired
Source: BBMP vi. MSW PROCESSING & DISPOSAL FACILITIES The Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) had one compost plant at Haralakunte on Hosur Road, managed by the Karnataka Compost Development Corporation (KCDC) and had an installed capacity of 300TPD. However, this plant is not operational due to obsolete technology and equipment, which date back to the start up of the plant in 1976 using a design provided by WHO, which is unsustainable now. The plan is to set up a new 300 TPD modernized plant at the site adjacent to the existing site. Moreover, KCDC is not using the old site for aerobic composting as it is fully occupied by a waste pile more than 10 m high covering an area approximately 100m by 170m that was deposited there by BBMP in October 2005 when a late monsoon prevented the Corporation from accessing
the municipality landfill sites. Additionally, there was recent public litigation against the operations of the plant as the site is now within the city limits. The total MSW generation in the City during 2003-04 was around 1,700 TPD and the processing was done for only 300 TPD, even this facility was not reliable to obsolete technology and recent public litigations. The Compliance rate for MSW processing was around 5 per cent only and for scientific disposal it was almost zero. As highlighted above, BBMP was having capacity to handle part of the MSWM services including Collection & Transportation, and Sweeping activities. However, significant capacity & financial constraints was holding back BBMP to implement crucial MSW component of MSW Treatment, Processing and Scientific Disposal.
3.3
Integrated Processing and Disposal system PPP format
3.3.1 Project Need and contours

To strengthen the areas of waste processing & scientific disposal of MSW using sanitary landfill sites, BBMP started a series of initiatives to involve private sector participation in integrated processing & disposal facilities. Following section dwells on the 3 (three) projects floated on BOT format between the year 2003-2008. 1. The first Integrated MSW Processing with development of engineered landfill site at Mavallipura with treatment capacity of 600 TPD was mooted in the year 2003 on BOT format. The technology for the project was specified as Aerobic Composting in line with the Detailed Project Report (DPR) prepared with an estimated project cost of around Rs 10 crore. The concession period for the project was of 15 years and was awarded to M/s Ramky Infrastructure on August 2004, following two-stage open competitive bidding process. 2. Simultaneously, another similar project of 1,000 TPD capacity was initiated on separate technology platform of Waste to Energy at Mandur Site for waste processing and power plant on BOT format. The estimated project cost for the facility was of Rs 70 crore and the concession period is of 33 years. The project was awarded to M/s Srinivas Gayatri Reource Recovery Limited (SGRRL) on November 2004, following a two-stage open competitive bidding process. 3. Recently, another integrated processing & engineered landfill facility of 1,000 TPD capacity on BOT format was awarded to M/s Terra-Firma Bio Technologies Limited on May 2008, following a twostage open competitive bidding process. The technology for the project included conversions of MSW to compost using vermin-composting, conversion to power using Bio-methanation and also conversion to bricks with an estimated project cost of Rs. 32 crore. The project has concession period of 20 years. The Exhibit 3.5 below summarizes the project components of 3 (three) Integrated Processing & disposal facility projects:
Exhibit 3.5 Project Components for three processing & disposal projects on PPP in Bangalore Mavallipura Site Integrated processing and Sanitary Landfill Ramky Infrastructure Private Ltd BOT Rs 10 Crore 15 years 600 TPD 2003 11th August 2004 45 acres Aerobic composting Rs 218 on rejects to SFL 50% Domestic Competitive Bidding No support Mandur Site Waste to Energy Project Srinivas Gayatri Resource Recovery Ltd BOT Rs 70 Crore 33 years + 15 years (Post Closure Period) 1000 TPD 18th December 2002 12th November 2004 35 acres Waste to Energy Rs 189 on rejects to SFL 14.86% Domestic Competitive Bidding Rs 4.5 cr for RWH under SFC grant MNES funds Compound wall & approach road constructed by BBMP Doddaballapur Site Integrated processing and landfill facility Terra-Firma Bio Technologies Ltd BOT Rs 32 Crore 20 years 1000 TPD January 2008 May 2008 102 acres Integrated system Rs 66 on rejects to LF 15% Domestic Competitive Bidding Mobilization advance of Rs 1.75 cr at PLR of SBI + 0.5% service charges to the operator. 50% of the monthly tipping fee payable will be adjusted towards recovery of the above said Mobilization Advance.
Project Name Private Operator Type of PPP Estimated Project Cost Concession period Project Capacity Date of Bid invitation Date of Award Area of Facility Technology used Tipping fee/MT (current) Max reject to SFL (input %) Mode of Award Amount of Govt. support and its type
35
Other Govt. Support
Land lease on annual rental of Rs 1 per sq meter
Source: Interactions with BBMP officials
Land lease on annual rental of Rs 1 per sq meter Exemption from wheeling & banking charge
Land lease on annual rental of Rs 1 per sq meter
3.3.2 Compliance Rate Improvement & Bottlenecks:

The Mavallipura site project of 600 TPD for composting awarded to M/s Ramky Infrastructure limited in the year 2004 has faced a crucial issue of LAND PROCESSION. The Autority (BBMP) at the time of award of the Project was obliged under contractual agreement to provide 100 acres of land free of encumbrances to the Private Operator for development of integrated composting and sanitary landfill facility. However, the Authority could provide only 50 acres of land, as there was public litigation (from farmers) against procession of land area. Currently, the remaining 50 acres of land is under High Court stay. Furthermore, out of 50 acres finally allotted to Private Operator, around 4 acres was utilized for setting up of power lines and related activities by ULB department, leaving only 46 acres of land finally with the Private Operator to develop the facilities. As a result of this, currently only 250-300 TPD is being processed against the contracted quantity of 600 TPD. However, the private operator is accepting 600 TPD at the integrated facility and disposing around 300 TPD without treatment to the landfill site. The Exhibit 3.6 depicts the compliance rate for MSW Rules in the BBMP area after implementing 3 (three) integrated processing and disposal facility projects.
Exhibit 3.6: Compliance rate improvement in SWM services after PPP projects
100% 90% 77%
90%
80% 70% 60% 50%
85%
64%
40%
30% 20% 10% 0% 10%
35%
5%
1%
Source: Interactions with BBMP officials
36

MSW segregation at the processing facility Construction & development of MSW compost facility in line with approved DPR provided; Construction & Development of Sanitary Landfill and O&M in line with MSW Rules & DPR; Post closure maintenance of sanitary landfill for 15 years after the Term of concession The section below outlines the contractual arrangement between BBMP and private operator for development of integrated processing & disposal facility of 600 TPD at Mavallipura Site on a concession of 15 years
3.4
Procurement
Exhibit 3.7 below highlights the key milestones achieved for selection of preferred private operator: Exhibit 3.7 Key Procurement Milestones for Selection of Preferred Bidder in Bangalore City Key Dates Bidding Process Mar06, 2003 Apr30, 2003 Nov11, 2003 Nov18, 2003 Aug18, 2004 Key Bid Process Milestones Two-stage bidding (Bidder quoting lowest financial parameter was selected) Request for Qualification (RFQ) Publication Date Application Submission Due Date (Application Fee INR 2000) Bid Submission Due Date Financial Bid Opening Date Concession Agreement Signing Date
As outlined above, CMC followed two-stage bidding process and the complete process of engaging a private developer for ISWM was completed in about one and a half years, which reflects the need for capacity building in the initial years of successful PPP interventions in similar projects
3.4.1 Pre-Qualification Criteria

1. Financial Criteria: Minimum annual Net worth of Rs 5.0 crore at the end of the most recent financial year; [all parties combined must meet criteria, lead member must meet 50% & others 25%]; AND Minimum aggregate net cash accruals of Rs 5.0 crore over the last 2 (two) financial years (all parties combined).
37
2.
General Infrastructure Criteria (similar work in SWM) The Applicant must satisfy any one of the following Qualification criteria for experience: Operating and maintaining a Compost Plant handling at least 25,000 tonnes per annum of raw waste for each of the last two completed financial years; or Operating and maintaining a Compost Plant having at least Rs. Seventy Five lakh (Rs.75 Lakh) as revenues from sale of compost for each of the last two completed financial years; or Operating and maintaining a landfill handling at least 12,500 tonnes per annum of input waste for each of the last two completed financial years; or Certified billings of at least Rs. One Hundred lakh (Rs.100.0 Lakh) towards earthwork for each of the last two completed financial years; or Experience in collection and transportation of at least 25,000 TPA of waste for each of the last two completed financial years. In case of Consortium, the operator should satisfy any one of the Qualification criteria for experience as stated above.
3.4.2 Bid Evaluation Criteria

1. Technical Criteria: The bidders will be evaluated against a total score of 100 by Committee as below. Any Applicant who scores 70 and above against the total marks of 100 will be deemed to be qualified for the technical capability criteria: S. No 1 2 3 Criteria Approach & Methodology for project implementation Details of Professionals Implementation Schedule TOTAL Marks 50 Marks 30 Marks 20 Marks 100 Marks
2. Financial Criteria the financial proposals of technical qualified bidders to be opened. The Bidder quoting the Lowest Tipping Fee per MT of inert waste (payable by the Authority)

M/s Ramky Infrastructure Limited was selected on Lowest Financial Offer Basis and the Financial Offer was Tipping Fee of Rs 198 per MT of inert disposed to the landfill (Maximum permissible inert to the landfill is 50% of the input waste). The total project cost was estimated at Rs 10.0 crore.
3.4.4 Key Obligations of Private Operator

i. Performance security of Rs 50 lakh; valid for a period of 24 months from the Appointed date ii. Weigh the MSW (input) at the entry point & final rejects to landfill at exit point of project site
iii. iv. v. vi. vii. viii. ix.
Minimum MSW acceptance of 600 TPD, may decline in excess of 600 tones on any given day. Waste Non-acceptance penalty = Wt * TR * 0.5 (Wt= waste not accepted, Tr= tipping rate) Minimum Capacity of 400 TPD for processing facility in a max. area of 15 acres. Free to sell compost/recyclable/ power after processing; supply 500 TPY compost FOC to BMP Pay all taxes, duties and outgoings, including utility charges relating to the project facilities. Endeavor to obtain Carbon Credits to be shared in the ration of 50:50 with BBMP. All fees to Project Engineer to be borne by Concessionaire only.
3.4.5 Key Obligations of BMP

i. BMP shall at its risk and expense, supply to the processing facility an aggregate quantity of MSW = 400 * D tones (Assured waste quantity), D = no. of days in such month; failing which ii. BMP shall compensate at the rate of 20% of tipping fee rate for each tonne of shortfall. iii. Declare & maintain a no development zone around the site in accordance with applicable law iv. Endeavour not to supply construction debris, biomedical/hazardous waste (no penalty clause) v. Endeavor to assist the concessionaire in obtaining finances from the FIs for the project
3.4.6 Key Features of BOOT concession agreement

i. Tipping Fee to the Concessionaire BMP shall pay the Tipping Fee = TR*WLF (WLF = rejects to landfill, TR= tipping fee per tonne) Increment in the Tipping Fee rate per tonne after a block of every three years as below: Year From COD to March 31, 2009 April 1, 2009 to March 31, 2012 April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2015 April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2018 April 1, 2018 to March 31, 2021 April 1, 2021 to March 31, 2024 April 1, 2024 to March 31, 2027 Tipping fee rate per tonne (in Rupees) 198 218 240 264 290 319 351
ii. Mechanism of Payment BMP shall, within 15 days from the receipt date of fee statement; Pay to the concessionaire an amount equal to 85% of the total amounts payable; Pay into Post closure performance account an amount of 15% of the total amount payable iii. Post Closure Performance Account (PCPA) The concessionaire shall be eligible to receive at the end of each year, during active operations period, an amount equivalent to two-thirds of the amount accrued in the PCPA during that year, subject to the concessionaire furnishing of a bank guarantee of equivalent value. The PCPA amount shall be payable during Post closure period in 60 quarterly installments.
39
3.4.7 Risk Sharing between BMP and Private Operator

The key risks which need to be borne by the private operator and the BMP are stated in Exhibit 3.8 below:
Exhibit 3.8 Risk Sharing between BMP and Private Operator
S. No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Design Risk
Risks Commissioning Risk Operations Risk Financial Risk Payment Risk Performance Risk Change in law Risk Force Majeure Risk
Private Operator
CMC
3.4.8 Impact of PPP Projects

1. Asset creation of 2600 TPD waste processing with initial capital investment from Private operators leaving no strain on BBMP finances. 2. Compliance rate of MSW Rules for Processing & disposal has substantially improved (~65%) as shown in figure above. 3. Scientific monitoring of MSW with check on unauthorized dumping. 4. Capacity building at ULB level the two new PPP projects transactions on open competitive bidding were carried out with in-house capacity & capability in record 2 months duration.
3.5
Challenges and New Initiatives
1. Land acquisition is critical for the success of PPP project; as in Mavallipura project, BBMP could give ~50 acres of land against contracted 100 acres of land, resulting in compost processing of only 300 TPD against 600 TPD envisaged under the project. 2. Technology selection two new PPP projects of waste processing of 1000 TPD each, where conventional need of DPR was replaced with pre-feasibility report having broad project contours allowing operator flexibility on technology and focus on outcome based indicators rather than input based factors. 3. Early indicators of Tipping Fee reversal - BBMP has recently finalized two integrated processing & landfill BOT projects of 1000 tons each for which agreements are yet to be signed. Interestingly, winning bidder (Organic Waste India Ld.) of both the projects quoted negative grant, which means
private developer would pay Rs 27/- to BBMP for every ton of MSW supplied at their facility. Though, success of such transactions is still to be established. 4. Decentralized Processing System - BBMP is running a pilot compost processing project at Yelahanka site with a capacity of 15 TPD with an objective of i) curtailing the transportation costs of MSW to processing facilities, and ii) utilization of small land parcels available within the city limits, though the challenge of public litigations is a threat to such projects, which can be overcome with either a completely closed plants and stringent odor management system. 5. Information, communication and awareness programmes there is a pressing need for running structured awareness programmes to involve all stakeholders with focus on sharing new technologies and procedures for handling the SWM activities. For instance, stakeholders should be apprised of benefits of decentralized processing in terms of efficiency gains and lesser costs, with innovative alternatives like waste transporting at night in strictly closed vehicles. This to large extent would allay public apprehensions/ resistant to such projects.
41
4.
4.1
Processing and Sanitary landfill Coimbatore

Introduction to Coimbatore City
Coimbatore, the third largest city in Tamil Nadu is known as `The Manchester of South India as it houses numerous textile mills and small scale engineering units. Coimbatore became a municipality in 1886 when its area was just 10.88 sq km and was upgraded to Municipal Corporation in the year 1981 by merging some adjoining areas into municipal limit. Its area in 1981 became 105.6 sq km and its population went up to around 7.0 lakh. Exhibit 4.1 below outlines the population growth in last few decades. Further, the floating population estimated in the year 2001 was around 15 per cent of the total city population.
Exhibit 4.1 Population growth trend in Coimbatore City
Census year 1981 Population (nos.) 7,00,923 Decadal growth (%) 12.60 Source: Census of India, CDP Coimbatore
Population 1991 8,06,321 15.04
2001 9,30,882 15.45
The population projections analysis carried out in the CDP of Coimbatore estimates projected population of 1,288,387 and 1,670,967 in the year 2021 and 2037 respectively. The Municipal Corporation manages delivery of services in all 72 wards within corporation limits, covering an area of 105.6 sq. km. The City is divided into four Zones namely, North Zone, South Zone, West Zone, and East Zone with 18 wards each. The summary of density pattern is shown in Exhibit 4.2 below.
Exhibit 4.2 Density pattern in Coimbatore City
Range (Persons per sq. km.) Very Low 0 8,830 Low 3,000 10,000 Medium 10,000 15,000 High 15,000 25,000 Very High 25,000 45,000 Saturated 45,000 Source: City Development Plan, Coimbatore
Density pattern
Number of Wards Nos. 20 3 16 18 10 5
In 2006, it was estimated that 173 pockets of slum exist in the City with East Zone having the highest of 57 slums followed by 55 in North Zone, 39 in West Zone, and 22 in South Zone. In 2006, the City has 1,89,979 units of residential and non-residential properties, around 1,410 numbers of hotels & lodges, and another 15 vegetable & fruit markets.
4.2
Municipal SWM system in Coimbatore
4.2.1 SWM Department:

The Solid Waste Management department is headed by City Health Officer (CHO), who is responsible for all health programs and is assisted by assistant city health officer, medical officers, sanitary officers, public health inspectors & sanitary inspectors for discharging the MSWM functions effectively. The Supervisory staff includes: zonal sanitary officers (4 nos.), sanitary inspectors (36 nos.), and sanitary supervisors (39 nos.). Additionally, one assistant engineer has also been exclusively allotted to look after MSWM services & for technical engineering inputs and/or support. There are around 3,237 sanctioned posts of sanitation workers out of which 2,457 are permanent and 780 are temporary, out of these some members of the staff as under were deployed by the Municipal Corporation for various functions in relation to SWM other than street sweeping & DTDC:
Exhibit 4.3 Details on manpower for SWM services in Coimbatore City
S. No 1 2 3
Nature of Work Drain cleaning Toilet cleaning Waste Transportation Total
Number 111 74 360 545 Source: DPR on SWM for Coimbatore City
4.2.2 Quantity & Quality of Waste Generated:

The MSW generation estimated by the Coimbatore Municipal Corporation (herein after CMC) is around 600 TPD, with 90 per cent waste collection efficiency. The CMC has set up computerized weighbridges at its Vellalore landfill since April 03 and the break-up of waste generators are as follows:
Exhibit 4.4 Sources of Waste Generators in Coimbatore City
S. No 1 2 3 4
Types of Waste Generators Households Markets & hotels Commercial establishments/offices Industries Total
Estimated quantity of MSW generated (TPD) 328.00 181.90 36.81 17.23 563.94 Source: DPR on SWM for Coimbatore City
The Detailed Project Report estimated the quantity of waste generation of 730 TPD by the year 2011. Further, the estimated physical composition of MSW generation in the City is as below:
43
Exhibit 4.5 Physical Composition of MSW in Coimbatore City
S. No 1 2 3
Type of Waste Biodegradable Recyclable Inert/Reject
Weight per MT 433.95 31.30 98.69
Percentage 76.95 5.55 17.50
Source: City Development Plan, Coimbatore
4.2.3 Identification of the problem area MSWM system

i. Source storage though the CMC had not prohibited littering of waste on the streets, however, the corporation had already initiated educating the citizen to store the MSW at source by offering the service of door-to-door collection (DTDC) of waste. With the efforts around 55.19% households & 20.83% shops & establishments had started storing the waste at source as per CMC estimates. ii. Source segregation segregation of recyclable waste is partially practiced by
households/commercial establishments for sale to waste purchasers (kabadiwalas). Rest of the recyclable material is disposed of by the residents along with domestic waste in a mixed form. Recyclable waste is, therefore, generally found mixed with garbage in the domestic bins, on the streets in the municipal bins and at the dumpsites. The compliance in regard to segregation of recyclable waste was reported to be only 9.09%. iii. MSW Collection there are 155,201 households, 33567 commercial & industrial establishments, and around 1,121 institutional buildings in the city. System of primary collection of waste from the doorstep was introduced in around 43.96% households & establishments. The MSW DTDC was carried using bullock carts, /or handcarts. However, in absence of the facility of DTDC in the entire city, around 56.04% people continued to throw the waste on the streets, and drains. iv. Street Sweeping the Corporation has a road length of 686.5 km including concrete asphalt roads (629.50 km), non-asphalted roads (45 km), and roads having dividers (12 km). The corporation had undertaken cleaning of most of the streets on a day to day basis. Most of the streets are cleaned daily or on alternate days and very few streets in low density areas are covered less frequently. The compliance rate of this activity was around 72%. The sweepers are generally given 250 houses or 500 meters of road length in high medium density area and 750 meters in low density areas. v. Secondary Storage MSW storage depots were an eyesore in the city and there were variety of waste storage depots in the city: open waste storage sites (622 nos.), masonry bins (6 nos.), cement concrete bins (27 nos.), and metal containers (87 nos.). As highlighted, majority of waste depots were open sites where MSW was deposited by the sanitation workers causing unhygienic conditions and the overall compliance of MSW Rules in this activity was around 14.37%.The CMC had taken an initiative to set up transfer stations to minimize the transportation cost to the landfill site with identification of 4 (four) new sites for setting up of transfer stations at
Peelamadu, Ondiputhur, Satya Road, and Ukkadam. However, only 2 (two) sites were in operations but in unscientific & unhygienic manner. Other two transfer stations had become dumping grounds. vi. Waste Transportation The CMC had introduced containerized system & refuses collector machines for MSW transportation. The system of using large 2 MT containers was introduced without proper synchronization with the primary collection system. However, the transportation work was not carried out on all the days of the year and this lead to accumulation of MSW and consequent backlog. Further, the corporation was using many open vehicles for MSW transportation and therefore, the compliance of MSW Rules (covered vehicles) in this matter was only 53.92% though the transportation efficiency was 91%. Another issue was on the availability & vehicles quality, as most of the vehicles were more than 10 years old leading to frequent break-downs. The vehicles were used only in one shift and on an average they make three trips. Around 61 drivers were deployed for CMC departmental vehicles and another 130 bullock carts were used for DTDC system. vii. MSW Processing The CMC had no major facility for MSW processing except a single Vermi compost plant commissioned by a private sector with capacity of 20 TPD at "Vellalore" site. Other than this, the entire MSW of the city was disposed of untreated at the landfill site. The compliance of MSW Rules in regard to treatment of MSW was only 3%. viii. MSW Disposal The CMC has a large parcel of 643 acres of land to be utilized for dumping activity at "Vellalore" site. However, this land was not developed yet as an engineered landfill site, instead mixed waste from the city was haphazardly disposed of all over the site with no earmarking of site for waste disposal. As the waste was neither spread, compacted or covered leading to heaps of waste up to 3 meters. The estimates indicate that over 5 lakh MT of solid waste was lying at that site. Hence, the compliance rate with MSW Rules for development of a sanitary landfill was zero. Exhibit 4.6 below outlines the compliance rate of MSW Rules collectively in all 72 wards of the Coimbatore city prior to PPP intervention in the MSWM services:
Exhibit 4.6 Compliance rate of MSW Rules prior to PPP intervention in Coimbatore
Source: IMaCS Analysis Volume II Case studies of PPP projects 45
As evident from the chart, the Corporation has managed to achieve reasonable compliance rate with MSW Rules in areas like source storage, door-to-door-collection, waste transportation, and street sweeping. The private sector participation through service contracts for providing MSW secondary transportation was significant high, as around 50-70 per cent of the total MSW collected was disposed off by the private lorries. Exhibit 4.7 below highlights the private infrastructure for waste collection:
Exhibit 4.7 Private Infrastructure for waste collection in Coimbatore City
Type of Vehicle Private Lorries Bulk Refuse Carrier
Vehicles (nos.) 53 4
Avg. Capacity (MT) 3 4
Trips per day (nos.) 4 4
Total Capacity (MT) 636 64 700
Total Capacity
Source: Interactions with CMC Officials
Other than the private lorries & bulk refuse carrier, around 8 prime mover vehicles with 2 MT capacity and 4 JCB were also hired from private service provider for MSW activities. The rentals for private lorries and tractors cost around Rs 608 per trip and Rs 92 per trip respectively to the corporation. With all these contractual arrangements with private contractors for waste transportation and inhouse capacity, the CMC had fairly achieved compliance with the service level benchmark norms in majority of the MSWM activities. However, the major gaps persisted in waste processing and scientific disposal and in this regard the CMC took series of initiatives as outlined in the section below to meet the desired performance indicators:
4.3
Integrated Processing & Disposal New Initiative on PPP format
As per the DPR estimates, the entire MSWM system in the city would need an investment to the tune of Rs 96.51crore. As the Coimbatore city is a one million plus covered under JnNURM scheme, it is entitled to get 50% grants from Government of India, 20% grant from the state and funds the balance 30% of its own to avail the benefits. To bring in the capital investment from the private sector and obtain operational efficiencies, the corporation floated the idea of engaging private developer on suitable PPP format for 30% capital investment requirement, ideally to be funded by CMC in the MSWM system, other than the 70% grant from Central and State Governments.

MSW Transportation from the existing & proposed transfer stations to Vellalore site;
Establish transfer stations at specified 4 (four) locations and the O&M of the same; Procurement of Bulk Refuse Carriers for MSW transportation and the O&M of the same; Establish MSW processing using composting along with other suitable options and its O&M; Closure of existing waste dumpsites at specified 3 (three) locations in the city; Construction & Development of Sanitary Landfill and O&M of the same in line with MSW Rules
4.3.2 Incorporation of SPV & Minimum Equity Requirement

CMC formulated a Special Purpose Vehicle for implementing the Project. The Selected Bidder is required to acquire the entire equity of the SPV (SPV, a company) for project implementation; The aggregate equity shareholding of the Consortium members/Sole Applicant (as applicable), in the issued and paid up capital of the SPV shall not be less than 76% (Seventy Six percent) during the Construction Period and for 10 years following Commercial Operations Date (COD) and 51% (fifty one percent) during the balance remaining Operation Period; Additionally, in case of a Consortium, the Lead Member would commit to hold a minimum equity stake equal to 51% of the aggregate shareholding of the Consortium in the SPV at all times during the Concession Period.

The concession period is defined as 20 years from Commercial Operations Date (COD). Also Scheduled Project Completion Date is defined as 24 (twenty four) months from the Appointed date [concession signing date] or COD [date on which Independent Engineer issues the readiness Certificate] whichever is earlier.
4.3.4 Estimated Project Cost and JNNURM Funds

As per the approved Detailed Project Report, the total project cost is around Rs 69.68crore. The Bidder shall arrange for financing of any funds over & above 70% of approved DPR Costs related to the Project scope. CMC will make available up to 70% of the approved DPR cost related to the Project scope under JnNURM and terms of release of such funds are as follows: During Project Implementation the concessionaire shall submit monthly bills for completed activities, included in the DPR approved under JnNURM scheme, duly certified by the Independent Engineer for release of 70% of the certified amount by CMC. The Bidder is entitled to receive up to 10% of the total amount payable against submission of a Performance Bank Guarantee.
47
Additional Capital Funds for Sanitary Landfill CMC understand the need for development of additional cells in sanitary landfill after exhaustion of phase-I (approximately 5 years) of landfill. To support the concessionaire, CMC shall provide additional support for the same and such additional support shall be Rs 4.0crore during 6th year of the term of concession and increased at an annual rate of 5% without any compounding.
4.4
Procurement Process
The Exhibit 4.8 below outlines the key milestones achieved to select the preferred bidder:
Exhibit 4.8 Key Procurement Milestones for selection of Preferred Bidder in Coimbatore
Key Dates Bidding Process July 04, 2007 August 16, 2007 September 03, 2007 October 10, 2007 October 17, 2007 October 18, 2007 October 31, 2007 November 19, 2007 Key Bid Process Milestones Two-Stage bidding (Bidder quoting lowest financial parameter was selected) Request for Qualification (RFQ) Publication Date Application Submission Due Date (Application Fee INR 10,000 or USD 300) Request for Proposal (RFP) Issue Date Bid Submission Due Date Financial Bid Opening Date Government Clearance CPHEEO clearance Letter of Intent to Preferred Bidder Concession Agreement Signing
As outlined above, CMC followed two-stage bidding process and the complete process of engaging a private developer for ISWM was completed within 5 (five) months, which reflects efficiency and corporation involvement to a significant extent.
4.4.1 Pre-Application Criteria

1. Financial Criteria: Minimum average annual Net worth of Rs 25.0crore over the last 5 (five) years [all parties combined must meet criteria, lead member must meet 50% & others 25%]; AND Minimum average annual PBT of Rs 12.5crore over the last 5 (five) years (all parties combined).
2.
General Infrastructure Criteria (similar work in SWM) As developer/contractor in last 5(five) years One project with a value of at least Rs 50.0crore; OR
48
Two projects each with a value of at least Rs 25.0crore

1. Technical Criteria: The bidders will be evaluated against a total score of 100 by Committee as below. Any Applicant who scores 60 and above against the total marks of 100 will be deemed to be qualified for the technical capability criteria: S. No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Experience in BOT Project Experience in Infrastructure Project Experience in MSW sector Approach & Methodology for project implementation Details of Professionals Implementation Schedule Plan for project sustainability covering marketing aspects or sale of products/by-products TOTAL Criteria Marks 20 Marks 20 Marks 10 Marks 20 Marks 10 Marks 10 Marks 10 Marks 100 Marks
2.
Financial Criteria the financial proposals of technical qualified bidders to be opened. The financial proposal shall essentially consist of 3 (three) figures for every year during the term as follows: Royalty /or Tipping fees per MT of MSW for transfer station & transportation; Royalty /or Tipping fees per MT of MSW for processing & disposal; Royalty /or Fund need per year for maintenance activities for closure of existing dump sites. The bidders have to assume a discounting rate of 11.1% during each year of the concession period. Based on the discounting rate, the discounting factor shall be calculated for each year. The bidder needs to provide a final NPV of the Project for the Term of the concession agreement. (Bidders shall use positive sign for tipping fees and negative sign for royalty) NPV = Sum of Discounted Price for every year of concession period.
3. Selection Criteria The technical and financial bids will be given a weight-age of 30:70 respectively to arrive at a final score, which determines the preferred bidder.
49
In case of Technical criteria, the bidder who has scored the highest technical score will be assigned a score of 30; while remaining will get a score calculated as below:
Technical Score of Bidder = Technical marks obtained X
30 Highest Score
In case of financial criteria, the bidders will be grouped under Group A (Royalty) or Group B (Tipping Fees) and financial score under each group will be calculated as below: Financial Score of Bidder = Total NPV value X 70 Lowest Total NPV Value (absolute)
The consolidated scores of bidders under each group will be worked out separately by summing up their technical scores & financial scores. The bidders will be ranked & suitable bidder would be invited for negotiations. However, the actual payment of royalty / fees would be based on the yearly fees / royalty quoted by them and the NPV value would be used only for comparison of the bids.

M/s BEIL-UPL, a consortium formed between M/s Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Limited (BEIL) and M/s United Phosphorus Limited (UPL); and the Financial Offer (2008 quotes) included Tipping Fee for transportation of MSW Rs 440 per MT of MSW received at Transfer Station Tipping Fee for processing of MSW Rs 185 per MT of MSW received at Transfer Station Tipping Fee for land filling Rs 171.5 per MT of inert (max 25% of MSW to Transfer station) Funds for Closure of existing dumpsite Rs 45.0 lakh per year (for next 12 years)
4.4.4 Financial Structure of Project

Total Project Cost Rs 69.0crore Grant under JnNURM Scheme (70%) Rs 48.0crore (approx.) Capital investment by Private Player (30%) Rs 21 crore (approx) Debt-Equity Ratio 2.5:1 Equity Capital Rs 7 crore Debt Funding Rs 14 crore @13% interest rate
4.4.5 Key Obligations of Private Player

Bid Security of Rs 50 lakh to be submitted along with Technical Proposal. Performance Bank Guarantee of Rs 3.5crore to be submitted on or before concession signing.
All insurances to be purchased & maintained by due reinstatement, in respect of the project Weighing of MSW at Transfer Station(s) (for input MSW) & Landfill (for inert from processing). Sale and/or Distribution of compost/mature & energy and other recyclables. Ensuring maximum inert disposal of < than 25% (of input waste at transfer station) in the land fill Pay annual land lease rent of Rs 1 per sq. m of land provided on lease by CMC Shareholding commitments for consortium members aggregate equity in the SPV not < than 76% till 10th year following COD and 51% during the remaining term Shall make endeavor to obtain carbon credits for the project and net revenue obtained (net of expenses) are to be shared in the ratio of 25% and 75% between CMC and the concessionaire respectively.
4.4.6 Key Obligations of CMC

Capital cost for SFL after phase I (5 yrs) to the extent of Rs 4.0 crore per year with 5% annual increment Collect & Transfer MSW to the transfer station, except 50 TPD of organic waste for existing Vermi plant. Assured min. quantity of 360 TPD in 1st yr, then CMC will indicate in the 11th month every year. Segregation of waste, non-mandatory (no penalties) target to achieve and maintain within one year of COD 50% or more within two years of COD 70% or more within three years of COD 80% or more within four years of COD 90% or more Landfill requirement within 12 months upon operator request, in case available site falls short of need.
4.4.7 Key Features of BOOT Concession Agreement

i. Independent Project Engineer (PE) CMC at its own cost shall nominate the Project Engineer in 15 days from Concession Signing. Commissioner, CMC shall decide the need for replacement and appointment of new PE. ii. Weighing, Acceptance and Rejection of MSW The concessionaire to accept all MSW supplied by CMC & weigh at Transfer Station In case of Non-MSW, upon verification by PE, the Concessionaire shall not accept the waste. iii. Mechanism of Payment CMC shall pay within 30 days from the date of receipt of the Monthly Fee Statement CMC shall pay an amount =95% of the total amounts till 2 year prior to the end of Term CMC shall pay an amount =90% of the total amounts in the last two years of the Term iv. Payment from Post Closure Performance Account (PCPA)
51
At the end of the every 6 months the amount accumulated in the PCPA shall be payable against submission of a separate PBG of equivalent amount to be kept valid throughout the Term.
4.4.8 Risk Sharing between CMC and Private Operator

Exhibit 4.9 Risk Sharing between CMC and Private Operator
S. No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Risks Commissioning Risk Operations Risk Financial Risk Payment Risk Performance Risk Change in law Risk Force Majeure Risk
Private Operator
CMC
52
5.
5.1
Processing and Sanitary landfill Rajkot

Introduction to Rajkot City
Rajkot City has one million plus population (as per census 2001) and an area of 104.86 Sq.km. (RMC, 2009). It is one of the busiest commercial centres of Gujarat state after Ahmedabad. It had been the capital of the then princely state of Rajkot. Currently it is one of the most dynamic district headquarters of Saurashtra region. It is located in the middle of the peninsula of Kathiawar at 22.3N 70.78E. It has an average elevation of 134 meters (439 feet). The River Aji passes by the city dividing it into two regions. According to the 2001 district census, Rajkot had a total population of 10, 03,015 with a little higher percentage of males (52.43%) than females (47.57%). This includes areas within Rajkot Municipal Corporation and fringe areas like Manharpur, Madhapar, Anandpar, Munjka, Mota Mova, Vavdi, Bedi and Kotharia. The average literacy rate of the city is 80.6%; higher than the national average of 65.38% (census 2001). Rajkot has high variation in annual temperature range; from 240C to 420C in summer and 100C to 220C in winter; and has a tropical wet and dry characteristic. The city receives 620 mm of rain on average. The months from November to February are mild, the average temperature being around 20C, with low humidity. Rajkot is well connected through rail and its Railway Station is one of the most important junctions in Saurashtra. Rajkot Municipal Corporation restored city bus services through Public Private Partnership in 2007; by providing around 80 CNG buses plying on about 20 routes within the city and nearby suburbs. The city also envisages incorporating a Rajkot Bus Rapid Transit System (RBRTS) for improved public transportation within city. The city has a robust economy and boasts of decent numbers of heavy and small scale industries. These have been developed and supported by state initiative to boost states economy by developing industries under Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC) and Gujarat State Financial Corporation (GSFC). Some industrial products manufactured include bearings, diesel engines, kitchen knives and other cutting appliances, watch parts (watch cases & bracelets), automotive parts, forging industry, casting industry, machine tools, and software development. Rajkot is a coveted destination for developers of casting and forging industries across the world. Rajkot city is characterized by a pattern of multiple land uses. The total area developed for urban activities constitute 77% of the Rajkot Municipal Area. Of this urbanized area, 50% is used for residential, 20% for industrial and 2% for commercial land use purpose.
53
5.2
Municipal SWM system in Rajkot
Rajkot Municipal Corporation (herein after RMC) is one of the front runners in terms of a holistic solid waste management system as per the guidelines of MSW Rules 2000. The section below outlines the status of existing MSWM system in the city with insights into the successful waste processing project on PPP format.

The Rajkot City is divided into three zones that is, Central, East and West with total 23 wards. The central zone consists of the ward numbers 3, 4, 8, 9, 15, 19, 20 and 22. The east zone consists of the ward numbers 5, 6, 7, 16, 17, 18 and 23 and the west zones consists of the ward numbers 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 21. The existing organizational structure of RMC SWM department is shown in the Chart below. The SWM department functions under the RMC and exercises the powers vested to it by the BPMC (Bombay Provisional Municipal Corporation) Act, 1949.
Exhibit 5.1 Hieraachy Flowchart for the provision of MSWM services in Rajkot city.
The SWM department is headed by Municipal Commissioner in support with Deputy Municipal Commissioner and Environmental Engineer. Currently, the Environmental Engineer is further assisted by Dy. Environmental Engineers (3 nos.) and Asst. Environmental Engineers (7 nos.). The department has total 3 sanitary officers and 19 sanitary inspectors & 49 sanitary sub-inspectors. The sweepers are directly supervised by around 12 sanitary supervisors.
Exhibit 5.2 Details on manpower for provision of SWM in Rajkot
S. No 1 2 3 4 5 6
Staff Environmental Engineer Dy. Environmental Engineer Asst. Environmental Engineer Sanitary Officer Sanitary Inspector Sanitary Sub-Inspector
Quantity (nos.) 1 3 7 3 19 49 12
7 Sanitary Supervisor (Mukadam) Source: RMC
The details of sweepers under the private contractors that are currently working under SWM department are outlined in Exhibit 5.3 below. There are as many as 215 sweepers currently employed by private contractors in the city. They utilize simple equipments like wheel barrows (44 numbers) and tricycles (10 numbers) under implementation of SWM phase-1.
Exhibit 5.3 Details of manpower under private contracts for SWM services in Rajkot S NO Zone Wards Sweepers Permanent Part time Temporary Total Sanitary Inspector Sub SI Mukadam
CZ
3,4,8,915,1 9,20,22
1,298
30
39
1,367
20
2 3
WZ EZ
1,2,10,11,1 2,13,14,21 5,6,7,16,17 ,18,23
822 874 2,994
375 28 433
12 72 123
1,209 974 3,550
4 7 19
15 14 49
1 2 12
TOTAL Source: RMC

The MSW generation in the City, estimated by the Rajkot Municipal Corporation is around 300 TPD and table below highlights the various waste generators in the city:
Exhibit 5.4 Source of Waste Generation in Rajkot City
S. No 1 2 3
Types of Waste Generators Residential areas Market waste Construction & demolition wastes
Estimated quantity of MSW generated (TPD) Percentage (%) 83.85 6.58 6.09 Tons per Day 250.74 19.72 18.27
55
Trade/Institutional waste Slaughter house waste Total Source: CDP, Rajkot
4 5
3.50 0.25 100
10.52 0.75 300
Further, the estimated physical composition of MSW generation in the City is as below:
Exhibit 5.5 Physical Composition of MSW generation in Rajkot City
S. No Waste characteristics 1 Biodegradable 2 Recyclable 3 Inert/Reject Total MSW generation Source: DPR SWM, Rajkot
Weight per MT 180 15 105 1,421
Percentage 60% 5% 35% 100%

i. Collection of Waste It is estimated that around 80% of the total waste generation is collected in the city. Street sweeping is a primary activity comprising of solid waste collection from public streets and spaces. Sweepers traditionally use short-handled brooms, although efforts are made to promote use of long handled brooms. Considering average productivity of a sweeper, one sweeper covers approximately 3,000 square meters of open area. Accordingly each sweeper is assigned stretch of 300 meters, 500 meters or 700 meters depending on the density of population. The expected hours of service are from 6.30 to 10.30 in the mornings and from 3.00 to 6.00 in the evenings. The sweepers work on all the days of the year including Sundays and Public holidays. Two days in a week are half days to permit one statutory weekly off per week to the staff deployed. A special night sweeping (includes scrapping and brushing) operation is carried out on some prominent and busy roads of the city to provide more efficient service to the citizens. The night sweeping contract is awarded to five cooperative societies covering all three zones for a period of two years starting September 2007 on renewal basis. After the collection of waste is done for the desired areas including solid waste and recyclable materials, it is then transported to a location for its temporary storage. In the existing scenario it is the conventional style where waste is collected from the door-to-door system and from the community bins. There are certain commercial areas where the shops and/ or trade centres have a dedicated dustbin for collecting the waste. Hence, primary collection of waste to a large extent relies on street sweeping by Safai Karamchary. Community Initiative Rag picking is an informal income-generating activity undertaken by poor strata of society. There are currently about 2,500-3,000 numbers of rag pickers and 800 numbers of women members operating in the city to collect recyclable waste (RMC 2009). These rag
pickers are coordinated by volunteering organization called Sakhi Mandals. These are mainly driven by women also known as Sakhis. They segregate the waste at source that is the city roads while picking and collect up to 20 to 25 kilograms of recyclable waste daily. According to an estimate by RMC, 20 tons of waste getting recycled on a daily basis and thus, reduces amount of waste from reaching the landfill sites. An important aspect of this collection is that this is collected from the source itself and hence it is much better practice than rag picker collecting waste from bins and landfill sites. Currently, 32 sakhi mandals are operating and contract with 15 more mandals in the process. Each sakhi mandal comprises of nine sakhis and on an average four sakhi mandals are deployed per ward. Each sakhi covers approximately 250 households. Out of 2.50 lakh households in RMC domain, 78,000 households are covered by sakhi mandals. Approximately 48,000 households receives grant from RMC for door-to-door collection through their society. They manage their own collection and transfer to the nearest collection bins. Remaining households are currently covered by RMC staff. RMC is expecting a 100% door-to-door collection by the end of year 2010. Some of the distinct advantages of Sakhi Mandal programme observed are; It generates employment for rag pickers. It helps in segregating waste at source and reduces requirement for community bins. Sakhi Manadal extract recyclable waste thus reduces tonnage in transportation and waste to landfill. RMC, NGO and trusts are helpful in monitoring, operation and capacity building of Sakhi Mandal. Sakhi Mandal members are coming from EWS or slums, thus this program also results in upliftment of urban poor. Pre-transportation Waste collected through primary door-to-door collection and street sweeping is carried in the hand driven carts or wheel barrows which usually carry six numbers of containers of given capacity. The wheel barrows or hand driven carts can carry 6 such containers and currently there are such 3,669 wheel barrows in the city. The tri-cycles purchased for waste collection remains un-utilized as they are not having acceptance from the male workers and also due to fact that sakhi mandals are having women workers, and obviously it is not used by them. For collecting litter in public places, littering bins are provided across the city of two capacities; 33 litres and 55 litres each. There are 2,500 numbers of 33 litre capacity littering bins and 2,000 numbers of 55 litre capacity littering bins respectively. Over and above those mentioned already, there are Sanitary Marts for primary SWM in ward No. 1,11,12,13,21, 22b and 23b in form of contracted services. Sanitary marts are registered cooperative organization and consist of persons from traditional sweeper community. Currently they employ 375 fulltime sweepers and 421 part time sweepers as specified in their contract (RMC). This kind of agreement existed prior
to Rajkot becoming a Corporation from erstwhile Nagarpalika; which got replaced and came to be known as Sanitary Marts. ii. Waste storage It is estimated by RMC that about 80% of the households, shops and establishment keep bins at the source of waste generation for storage of waste. Rajkot Municipal Corporation has been placing dustbins /or street bins for the temporary storage of waste collected by the sweeper as well as for the citizens to depot their domestic waste. The waste carried in the handcarts is transferred to the stationary MS containers placed at every available corner. These containers are of two capacities; 4.5 and 8 cubic meters. There are currently 1,218 numbers of containers being used from which 1,143 are of 4.5 cum capacity and remaining 75 are of 8.0 cum capacity. iii. MSW Transportation In the first phase of transportation, the containers carrying waste is lifted by dumper placer trucks and carried to the transfer stations (2 nos.) closer to that locality. At transfer stations, 4-5 closed container load of waste is emptied into a bigger tipper which is taken for final transportation to waste processing plant and ultimately to land fill site. This has led to an estimated saving of about Rs 70.00 lakh per annum for RMC (RMC, 2006). Lifting of Closed Container is being carried out by RMC in coordination with private operators. Transfer station-1 (Bhavnagar Road) covers 55% of population and handles 62% waste. In 7 out of 13 wards attached to Bhavnagar road transfer station, secondary transportation work is privatized. It takes about 128 trips of dumper placer (4.5 cum) to transfer about 200 tons of waste. Out of 128 trips 85 trips (66.4%) are operated by private contractor and 43 (33.6%) by RMC Transfer station-2 (Gandhigram) covers the rest of 45% of total population and handles 38% of total waste. Around 113 trips of dumper placer (4.5 cum) make 130 ton waste for Gandhigram transfer station. Six out of ten wards attached to Gandhigram transfer station have private operators for secondary transportation and conduct about 77 trips (68.1%) and rest are carried out by RMC. The waste is transferred into higher capacity vehicles, that is, Tippers of 14.0 cum capacity at transfer station. The entire transportation work is privatised and paid on per weight basis to the contractor. About twelve trips originating from Transfer Station-1 handle around 200 tonnes of waste, and about eight trips from Transfer Station-2 haul 130 tonnes of waste daily.
Exhibit 5.6 Details on transportation fleet for SWM services in Rajkot City
S No 1 2 3 4
Type of vehicles Open Trucks Tipping Dumpers Tipper Trucks Dumper Placers
Capacity 7.5 MT 7.5 MT 3.0 MT 2.5 MT
Owned by RMC 2 8 6 19
Owned by Private firm 0 0 4 18

58
JCB
72 HP
4 8
0 0
6 Tractors-Trailers 2.0 MT Source: Solid Waste Department, RMC
iv. MSW Processing & Disposal Till 2005, there was no treatment of municipal solid waste (MSW) in the city and the processing of waste was not carried out by the Solid Waste Department of Rajkot Municipal Corporation. RMC was directly dumping the MSW in the landfill site situated at Manda Dungar, around 8 km away from the centre of city. RMC used to dump around 300 tons of MSW daily in the landfill site. In order to implement a systematic development of sanitary landfill site, RMC has identified new site at Nakrawadi, 15 kms from Rajkot city. The area of new landfill site is around 170 acres and the final design for sanitary landfill was prepared on the basis of soil investigation and Environmental Impact Assessment of the site.
5.3
Processing and Disposal on PPP format
5.3.1 Project Need and Innovative Initiative

The RMC realized the need for processing and scientific disposal of municipal solid waste in the city However, the following issues posed a serious challenge to the RMC officials in project development: Need for high initial investment for setting up of a waste processing facility; High operating & maintenance costs for running the processing facility; and Need to establish market linkages for sale of by-products like compost manure, pellets etc. Further, the success of sustainable waste processing plants was not very encouraging in the country. Considering all above mentioned issues relating to development of processing facility, RMC initiated efforts to develop waste processing plant on PPP format with selection of suitable private operator with desired technical and financial capability. To start with, on 20th March 01, RMC published an Expression of Interest (EOI) for processing and useful conversion of MSW in the city on BOOT format. After detailed scrutiny of proposals on welldefined evaluation criteria, finally on 28th February 03 suitability of Hanzer Biotech Energies Pvt Ltd (HBEPL) was considered. Later on 16th June 2003, Standing Committee Resolution was passed for the confirmation of the contract for the establishment of the waste processing plant. Exhibit 5.7 below summarizes the components of this waste processing facility on PPP format:
Exhibit 5.7 Project Components of Waste Processing on PPP format in Rajkot City
Project Name
Integrated Processing & Landfill at Nakrawadi site

59
Private Operator Type of PPP Estimated Project Cost / Capacity Concession period Date of EOI invitation Suitability of Hanjer Biotech Standing Committee Resolution Signing of Concession Agreement Handing over the land Construction of basic infrastructure Commencement of Bio-fertilizer section Commencement of Fluff Section Commencement of Eco-Brick section Plant became full fledged operational Area of Facility Technology used Tipping fee/MT (current) Max reject (input %) Mode of Award Other Govt. Support
M/s Hanjer Biotech Energies Pvt. Ltd BOT 300 TPD 30 years 20th March 2001 28th February 2003 16th June 2003 20th June 203 7th August 2003 11th June 2005 2nd July 2005 2nd March 2006 4th March 2006 21st April 2006 100 acres (25 acres for waste processing & rest for sanitary landfill development) Waste conversion to Compost, Green Fuel, Eco-Brick Rs 220/- per MT to HBEPL on 20% (max. 60MT) of the incoming MSW to processing plant 15% (no penalty) Domestic Competitive Bidding 12 hectares Land on lease for 7 years on annual rental of Rs 1 per sq meter.

MSW segregation at the processing facility Construction & development of MSW processing facility at the prescribed site; Operations & Maintenance of MSW processing facility; Transportation of inert/reject to landfill; Construction and development of landfill facility at the prescribed site.
5.3.3 Project Impact and Benefits

The waste processing plant at Nakarawadi site was developed and maintained by Hanjer Biotech Energies Pvt. Ltd and is operational since April 2006. This has resulted in improved compliance with MSW Rules for processing from zero prior to year 2005 to almost 80% as indicated in the graph below. The Exhibit 5.8 below depicts the compliance rate for MSW Rules in the RMC area after implementation of the project on processing and disposal on PPP format:
Exhibit 5.8 Compliance rate for MSW Rules in Rajkot City after PPP Intervention 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Source Segregation Primary Collection Street Sweeping Waste transportation Processing Before PPP Processing - Disposal - Before Disposal - After After PPP (2006) PPP PPP
90% 80% 80%
90%
80%
80%
0%
0%
5.3.4 Innovative Approach in Project Implementation

Exhibit 5.9 Innovative approach in project implementation in Rajkot
61
i. Process Involved The MSW supplied by RMC to processing plant undergoes segregation process, wherein the waste is segregated into four components namely; (i) wet organic waste, (ii) dry organic waste, (iii) recyclable waste, and (iv)inert material. The segregation is done owing to the material having specific gravity. The material is allowed to pass through conveyor belt wherein dry waste and wet waste is segregated as latter being heavier settles down. Then wet waste taken to further processing, while dry waste is segregated further into recyclable material, wherein metal and usable plastic is taken as scrap and sold for recycling. Wet waste comprises about 20 % to 30 % of total waste. Wet waste sprayed in the composting yard where heaps of waste is made and left for aerobic digestion. Regular spraying of water is done to enable speedy digestion. The heap is left for 40 days during which the waste is overturned manually regularly so as the aeration is achieved. After 40 days wet waste gets transformed into organic compost. Dry waste forms 30 to 40 % of waste which utilized for making green coal or fluff as it is commercially called. The results has been very encouraging and which has made this processing plant first of its kind in country. It is first of fully Integrated Waste Processing Plant. The entire waste of 300 MT of MSW is processed into; (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Bio Fertilizer: 40 MT, Fluff (Green Coal): 70 MT, Eco bricks: 15,000 nos. Recyclable: plastic metals & others.
ii. Sustainability to establish the by-product quality and acceptance in the market, initially HBEPL carried out experiments prior to start of project. After much experimentation HBEPL found that inert material if mixed with fly ash, would give binding and bricks could be made from it. Once the bricks were tested for compressive strength, water absorption etc., and found on the higher side then conventional burnt brick, HBEPL decided to go ahead with the idea of making bricks. The production costs of by products are compatible to their conventional counterparts. Initial results were very encouraging and there are many takers for the byproduct of the plant. For Bio-Fertilizer a sample container of 18,000 kg of Bio-Fertiliser was exported to Oman in October 2005.Now the entire compost is being sold to corporate clients including Reliance Industries at Jamnagar (Gujarat) and Reliance Energy at Dhanu (Maharashtra). Compost is also being used in appropriate mix with chemical fertilizer. This application has been approved by Gujarat State Fertilizer Corporation having advantages of reducing the cost and increasing the output. It is reported the yield increases to approximately 1.5 times. The production cost of compost is Rs 1.50 per kg. For Fluff (Green Coal) The dry organic waste is compressed into fuel fluff and the calorific value is very high compared to the other sources of fuel. The production cost of the fluff is also
very economic. It is just Rs 1.40 per kg. The Exhibit 5.10 below shows calorific value and commercial market value is as shown in table for various conventional sources of fuel.
Exhibit 5.10 Calorific value and commercial market for conventional fuels
Name of Fuel Source Coal Wood Fluff (Green Coal)
Calorific Value Kcal.kg 3600-4080 4060-6960 3700-4200
Cost per kg Rs 9.0 Rs 7-Rs 10 Rs 1.4
The fluff has high demand in the nearby paper plants and cement industries due to its high calorific value at reasonable price. The fluff could be used in combination of other source of fuel like coal, wood, natural gas etc., Presently Fluff is being sold to cement factory at Kodinar, Paper mills at Vapi & Paper mills at Kuwadwa. Gujarat Ambuja Cement has placed order for Fluff. Exhibit 5.11 below outlines the characteristics of the Green Coal produced at processing plant:
Exhibit 5.11 Characteristics of Green Coal produced at Rajkot Processing Plant
Moisture 10-12%
Ash 10-15%
Volatile Matter Sulfur content Fixed carbon 53.29% 0.28% 10.76%
Calorific value 3700-4200 kcal/kg
For Eco-Bricks The Eco bricks are utilized by HBEPL for construction work in their plant itself. The production cost of Eco Brick is Rs. 1.10 per unit, while the cost for normal burnt brick is Rs 1.40 per unit. The Integrated Waste Processing Plant at Rajkot is first of its kind which has utilized nearly 85% to 90% of waste and only leaves behind 10% to 15% of total waste as rejects.

M/s Hanjer Biotech Energies Pvt. Ltd was selected on Lowest Tipping Fee and the Financial Offer was Rs 220 per MT of waste (20% of the incoming MSW to processing facility /or 60 MT, whichever is lower).

Weigh the MSW (input) at the entry point & final rejects to landfill at exit point of project site Minimum MSW acceptance of 300 TPD, may decline in excess of 500 tones on any given day. Penalties include a. Penalty of Rs. 10 lakh in case of delay/failure to set up plant as per defined milestones.
63
b. Waste Non-acceptance penalty = WU *TR *0.5 (WU, is gap in MSW, TR is tipping fee) Entire liability of the equipments involved in Waste Conversion Processing Plant All by-products as output of the Waste Conversion & Processing Plant to be assets of HBEPL Marketing/sale of recovered products by-products, co-products and all the revenue generated would go to HBEPL. Entitlement to mortgage plant, machinery & structure.
5.3.7 Key Obligations of RMC

RMC shall at its risk and expense, supply to the processing facility an aggregate quantity of MSW = 300 * D tones (Assured waste quantity), D = no. of days in such month; with no penalty clause. To lease 12 hectares land for setting up of processing plant & warehouse facilities for 7 years.
5.4
Conclusion
1. Better Customized Technologies for screening and segregating of MSW into Wet waste and Dry waste is the need of the hour for better quality output like compost, refuse derived fuel, pallets, electricity, eco-bricks etc. As in the case of Rajkot processing plant, initial experiments leading to establishment of the by-products and their quality in line with market requirements has lead to sustainable operations with desired returns. 2. Authority capacity & commitment to deliver minimum assured/guaranteed waste to the processing plant is decisive in success of similar waste processing projects.
64
6.
6.1
Processing Jaipur
Introduction to Jaipur City
Jaipur, the pink city of India enjoys special status as a heritage city and spread over an area of 465 sq km. Amongst all the mega cities in the country, Jaipur ranks at 11 position with a total population of around 23 lakh. The total Jaipur region (Jaipur Development Area) has an extent of 1,467 sq km and comprises; (i) the Jaipur Municipal Corporation (JMC) that includes the walled city and the rest of the JMC, and (ii) rest of JDA area that includes the satellite towns and the villages. Table below outlines the area and population under JMC and JDA. As shown, in terms of share, 87% of the total population resides in the JMC area, of which 7% lives in the walled city. The Walled City has a spatial extent of only 6.7 sq km but houses nearly four lakh people.
Exhibit 6.1 Area and Population in Jaipur Region
The population of Jaipur city was only 3.0 lakh in 1951 but in 2001 it has reached 23 lakh. The walled city has the highest population density in the city at 58,207 persons/sq km. This is despite the fact that the density has declined from 1991 (74,000 persons per sq.km). The literacy rate in the city has grown from 58.5% in 1991 to 66.2% in 2001, which is above the national average of 65.4%. The city has a floating population of around 1 lakh people. It is estimated that the population will reach around 35.6 lakh in 2011 and 55.6 lakh in 2021. The slum population in the city has grown from 16% in 1971 to 31% in 1991. The total number of slums has increased from 109 in 1971 to 183 in
2004. However, the proportion of slum dwellers has declined. This is primarily due to the relocation of slums by the JMC to other areas in the JDA area. The largest proportion of slum dwellers is in Vidhyadhar Nagar Zone followed by Hawa Mahal East (that includes the walled city).
6.2
Municipal SWM system in Jaipur

The Jaipur City is divided into 8 zones and total 77 wards namely; civil line (13 wards), sanganer (7 wards), mansarovar (8 wards), moti doongri (10 wards), hawa mahal east (11 wards), hawa mahal west (7 wards), amer (4 wards), vidhyadhar nagar zone (17 wards). There are two separate wings in Jaipur Municipal Corporation. The executive wing is headed by one Chief executive Officer (CEO). Under his guidance the Public health and Public works and Mechanical (Garage) sections of JMC are responsible for the SWM system delivery. The responsibilities of public health and public works and mechanical sections towards SWM in Jaipur are given in Table below. However, the legislative wing is formed with elected ward councilors. The wing is headed by one Deputy Mayor. There are about 18 functional committees and 75 ward committees. However for SWM system delivery Health and Sanitation committee of the legislative wing take responsible actions. Public Health Public Works Mechanical (Garage) section of collected
Overall monitoring of comprehensive and Silt cleaning from Transportation complete sanitation Street sweeping and waste collection from markets and commercial areas, hotels & restaurants. Concentrate more or less on primary collection Waste collection from hospitals and nursing open drains wastes
Refuse vehicle operations & maintenance
homes and health aspects of the sanitation The public health section of JMC is headed by one chief health officer. The chief health officer is workers, sweepers assisted by five other health officers, eleven chief sanitary inspector, fifty-one sanitary inspectors (ideally one needed for each ward, hence, shortage of some 26 more people), 170 sanitary operators/jamadars, another 5,644 sanitary sweepers as permanent staff and around 925 sanitary sweepers on contractual basis. The detail staff strength of public health section is shown in Exhibit 6.2 below:
Exhibit 6.2 Manpower for provision of SWM services in Jaipur City
S. No 1 2 Zonal Commissioners
Staff Chief Health Officer /Health officers
Quantity (nos.) 8 1/5

66
3 4 5 6 7
Chief Sanitary Inspectors Sanitary Inspectors (ideally one for each ward) Sanitary operators/jamadars (permanent staff) Sweepers (permanent staff) Sweepers (contractual staff)
11 51 170 5,644 925
Source: Interactions with JMC officials The Garage section of JMC is headed by one executive engineer (mechanical) who is assisted by one assistant engineer each for the three JMC garages. Each assistant engineer is assisted by two junior engineers, mechanics, helpers, cleaners, welders, fitters, carpenters, drivers& operators. The total sweeping staff available with JMC is in the ratio of 1 per 470 persons (considering a population of 30.9 lakh within JMC boundary in 2006), which seems reasonable and in accordance with the prescribed norm of 1:500 in CPHEEO manual on SWM. Within the municipal area, some zones have been contracted out to the private contractors from the primary collection to waste disposal. They have their own sweeping staff, waste collectors and vehicles to transport the waste from the collection points to the disposal sites. In some selected pockets, NGOs has also been contracted out the work of house-to-house waste collection in a collective manner. One NGO named CDC is pioneer in this field and covers nearly 50,000 houses for provision of MSWM services.

The MSW generation in the City, estimated by the Jaipur Municipal Corporation (herein after JMC) is around 1,400 TPD. Exhibit 6.3 below outlines the discrete sources of MSW generators:
Exhibit 6.3 Sources of Waste Generation in Jaipur City
S. No 1 2 3 4 5
Types of Waste Generators Residential areas Commercial areas & Hotels Markets & slaughter houses Street sweeping Construction & demolition wastes Total
Estimated quantity of MSW generated (TPD) 850 282 68 104 116 1,421 Source: CDP, IMaCS analysis
The City Development Plan projects the quantity of waste generation of around 1,910 and 2,208 in the years 2016 and 2021 respectively based on the population growth forecasts and the per capita waste generation estimates of approximately 400 gm/day. Further, the estimated physical composition of MSW generation in the City is shown in Exhibit 6.4 below:
Exhibit 6.4 Physical Composition of MSW generation in Jaipur City
S. No 1 2 3 4 5 6
Waste characteristics Weight per MT Percentage Biodegradable 646 45.50% Recyclable 172 12.10% Inert/Reject 603 42.40% Total MSW generation 1,421 C/N ratio 43.29 ratio HCV (kcal/kg) 834 Kcal/kg Moisture (%) 21% Source: Waste Characteristics Report on 59 cities CPCB with NEERI

i. MSW Collection in areas under complete sanitation programme initiated by JMC, the primary collection of wastes are through (i) street sweeping and (ii) house-to-house waste collection. The private contractors deploy their own sweepers and door-to-door waste collectors. However areas covered under comprehensive sanitation programme, waste collection from households are arranged by private contractors but the street sweeping & drain silt clearing are taken care of by JMC. The collected waste is then deposited to storage bins /or in open storage points. However, the areas covered by JMC do not have a door-to-door waste collection facility. It is estimated that nearly 50,000 households (source: Jaipur CDP) has been covered by door-to-door collection. A NGO named CDC is involved in the door-to-door collection system. However, some Residential Welfare Associations (RWAs) in the city also arrange door-to-door collection in their society under JMC Swasta Mitra Apke Dwar programme. The MSW collected through this system are transported by the refuse vehicles. The nongovernment organizations (NGOs) who have been permitted to collect waste from households need to have at least Rs. 9,000/- as bank balance and JMC provides them one tricycle and one mechanized container. These organizations are allowed to take Rs. 20 from households and Rs. 25 from commercial areas. The zones and wards in which such system exists are: Ward numbers 3,7 and 20 of Civil Lines Zone; Ward numbers 14 and 25 of Sanganer Zone Ward numbers 9,10 and 68 of Vidyadharnagar Zone However, this is not a common practice in all the residential areas in the city. Further, the doorto-door collection system in the city lacks source segregation component and the waste is collected in a mixed manner. Also, in areas under complete sanitation programme, normally 1,000 running meter has been allotted to one sweeper for waste collection. However, in areas under the comprehensive and normal sanitation programme (covered by JMC) 700-800 running meter of sweeping is allotted to one sweeper. In all the cases, this norm is little on higher side as
compared to the norm prescribed in CPHEEO manual (which mentions about 500 running meter on an average). The sweeping time is in between 6 a.m. to 7a.m in the morning and 3p.m. to 4p.m in the evening along major roads. At the start of the shift, the attendance register of sweepers is maintained. However, with all such efforts only 65% i.e. 900 TPD of municipal solid waste is collected on a regular basis. ii. Secondary storage There are mixed type of storage facilities available in the city. Mechanized containers of 4.5 cubic meter capacity have been provided by JMC in Motidungri, Vidyadharnagar, Civil Lines and Sanganer zone. In addition to this, private contractors also provide their own containers at Hawamahal (east) and Hawamahal (west) zones. Furthermore, there exist many open waste collection points in the city. The percentage comparison of open collection points and containerized storage points is shown in following graph. From Figure shown, it can be considered that open collection points are higher in the Hawamahal (east) and Hawamahal (west) zone and on an average about 50% open collection points still exists in the city. In areas where open storage points exist the system of waste collection is through a manual /or multi-handling system, which degrades public health and environment and is not in conformance to MSW Rules. Waste collected through street sweeping is first stored manually, then is loaded manually to the refuse vehicles and then from the refuse vehicles to the disposal site it is again unloaded manually and finally wastes are segregated at the disposal site for the recyclables. Hence this lead to multi/manual-handling which is not in line with the MSW Rules. Moreover, no waste segregation (biodegradable parts from non-biodegradable) is practiced. In addition, wastes from industries and construction activities also get mixed with MSW. However, JMC has taken active role towards separate collection and treatment of biomedical wastes. The biomedical wastes are treated at a common treatment plant at Khori Ropara. iii. MSW Transportation municipal solid waste accumulated in the community containers are removed by refuse vehicles. The waste transportation in following zones and wards have been given to private contractors at rates indicated in Exhibit 6.5 below:
Exhibit 6.5 Waste transportation by private players in various zones of Jaipur City
S No 1 2
Zones (Wards)
Contractor Name
Tipping Fee per MT Rs. 250.80 per MT
HawaMahal East & Amer (44-52, 55-57) M/s R.K Yadav HawaMahal West (39-43, 53, 54, 58- M/s 61) Enterprise
Arihent Rs. 250.80 per MT

69
3 4
Civil lines (4,5,7,11,15,19) Mansarovar (13)
M/s B.S Transport M/s Ankur Transport
Rs. 250.80 per MT Rs. 739.31 per MT
Source: JMC officials Other wards except mentioned in Exhibit 6.5 above are managed by garage section of JMC, headed by one executive engineer with over 100 vehicles in working condition as shown in Exhibit 6.6 below.
Exhibit 6.6 Physical Infrastructure with JMC for MSW transportation
S No 1 2 3 4 5 6
Description Dozer Loader JCB Dumper Trucks/ Tractors Dumper Placer Compactors
Total Quantity (nos.) 2 6 15 10 / 16 43 20 4
7 Road sweeping vehicles Source: JMC officials
However, most of the vehicles with the municipality are over 5-7 years of age, which is a matter of concern and there is a serious need to replace these vehicles. Further, over 250 vehicles are available with private contractors and around 200 are utilized for MSW transportation. The waste carrying capacity considering both JMC and contractors vehicles is about 1,200 TPD considering 2 trips per vehicle per day and it is estimated that about 900 TPD of waste is actually transported to the designated disposal sites, hence, compliance rate of around 65%. iv. MSW Processing till 2007, there was no waste processing facility in the city and this component of MSWM was in complete non-compliance with MSW Rules in contrast with other well managed components like collection, transportation and sweeping in the MSWM value chain. v. MSW Disposal the city had disposal sites at Sewage farm and Jagatpura, which has been abandoned now. Following this, two more disposal sites at Sewapura in the North, Mathuradas pura in the East were developed. Due to proposed physical growth of the city, disposal site is not possible to be taken at the Western and North Western part of the city. Further, the southern part of the city has existing aero drum which restricts the possibility of developing any disposal site in its vicinity. The waste collected from the Vidyadharnagar zone and part of civil lines zone are disposed at the Sewapura site. Wastes from other areas are disposed at Mathuradas pura. Moreover, these sites were not Mathuradas Pura Area: 176 Bigha 17 km Sewapura Site Area: 200 Bigha 20 km Langariawas Area: 200 Bigha 21 km
70
designed on sanitary landfill technology, hence, not in compliance with the applicable MSW Rules. Under the JNNURM programme, funding of Rs 10.92crore has been approved for development of sanitary landfill in the city. The JMC has allocated around 200 Bigha of land at Langariawas site for development of sanitary landfill, which is around 21 km from the main walled city. The JMC is constructing the landfill site as per the approved design from IIT Chennai and it is estimated that around 50% of the work has already been completed in this landfill site. The compliance rate for scientific disposal has increased from almost nil to 25% following disposal of waste from waste processing to this site
6.3
Waste Processing on PPP format
6.3.1 Project Need

To strengthen the areas of waste processing & scientific disposal of MSW using sanitary landfill sites, the JMC has started a series of initiatives to improve the compliance with MSW Rules. To start with, in middle of the year 2005, JMC published an Expression of Interest (EOI) for processing and useful conversion of MSW in the city on BOOT format and then in the year 2007 another EOI was floated for MSW processing on BOOT format. Exhibit 6.7 below summarizes the components of these 2 (two) MSW Processing projects implemented on PPP format:
Exhibit 6.7 Project Components of Waste Processing projects (2 nos.) on PPP in Jaipur City
Private Operator Estimated Project Cost Concession period Project Capacity Date of Bid invitation Date of Award Area of Facility Technology used Tipping fee/MT (current) Max reject (input %)
Langariawas Site M/s Grasim Ltd Rs 15.0 Crore 30 years 350 TPD 5th February 2005 13th June 2005 25 acres Palletization (Refuse Derived Fuel) Rs 1.01 per MT to JMC (Rs 1,20,190 per annum) 30%
Sevapura Site M/s IL&FS Ecosmart Ltd. Rs 8.94 Crore 30 years 250 TPD 26th March 2007 18th October 2007 5 hectare (12.35 acre) Aerobic Windrows Composting Rs 4,37,500 per annum to JMC 14.86%
71
Mode of Award Other Govt. Support
Domestic Competitive Bidding for both the projects Land lease for 30 years on annual rental of Rs 1 per sq meter

MSW segregation at the processing facility; and Construction & development of MSW processing facility at the prescribed site.
6.3.3 Impact and Benefits

The waste processing plant at Langariawas site managed by Grasim limited is operational since January 2007. However, the processing plant at Sewapura is expected to be operational by the end of year 2010. Thus the compliance with MSW Rules for waste processing has increased from almost zero prior to year 2007 to almost 25% and it is expected to further move up to 43% once the processing plant at Sewapura site gets operational by the end of year 2010. The Exhibit 6.8 below depicts the compliance rate for MSW Rules in the JMC area.
Exhibit 6.8 Compliance rate of MSW Rules after PPP Intervention in Jaipur City
80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

Source Segregation Primary Collection
65%
70%
65%
43% 25%
5%
Street Sweeping Waste transportation
25%
0%
Processing Before PPP Processing After PPP (2007) Processing After PPP (2010)
0%
Disposal Before PPP Disposal - After PPP
Source: IMaCS Analysis
6.4
Procurement Process
The Exhibit 6.9 below outlines the key milestones achieved for selection of a preferred bidder for the project on waste processing on PPP format:
Exhibit 6.9 Key Procurement Milestones for selection of Preferred Bidder in Jaipur City
Key Dates Bidding Process
Key Bid Process Milestones Two-stage bidding (Bidder with Highest Premium per MT to Authority)
72
February 02, 2005
Expression of Interest Submission date
Total 21 firms submitted EOI 1030 Mar, 2005 RFP Bid document sale
Total 3 firms short-listed for Second Stage of Bidding March 19, 2005 April 11, 2005 Pre-bid meeting Bid Submission date (technical bid opening min. 50 marks required)
2 out of 3 firms rejected on technical evaluation Alternative Use Plc (Australian firm) rejected as EMD not submitted Gujarat Enviro Protection Ltd rejected as marks less than threshold 50 marks Only Grasim was technically qualified June 13, 2005 Letter of Award (LOA) to M/s Grasim Ltd

M/s Grasim Limited was selected at a Royalty Fee of Rs 1.01 per MT of waste to JMC for providing waste at the processing facility.
6.4.2 Pre-Application Criteria

i. The firm/ entrepreneurs should have designed and executed at least one project of MSW processing having capacity of 100 MT or more in the last 5 years in the field. ii. The firm should have minimum annual turnover of Rs 500 lakh in any of the last 3 years.

1. Technical Criteria: The bidders will be evaluated against a total score of 100 by the evaluation committee as below. Any Applicant who scores 50 and above against the total marks of 100 will be deemed qualified for the technical capability criteria: S No 1 2 Criteria 10 Annual Turnover Net Worth > 20cr > 10cr Marks Allocated 7 15-20cr 7.5-10cr 5 10-15cr 7.5-5cr 2 <10cr <5cr
73
Nature of business handled in the field of MSW processing (number of successful projects) Land requirement Break even period
>2
4 5 6
<10acre <3 years
10-15acre 3-5years JV with VNL in case of electricity 9-12months
15-20acre 5-7years Agreement with NGO
>20acre >7years Not yet decided
Forward linkage for end Own product arrangement
Commissioning required
Time
<9 months
1218month Franchise
>18months
Availability of proposed technology suitable for Indian Garbage No. of projects in which firms has availed NOC from PCB in past related to MSW work
Owned technology
Franchise + owned
Transfer of technology (agreement) 0
>3
2-3
2.
Technical proposal Excellent Very Good Good Poor presentation Financial Criteria The Bidder quoting the Highest Premium to the Authority (JMC) in terms of Tipping Fee per MT of waste provided at the processing facility by the Authority.
10

Performance security of Rs 20 lakh; valid for a concession period Weigh the MSW (input) at the entry point & final rejects to landfill at exit point of project site Minimum MSW acceptance of 350 TPD, may decline in excess of 600 tones on any given day. Commissioning date within 1 year from issue of Letter of Award.
6.4.5 Key Obligations of JMC

JMC shall at its risk and expense, supply to the processing facility an aggregate quantity of MSW = 250 * D tones (Assured waste quantity), D = no. of days in such month; with no penalties. Endeavour not to supply construction debris, biomedical/hazardous waste (no penalty clause) Endeavor to assist the concessionaire in obtaining finances from the FIs for the project.
6.5
Conclusion & Key learning
1. Land acquisition is critical for timely implementation of project, as in the case of Sewapura project, the long delay in the project implementation happened due to delay in actual handing over of the prescribed land area to the private player for development of project facilities. 2. Assured Waste Quantity in the case of Langariawas RDF project, the Authority (JMC) has failed at times in providing the minimum assured waste quantity to the processing facility due to workers unrest and related factor. Further to add to the misery of the private player there are no penalty clauses in the contract to counter such defaults. However, it is observed lately that the concession agreements have started incorporating penalty clauses for shortfall in MSW quantity against the minimum assured waste. 3. Risk pertaining to MSW quality in the case of Langariawas RDF project, the JMC is providing mixed un-segregated waste to the processing facility, hence, the complete risk of extracting biodegradable waste from mixed waste lies with the private operator. Further, the informal stakeholders like rag-pickers & household waste collectors (kabariwalas) extract most of the organic/recyclable waste from the MSW, thereby significantly affecting the quality of the waste. The Langariawas RDF plant has also suffered as the calorific value of the input waste supplied by JMC is not sufficient enough due to extraction of valuable elements form the waste by informal stakeholders in the MSW value chain. Hence, there is a need to establish inflexible door-to-door collection system in the city and ensure that all the waste collected is transported to the processing facility. Box below cites instances/experiences in the country supporting the fact that thermal treatment of municipal solid waste is not feasible, in situations where the waste has low calorific value.
Exhibit 6.10 Track Record of Waste to Energy Projects in India
Track Record of Waste to Energy Projects in India: The first such facility was set up in 1987 at Timarpur, Delhi, based on incineration technology to produce 3.5 MW power. It soon became inoperative due to mismatch in quality of waste received and plant design. The fate of the 5 MW project in Lucknow, which started commercial operation in 2003, was similar. Based on an imported biomethanation technology used in over 50 WTE plants worldwide, the plant only reached 1 MW and was closed down within six months due to several reasons. Prime among them was the ineffective waste segregation system which led to poor quality of MSW being delivered to the plant. The waste contained only 12-15% biodegradables. Problems were aggravated by poor accountability on part of the ULB for the waste supplied. The RDF technology based power plants at Vijayawada and Hyderabad, of 6 MW each, also started commercial operations in 2003. However, to overcome the poor heat value of MSW received, viz. about 1000Kcal/Kg and way below the optimum 2500Kcal/Kg, the plants Volume II Case studies of PPP projects wastes as auxiliary fuel. The RDF plants remain grossly 75 supplement MSW with agro underutilized as the desired amount of MSW is not being received.
Source: Waste to Energy: An imperative for Sustainable Waste Management; IDFCs Policy Group Quarterly, March 09
7.
7.1
Collection and Transportation Chennai

Introduction to Chennai City
Chennai, the capital city of Tamil Nadu, is the fourth largest Metropolitan City in India and is located at 13o05N and 80o17 E, on the shoreline of Bay of Bengal. The City of Chennai, erstwhile called as Madras, spread in an area of 170 sq km is the city of faith, religion, culture, wisdom and seat of ancient knowledge. In recent times, Chennai has experienced growth in all segments of the economy resulting in a marked increase in population across and beyond the Chennai Metropolitan Area (CMA). Urban sprawl has resulted in expansion beyond the city limits which has in turn resulted in the mushrooming of various suburbs and the transformation of erstwhile taluks. The Chennai Metropolitan Area (CMA) comprises the city of Chennai, 16 Municipalities, 20 Town Panchayats and 214 Village Panchayats. The extent of the CMA is 1,189 sq km. The population of Chennai city as per 2001 census is 43.43 lakh and is estimated to be around 46.28 lakh in 2006, correspondingly population of Chennai Metropolitan Authority (CMA) was 70.41 lakh in the year 2001 and 78.96 lakh in 2006 as per the City Development Plan of Chennai. It is estimated that CMA would house a population of 126 Lakh by 2026, of which Chennai city alone would account for over 58 lakh people. According to the 2001 census, Chennai tops the state of Tamil Nadu in terms of its slum population. Around 10, 79,414 inhabitants live in slums within the city and a total of 25.6% of the population in the municipal area are slum dwellers. The population projections as indicated in the City Development Plan are shown in Exhibit 7.1 below:
Exhibit 7.1 Population projections for Chennai City
Salient features of the City of Chennai Extent of CMA 1,189 sq km Population in CMA (2001) 70.41 lakh Extent of Chennai MC 174 sq km Population CMC (2001) 43.44 lakh No. of households 5.25 lakh Arterial roads 79 km Interior roads 2,475 km Storm water drainage length 850 km
76
Source: CDP, Chennai Chennai is one of the high-density cities in India. The density varies from 180 persons per ha in Saidapet and Mylapore Corporation zones to 368 persons per ha in Kodambakkam zone within the Corporation limits and the gross density for Chennai City is around 247 persons per ha.
7.2
Municipal SWM system in Chennai

The Chennai city is divided into 10 zones namely; Tondiarpet, Basin Bridge, Pulianthope, Ayanavaram, Kilpauk, Ice House, Nungambakkam, Kodambakkam, Saidapet, Adyar. The Corporation of Chennai (herein after CoC) is the countrys first municipal corporation, established on 29th September 1688. The Commissioner of CoC is the chief executive officer. He is assisted by a Joint Commissioner (Works), Deputy Commissioner (Health), Deputy Commissioner (Education), Assistant Commissioner (General Administration and Personnel), Deputy Commissioner (Revenue and Finance) and Director (Urban Forestry Wing). For efficient delivery of civic services, each zone is headed by a zonal officer. Departments are created within the CoC based on the nature of urban services to be delivered. The SWM management department is responsible for collection, transportation and scientific disposal of MSW. The two key positions within the CoC that hold prestige and power are the Mayor and the commissioner. The Mayor heads the electoral wing while the commissioner heads the executive wing. The electoral wing comprises of councilors and standing committees wherein the councilors exercise their general authority through budgetary and financial controls by determining taxes and allocating expenditure; approving contracts and other financial proposals; and approving appointments to senior posts. Exhibit 7.2 below outlines the total staff engaged in the provision of MSWM services in the city:
Exhibit 7.2 Manpower for provision of SWM services in Chennai City
S No 1 2 3 Sanitary workers No. of vacancy No. of temporary daily wage workers
Manpower/ Staff employees Permanent 8,442 1,785 1,664 Consolidated 1,688 Total 10,130 1,785 1,664 Source: Corporation of Chennai
77

The MSW generation in the City, estimated by the Corporation of Chennai is around 3,700 TPD, considering the present population growth, population density, and spatial distribution of income groups in the city. Exhibit 7.3 below outlines the discrete sources of MSW generators:
Exhibit 7.3 Sources of Waste Generation in Chennai City
S No 1 2 3 4
Types of Waste Generators Residential areas Commercial areas, hotels etc Vegetable Markets houses Construction wastes Total & slaughter
% break-up 68.0% 14.0% 4.5% 13.5%
Estimated quantity of MSW generated (TPD) 2,516 518 166 500 3,700
The City Development Plan projects the quantity of MSW generation of around 6,403 in the year 2021 based on the population growth forecasts and the per capita waste generation estimates of approximately 782 gm/day. Further, the estimated physical composition of MSW generation in the City is as below:
Exhibit 7.4 Physical Composition of MSW generation in Chennai City
Waste details Plastic Glass Metal Paper Organic 1 6% 14% 12% 56% 2 8% 6% 3% 13% 63% 3 7% 3% 7% 72% 4 10% 13% 7% 13% 47% 10% 5
Zone 6 7% 13% 4% 15% 54% 7% 7 10% 13% 25%1 4% 40% 12% 8 11% 7% 4% 14% 57% 7% 9 11% 9% 7% 10% 54% 9% 10 8% 8% 11% 66% 8%
Average
12% 22% 10% 52% 5%
9% 10% 3% 13% 56% 9%
Inert 12% 6% 12% Source: Corporation of Chennai
7.3
Collection and Transportation First Round of Privatisation
7.3.1 Project Need

In 1996, Chennai was a growing city making impressive strides in terms of overall economic development. The expansion of the city and the resultant urbanization placed the CoC under severe stress to collect & dispose garbage in a timely manner. As a result, mounds of un-cleared garbage were a common sight across the city, posing serious health hazard to the citizens of Chennai. This
situation was exacerbated by a shortage of sanitary workers to collect the garbage, low productivity of the existing sanitary workforce and the utilization of an ageing fleet of vehicles for the collection and transportation of solid waste. Efficient management of solid waste activities was needed to transform the city into livable place. As a result, discussions on the privatization of collection & transportation of MSW in the corporation area as an innovative, out of- the-box solution to Chennais MSWM woes started making its rounds along the corridors of powers in the corporation. The administrative wing of the CoC too contemplated solutions to MSWM problems in the city, and looked towards privatization as a means to ease the situation. As a result of this convergence of views between the elected and administrative wings of the corporation, a decision to privatize MSWM services was taken.
7.3.2 First Attempt of Privatisation (1996)

The CoC floated tenders for the privatization of collection and transportation of solid waste from one ward within each of Chennais zones. However, the tender failed to evince the interest of any private player mainly due to following reasons: The project area was geographically scattered thereby adding complexity to the project design Lack of economies of scale due to in-sufficient waste generation in the selected wards. Higher transportation and fixed costs of operations outweighed the potential earnings due to waste collection and transportation, making the project unviable economically. Then CoC decided to seek handholding support from the Tamil Nadu Industrial Development Organization (TIDCO)3 in order conceptualize and implement the project on PPP format.
7.3.3 Second Attempt of Privatisation (1999)

The CoC finally engaged TIDCO to handle bid process management for selection of a private operator to collect & transport MSW in Chennai in 1997. Subsequent to this, TIDCO appointed private consultant through an open competitive bidding process to assist in bid process management including initial assessment and project conceptualization with identification of the locations/areas to be included in the scope of work, designing the bid documents with evaluation criteria and duration of the concession period, evaluation of bids and selection of preferred bidder. This was the first time, when privatization of collection and transportation of MSW at such large scale was attempted in the country. vii. Guiding Principles The following principles were adopted to engage private player:
TIDCO is an organization established by the Government of Tamil Nadu in the year 1965, to identify and promote creation of large and medium scale industries within the state of Tamil Nadu, in association with the private sector.
79
Integrated approach and single point accountability emphasis on bundling selected zones together to gain economies of scale and operations leading to profitable project. Further, it was stressed to have single operator to establish full accountability. Need to attract solution providers rather than contractors it was stressed to have stringent evaluation criteria to attract experienced players who would make investment in the project. Attractive project structuring with a longer-term contract it was emphasized to have a longer contract period of 7 (seven) years so as to recover the investment in the project. Bid process and documentation it was suggested to have two-stage bidding with a single quote bidding parameter (tipping fee per ton) so as to scrutinize and select only the experienced players.

Primary collection of MSW from three zones (6,8 and 10) in the city and pre-transportation of the collected waste to designated places/transfer stations in the city; Sweeping of roads in the select zones (6,8 and 10); and Secondary collection of MSW from transfer stations/designated places and disposal of the collected waste at the prescribed disposal site. The total waste to be handled was estimated at around 1,100 TPD from three zones.

The concession period was of 7 years and 3 months from the concession signing date
7.3.6 Procurement Process

The Exhibit 7.5 below highlights the crucial activities & corresponding timelines achieved for engaging a private operator:
Exhibit 7.5 Key Procurement Milestones for selection of Preferred Bidder in Chennai Phase I
Key Dates Bidding Process June 04, 1999
Key Bid Process Milestones Two-stage bidding (Bidder with Lowest Tipping Fee per MT) Request for Qualification (RFQ) issued
Total 7 (seven) firms submitted RFQ Total 4 (four) firms short-listed for Second Stage of Bidding
80
August 14, 1999 September 15, 1999
Pre-bid meeting Bid Submission date
Total 3 (three) firms submitted their Bids October 01, 1999 Opening of Financial bids
Finally, CEGA Asia Holding was selected as the preferred bidder November 26, 1999 Concession Signing between CoC and CEGA Asia Holding Pte. Ltd
As outlined above, CoC followed two-stage bidding process and the complete process of engaging a private developer for collection & transportation of MSW was completed in about 6 (six) months. CEGA Asia Holdings formed a subsidiary company under the name of Chennai Environmental Services Onyx (CES Onyx). Onyx is an affiliate of the French multinational Vivendi Environment and is a market leader in waste management in Europe with diversified operations in all sectors of waste management including waste collection, segregation, treatment and landfill.

The lowest financial quote from CES Onyz was USD 25 (Rs 1,125)4 per ton of MSW.
7.3.8 Key Obligations of Private Player

Prepare project implementation and operation plan (PIOP) for CoC approval The commencement of operations within 90 days after signing of concession agreement. All Insurances to be purchased/maintained in line with Good Industry practice at its own cost.
7.3.9 Key Obligations of COC

Handing over of transfer stations and vehicle workshops but ownership with CoC only Security against default in monthly payments - The CoC would provide an irrevocable standby letter of credit in favor of the concessionaire, which can be utilized against any unpaid invoice that was delivered to the CoC in accordance with the agreement. Co-operate with the concessionaire in obtaining, and renewing necessary permits for the project. Make arrangements at the disposal area to weigh the MSW disposed by the concessionaire.
4
One USD is considered as Indian Rupees 45 only. 81
7.3.10 Key Clauses of Concession Agreement

Performance monitoring CoC maintained rights to constitute Citizens Groups to conduct random inspections of the concession area. In case of default, the performance evaluation committee (constituted by CoC) would decide on enforcing a penalty clause. Resolution of complaints The concessionaire was expected to resolve any complaints arising due to a breach of his service obligations within 24 hours of the receipt regarding such complaints. Penalties In case of complaints that were recorded by the Citizens Groups remained unresolved for a period of 24 hours, exceeded 10 for any one month, CoC would deduct an amount equivalent to 0.5% of the monthly invoice amount for the month in which these complaints were recorded. Payment The concessionaire would submit an invoice and enclose receipts of delivered MSW at the disposal yard as well as the weight of debris recycled directly in the previous month to the CoC, not later than the 5th working day of every month. CoC would pay the amount due as per the invoice raised within 15 days of receiving the invoice after deducting relevant penalties. Minimum Guaranteed MSW The CoC had defined a minimum assured MSW of 760 TPD over a period of 60 consecutive days; In the event of a shortfall, the CoC would compensate the concessionaire at the reimbursement rate. Transfer Clause After the termination /or expiration of the agreement, vehicles and other movable property owned by the concessionaire would be removed by the concessionaire within a reasonable period of time. However, the transfer stations and vehicle workshop will be handed back to CoC.
7.3.11 Project Implementation Issues Opposition from a Labour Union

The labor union representing municipal workers involved in waste collection filed a writ petition in the Honorable High Court of Chennai challenging the CoCs move to privatize the MSW collection operations. The petition cited an order issued with regards to the GoTNs exercise of their powers under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, which prohibits the engagement of Contract Labourers for sweeping and scavenging the work. The Honorable High Court of Chennai granted an interim injunction restraining the Corporation of Chennai from finalizing the tender and awarding the contract to a private party. However, at the insistence of the Corporation of Chennai, the Labour Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu, issued a Government Order exempting the Corporation of Chennai from the purview of this earlier Act. Consequently the Writ Petition was dismissed.
7.3.12 Project Implementation by CES Onyx

Equipment procured CES Onyx purchased 180 auto rickshaws, 60 heavy vehicles, plastic bins of capacity 600 to 1000 liters and working tools for staff such as brooms, shovels, bicycles etc. More than 50% of this equipment was imported due to their unavailability in the Indian market, despite the existence of high customs duty. The chassis of the heavy vehicles were purchased from Indian manufacturers whereas the body was assembled by local skips imported from France or Singapore. The plastic containers were imported from Europe and insured against theft by Indian insurers. Manpower mobilization The Company recruited about 2,000 workers for clearing the garbage from the concession area and provided attractive remuneration packages with conditions such as employment guarantees during the concession, creation of a bank account for all employees and the possibility of availing of loans. Collection system The city has narrow by lanes which cannot accommodate containers; the concessionaire therefore decided to collect the MSW from these areas by auto rickshaw or tricycles with the provision of a bell to request residents to give household waste. Onyxs service area was spread out over a large geographical zone and therefore bicycles were provided to the workers for reaching their places of waste removal. CES Onyx deployed truck type skips which could lift plastic bins and dump the garbage in the hopper of truck. The garbage would then be further compacted. Each compactor was equipped to handle garbage of nearly 7 - 8 tones. These trucks allowed the transport of larger volumes of garbage compared to conventional vehicles which could carry only about 2 tons of garbage and which would also litter streets by virtue of having open tops, during transportation of garbage. CES Onyx faced bottlenecks in the upkeep of its equipment due to the unavailability of ancillaries for the maintenance of equipment and the absence of a mechanical workshop for the maintenance of vehicles. Owing to these circumstances, Onyx established its own mechanical workshop, and recruited and trained around 70 engineers. Further, CES Onyx deployed sector supervisors for ensuring the collection of garbage from each street as per a predetermined schedule. The supervisors were equipped with radio transmitters for faster communication with the zonal managers. This advanced management information system resulted in the provision of efficient garbage cleaning services to the citizens. Information-Education-Communication (IEC) activities CES Onyx used print media as well as visual media for creating awareness in the city. Posters/ banners were displayed in various streets to inform citizens about the need for cleanliness and hygiene as well as the proposed timing of cleaning operations. Street plays were organized on themes such as health, cleanliness and hygiene. The CoC also came forward to further strengthen this communication campaign.
The Mayor himself walked 6-7 km to distribute pamphlets in the Ice House & Kodambakkam zones.
7.3.13 Impact of PPP intervention

Financial impact As per the estimates by CoC, the total cost for street sweeping, collection & transportation per Metric ton of MSW by CoC and CES Onyx was approximately USD 33 (Rs 1,485)5 and USD 25 (Rs 1,125) respectively. Thus, the compensation sought by private operator for similar scope of work was around 30% cheaper than the CoC spending on the same activity at that time. Operational efficiency gains CES Onyxs staff used to remove even during holidays and festivals leading to considerable improvement in cleanliness of the city due to CES Onyxs efficient operations and the extension of support from the community. Disruption of community initiative of segregation Exnora, a NGO, established in 1988, had been spearheading community initiatives in the area of MSWM and became operational in the Adyar zone in October 1988. Exnora employed rag pickers to collect waste from door to door. This collected waste was processed, and compostable and recyclable materials were segregated, before the garbage was transferred to the receptacles. These activities were financed through the collection of monthly charges from residents. Further, a decentralized composting facility was built in each locality. At one point of time Exnora covered almost 20% of the area of the CoC. Soon after the appearance of CES Onyx, Exnoras community structure became redundant. As per the conditions of the contract, the concessionaire could collect garbage without segregating the garbage at the source. The established system of source segregation in many parts of the city reverted back to a garbage-mixing system with the commencement of operations by CES Onyx. More importantly, citizens of vulnerable sections of society who had earlier been employed as Exnoras street beautifiers (rag pickers) lost their jobs and were pushed into joining the unorganized sector of rag pickers once again.
7.4
Collection and Transportation Second Phase of Privatisation
The concession period for CES Onyx ended in February 2007 and the CoC decided to continue with the provision of MSWM services on PPP format in zones 6, 8 and 10 under a new contract. Hence, the CoC extended the contract period of CES Onyx for another 6 months up to 24 th August, 2007, till selection of private operator under new contract.
One USD is considered as Indian Rupees 45 only. 84
The CoC also decided to include Zone 3 in the privatization package to extend private services in the northern parts of the city. The four zones for privatization were divided into two separate packages for bidding with Package-1 including Zone 6 & 10 and Package-2 included Zone 8 & 3. CoC again appointed TIDCO to facilitate the appointment of private operator in these select Zones.
7.4.1 Procurement Process

The Exhibit 7.6 below highlights the crucial activities & corresponding timelines achieved for engaging a private operator:
Exhibit 7.6 Key Procurement Milestones for selection of Preferred Bidder in Chennai Phase II
Key Dates Bidding Process April 01, 2007 May 02, 2007
Key Bid Process Milestones Two-stage bidding (Bidder with Lowest Tipping Fee per MT) Request for Qualification (RFQ) issued [Document Fee Rs. 10,000] RFQ Submission Date
Total 12 (twelve) firms submitted RFQ May 16, 2007 RFP Bid document issued [Processing Fee Rs 50,000]
Total 7 (seven) firms short-listed for Second Stage of Bidding May 25, 2007 June 15, 2007 June 20, 2007 Pre-bid meeting Bid Submission date [Bid security Rs 20 lakh] Presentations by pre-qualified Bidders on technical plan
Total 6 (six) firms submitted their Bids and 5 (five) firms were technically qualified June 20, 2007 Opening of Financial bids
Finally, Consortium of Neel Metal & Fanalca S.A was selected for both the Packages 1 & 2 July 30, 2007 Concession Signing between CoC and Neel Metal Fanalca
As outlined above, CoC followed two-stage bidding process and the complete process of engaging a private developer for collection & transportation of MSW was completed in about 4 (four) months.
7.4.2 Financial Offers by Bidders

The tipping fee for the first year of operation as quoted by 5 (five) technically qualified bidders were as follows:
Exhibit 7.7 Financial Quotes by Bidders for SWM services in Chennai City
S No
Name of the Bidder
Tipping Fee per MT in Rs. Package-1 Package-2

85
1 2 3 4 5
Neel Metal Products Ltd + Fanalca S.A IL&FS + CDC Ramky Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd + Ramky Enviro Engineers Ltd + Elsamex India Pvt. Ltd. Veolia Environmental Services Asia Pte Ltd. Modern Building Maintenance LLC + Swachatha Corporation
673 776 963 1,150 1,359
642 655 990 1,150 1,249
Finally, Neel Metal Fanalca was awarded Package-1 & -2 for collection, segregation and transportation of MSW from Zones 3, 6, 8, and 10.
7.4.3 Municipal Solid Waste to be handled

The total estimated quantity of MSW in Zones 3, 6, 8, and 10 is around 1,400 metric tons per day. The details of the Packaged Zones are in Exhibit 7.8 below:
Exhibit 7.8 Waste Generation in Package 1 and 2 for PPP projects in Chennai City
Details
Package-1 Zone 6 Zone 10 39.41 5.36 437.58 436 PDG
Pacakage-2 Zone 3 17.59 5.77 249.8 230 KDG Zone 8 25.59 6.63 309.6 466 PDG
Area in sq. km Population in lakh Total road length in km MSW generation in TPD Location of landfill site Total MSW generation & to be collected KDG Kodungaiyur Dumping Ground, PDG Perungudi Dumping Ground
8.24 3.94 137.4 260 PDG
Around 1,400TPD in Zones 3, 6, 8, and 10 of City

Door-to-door collection of MSW Segregation of MSW at source Collection and transportation of segregated waste without mixing Road sweeping including collection, removal, transportation and disposal of road dust Separate transportation of MSW collected during road sweeping to the dumping ground
Providing manpower and machinery (including but not limited to vehicles & bins) for collection, segregation and transportation in conformance with the specifications provided in work specifications of the draft contract, for different road lengths. If required, installation of transfer stations with permanent refuse compactors, along with manpower required for operations. Providing required number of vehicles with operators/drivers for collection, segregation and transportation of MSW such as small compactors, medium capacity compactors, large compactors and skip loading vehicles etc. Only non-recyclable waste shall be dumped at the dumping yard. The concessionaire is responsible for disposing the recyclable waste as per his own choice. The removal of debris and mud earth must not be carried out by the concessionaire Transfer stations owned by CoC in the privatized areas to be handed over to the private operator. The operational management of the CoC transfer stations will be the responsibility of the private operator but the ownership of the same will rest with CoC.

The concession period was kept for 7 (seven) years.
7.4.6 Pre-Qualification Criteria

Technical capability/experience: (all the below criteria to be fulfilled) Criteria Experience handling logistics Experience Conservancy tasks in in complex 1. Total Parameters combined Qualifying Level MSW Minimum total combined capacity of 350 TPD (sum of individual capacities of vehicles * shifts per day) 2. Service area covered in Minimum service area coverage of previous MSW 45 sq. km transportation projects 3. Population covered in Minimum population coverage of 10 lakh Minimum service coverage of 500 km
87
transportation capacity
previous MSW projects 4. Street cleaning

Experience operations
in
5. Conservancy tasks such as Managed more than 250 persons in collection road sweeping and each of the last 2 years. transportation of MSW and
managing manpower
Financial capability/experience: Criteria Parameters Minimum requirements Minimum = Rs 15 crore
Size of current operations/ 1. Tangible Net Worth Existing business strengths 2. Net tangible Assets Financial Flexibility
Minimum = Rs 35 crore
3. Total Net cash accruals Minimum = Rs 7 crore for the past three years.

Evaluation of Techno Business proposals: an evaluation committee was constituted by TIDCO in order to assess the technical competence of the bidder in implementation of the Project and the responsiveness of the Techno Business proposals in respect to practicality of implementation. Type of Activity OPERATIONAL COMMITMENT Resource commitment no. and usage of vehicles, type of vehicles, replacement and maintenance of capital equipment Infrastructure commitment deployment of people, machines and other infrastructure including investment in health, safety and training of people OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE Solution viability elegance of the solution and its efficiency in terms of route deployment, frequency, utilization of resources and segregation of recyclable waste
Marks 30 15
15
50 10
Solutions ability to inherently reduce the amount of waste generated on a daily basis and long term plans surrounding the same Prior experience and track record at least one performance certificate from the municipal body wherein the bidder has handled/handling more than 350 TPD to be enclosed FINANCIAL VIABILITY OF THE SOLUTION Amount of capital committed and the timing of capital infusion and the adequacy of that level of investment given the project needs The Debt Equity mix and the profitability sustenance of the project; the balance sheet strength of the bidding company/bidding consortium to infuse the level of equity required or raise debt needed 20
10
30
10
10
The bidders were required to achieve minimum threshold marks of 75 on the evaluation criteria to be declared as technically qualified bidders. Financial Proposal evaluation criteria Lowest of the Tipping fee separately for Package-1 & 2. [The CoC has mentioned escalation rate as initial rate quoted by the concessionaire escalated by 5% every year on the First Year Tipping Fee]
7.4.8 Project Implementation by Neel Metal Fanalca

The concessionaire was obliged to commence operations throughout these zones within 30 days from the date of issue of the letter of award. On August 24th 2007, CES Onyx gradually removed their garbage bins and supporting infrastructure in zones 6, 8 and 10. However, Neel Metal Fanalca could not mobilize manpower for MSW collection from the concession area in time. The supporting infrastructure such as garbage bins, compactors and transportation equipment were inadequate to meet the garbage collection requirements from the selected zones. Owing to the absence of roadside garbage bins and the arrangement of door-to-door collection, the residents were forced to resort to throwing garbage in open areas. On the second day of concession period, the situation further worsened with garbage piled up on every street in the concession area. With increasing pressure from all sections of the society, the CoC intervened to improve the situation. The CoC diverted corporation workers and equipment from other zones for clearing garbage in the concession areas, thereby affecting services in CoC covered Zones. On 30th August 2007, the CoC served a show-cause notice on Neel Metal Fanalca demanding an explanation for the abysmal level of MSWM services in the concession area. As a gesture of goodwill, CES Onyx
offered to help CoC with their 30 compactors and 3,000 garbage bins in attempt to bring MSWM services in the city back to normal and in return, asked only for the reimbursement of fuel expenses and driver allowances. The Neel Metal Fanalca cited reasons for initial mismanagement including; high attrition rates leading to manpower shortage; delay in arrival of bins; delay in vehicle registration and other formalities leading to delay in deployment of equipment. Subequently, Neel Metal Fanalca assured CoC to abide by the contractual obligations for all times during the concession period. The CoC decided to hold back the handover of Pulianthope to Neel Metal, which was part of the Package-2 contract, until a re-assessment of its readiness to handle MSWM services. After a long span of eight months, Pulianthope zone was transferred to concessionaire on 1st April 2008, with assistance from CoC workers for ensuring a smooth transition. Currently private operator works in all four zones and is collecting segregated garbage in some localities in the concession area.
7.5
Conclusion and Key Learning

Political championing is necessary for PPPs in urban services: Historically privatization has widespread political ramifications such as opposition from labor unions and ideological opposition from political parties in the corporation council. In Chennai case, the Mayor steered clear of these issues by giving an in depth explanation on the rationale for the privatization of MSWM services to the corporation council and passed a council resolution approving the privatization of MSW services. Contestability resulting in operational efficiency gains The CoCs decision to privatize MSWM services in a few wards of the city was a noteworthy step. As a result, the municipal monopoly over the provision of MSW services was broken and municipal operations came under public scrutiny and comparison with the performance of private operators. Through this comparison, citizens became aware of the prevailing inefficiencies in the operations of the CoC and community pressure steadily built on the CoC to improve their performance. This healthy competition did indeed improve the performance of MSWM operations in the areas served by CoC. Need for well defined transition process/duration it is imperative to initiate steps in developing service handover management competencies, else it can lead to complete failure of adequate service delivery as outlined in the case of transition between CES Onyx to Neel Metal Fanalca.
90
Lack of approach towards sustainable MSWM The CoC failed to realize the critical link between MSWM activities such as primary collection, secondary collection, transfer and acceptable disposal and the fact that source segregation could lead to reduced amounts of garbage transfer and a cleaner environment. The objective of reducing the volume of MSW that reached the disposal site was sidelined during first PPP contract for collection and transportation of MSW. Failure to incorporate the concerns of the informal sector in MSWM the ongoing
community/NGO initiatives were not given due consideration while structuring the PPP project as in the case with CES Onyx leading to disruption of such initiatives for segregation and decentralized composting in the city. Further, the involvement of informal private sector such as rag pickers, waste buyers, and the small scale recycling industry was not duly appreciated or acknowledged in the process of privatization of MSWM services leaving vulnerable and marginalized sections of society suffered on this account. There is a strong case to chart out a policy on NGOs involvement in MSWM like they can be involved in localized activities such as building awareness in communities and disseminating information on various government initiatives, and waste segregation at source that would feed into the large-scale waste management activities undertaken by private concessionaire and/or NGOs being grassroots initiative can be made eligible to collect user charges as they have close ties with community members.
91
8.
8.1
Collection and Transportation Delhi

Introduction to Delhi City
Delhi is located in northern India between the latitudes of 2824-17 and 28-53-00 North and longitudes of 76-50-24 and 77-20-37 East. It has an area of 1,483 sq. km with a maximum length of 51.90 km and greatest width of 48.48 km. It shares borders with the States of Uttar Pradesh and Haryana. The Yamuna River and terminal part of the Aravali hill range are the two main geographical features of the city. The average annual rainfall in Delhi is 714 mm, three-fourths of which falls in July, August and September. Delhi has been one of the fastest growing cities in the country, clocking over 47% decadal growth from 1991-2001, more than double the national rate. A large part of this rapid growth has been due to the high level of migration. The annual average exponential growth rate of population of Delhi was the highest (6.42%) during 1941-1951 due to large-scale migration from Pakistan to India after partition in 1947. Since then the annual growth has been recorded at 4.22 % during 1951-1961; 4.25% during 1961-1971; 4.25% during 1971-1981 and 4.15% during 1981-1991. The annual growth rate of population of Delhi during 1991-2001 has been recorded as 3.85% and it is almost double the national average. Delhi was considered as a single district for Population Census 1991. In 1996, Government of NCT of Delhi, through a Gazette Notification, created 9 districts and 27 sub-divisions. Population Census 2001 was conducted in Delhi in each of 9 districts and 27 Sub-divisions. Ranking of districts by population, in 1991 and 2001 is given in Exhibit 8.1 below:
Exhibit 8.1 Population growth trends in Delhi City
92
8.2
Municipal SWM system in Delhi

The responsibility of managing solid waste generated within the city is vested on two agencies; Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC). The total sweeping staff available with MCD and NDMC is in ratio of 1:216 persons and 1:326 persons respectively. This is above (better than) the prescribed norms of 1:500 in Central Public Health and Environmental Engineer Organisation (CPHEEO) manual. Within the municipal area, some zones have been contracted out to private contractors for functions ranging from the primary collection to waste disposal. They have their own sweeping staff, waste collectors and vehicles to transport the waste from collection points to disposal sites. MCD has privatized collection of municipal solid waste in 6 zones through 3 private operators, in order to save costs and improve efficiency in service delivery. These operators have to put sets of two bins (blue and green coloured) for collection of non-biodegradable / recyclable and bio-degradable waste respectively. These bins are emptied into separate vehicles of similar colour daily. The operators are also expected to do segregation of biodegradable and non-biodegradable solid waste before the waste is collected into separate vehicles. NDMC has 900 community bins (masonry built) and 1000 metallic skips (open containers of about 1m3 capacities).

The waste generation estimated by the Public Health Department of MCD, NDMC is highlighted in the Exhibit 8.2 below:
Exhibit 8.2 Waste Generation (TPD) in Delhi City
Agency MCD NDMC Cantt Board TOTAL
Area (km2) 1399 42.8 43
Population (million) 13.8 4.5 0.13 18.43
Waste generation (MT/day) 7,000 250 60 7,310
Projected Waste generation in 2021 15,100 (MT/day) 550 100 15,750
Source: Public Health Department of MCD, NDMC The estimated physical composition of MSW generation in the City is as below:
Exhibit 8.3 Physical Composition of MSW in Delhi City
S. No 1 2 a.
Type of Waste Biodegradable Recyclable paper
Percentage 38.6% 26.7 % 5.6%

93
b. c. d e 3
glass 1.0% plastic 6.0% metal 0.2% Non-biodegradable (leather, rubber etc) 13.9% Inert/Reject 34.7 % Source: Performance measurement of pilot cities, TERI March 2002
The estimated chemical composition of MSW generation in the City is as below:

Exhibit 8.4 Chemical Composition of MSW in Delhi City
S. No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Parameter Moisture Organic Carbon Nitrogen as N Phosphorous as P2O2 Potassium as K2O C/N ratio Calorific value
Percentage 43.8% 20.5% 0.9% 0.3% 0.7% 24.1 713 Kcal/Kg
Source: Performance measurement of pilot cities, TERI March 2002
8.2.3 MSWM system in Delhi

i. Waste Collection and Storage Several types of waste receptacles are used in the MCD area (i) large masonry bins, locally called "Dhalao" (ii) metallic bins of covered and open types (iii) 4- wheeled plastics and FRP bins with large covers, which have been introduced in some areas during the last 2 years and (iv) sites in some localities, where waste has been dumped in the open. The estimated number of dhalaos, metallic bins and open sites is about 2500. Delhi is divided into 12 zones, and each zone comprises different receptacles at which the waste from different corners in zones gets collected. It is transported to landfill sites for final disposal. Zone-wise list of Dhalaos, dustbins and open sites is described in table above.
94
ii. MSW Transportation MCS has 689 trucks (majority of the tipping kind), 71 private tipper trucks (8 m3 capacity) and 100 loaders for collection, lifting and carriage of municipal garbage.
iii. Processing and Disposal Delhi has four operational compost plants as shown in Exhibit 8.5 below:
Exhibit 8.5 Details on Compost Plants in Delhi City
S No
Facility
Capacity (TPD)
Area (Ha) 3.2
Starting year 1981
Technology
Remarks
Okhla closed present
(MCD) 150 at
Aerobic windrows composting
Proposed to upgrade to 200 TPD
Okhla (NDMC)
200
3.4
1985
Operating capacity
below
Bhalswa (private sector)
500
4.9
1999
50% capacity
operating
Tikri (APMC
Khurd 125 and
2.6
2001
Dedicated
waste
stream from APMC
private sector) TOTAL 975 14.1
Thus out of total 7,000 TPD of waste generation, only about 900 is being processed at present in the three compost plants and the balance is assumed to be dumped at the three dump-sites. iv. MSW Disposal The disposal sites details are mentioned in Exhibit 8.6 below:
Exhibit 8.6 Details of Disposal Sites in Delhi City
S No
Name of Location Site
Area (Ha)
Year Started
Input waste
Zones waste Civil Bagh, West.
supplying
Bhalsawa
North Delhi
21.06
1993
2,200
lines,
Karol Rohini,
Narela, Najafgarh &
Ghazipur
East Delhi
29.16
1984
2,000
Shahdara,
95
Paharganj, NDMC 3 Okhla South Delhi 16.20 1994 1,200 Central, Najafgarh, South & Cantt Board Source: CDP, Delhi v. Recycling and rag-picking Recycling and rag-picking of municipal solid waste is widely prevalent in Delhi through the involvement of an extensive network of informal (rag-pickers and scrap-dealers) and formal (recycling facilities) stakeholders. A wide range of materials and items are involved, such as, paper / cardboard, plastics, metals, glass, rubber, leather, textiles and clothing etc. As per a study the number of rag-pickers in Delhi is in the range of 80,000 to 100,000 (Srishti). It is estimated that about 1200-1500 TPD is removed from the municipal collection and disposal chain by these activities. However, these activities, carried out in unhygienic and unscientific manner, have unfavourable environmental, occupational health and community health implications.
8.2.4 Identification of Service Delivery Gaps in MSWM system

The key issues in Delhi with respect to solid waste management are: 1. Efficient service delivery for collection and removal of garbage, construction and demolition debris and other types of waste, street sweeping etc. 2. Appropriate disposal of waste in conformity with the applicable rules and most importantly, 3. Strategy for reducing land requirement for disposal, hence, reduction in waste quantity to the landfills. In the above listing, the most important element is reduction in land requirement for disposal. In the absence of adequate land, the three landfill sites are being over-used. As per the present situation, Delhi is actually in a very serious situation with respect to land required for processing and disposal of solid waste.
8.3
Collection and Transportation on PPP format
Delhi government in its attempt to overcome the grim scenario of inefficient service delivery in the provision of services relating to primary & secondary collection, transportation, street sweeping and disposal has taken the route to privatization of SWM services in the city: MCD has signed agreements with three [3] private companies for collection, segregation, transportation and disposal of municipal solid waste in six zones on January 31 2005.
96
Aimed at increasing efficiency and effectiveness of its waste management activities, MCD planned this public private partnership project in six zones City, South, West, Central, Karol Bagh and Sadar Paharganj. The three [3] agencies with which the civic body signed the concession agreement for the project are: Delhi Waste management private limited for south, central, and city zones; Noida based Ag Enviro infra projects (P) ltd. For Karol Bagh and Sadar Paharganj zones; and Delhi based Metro Waste Handling (P) Ltd.(MWH) for west zone. The project proposed to be implemented in phases went fully operational in June 2005. The private companies were allotted a concession period of 9 years inclusive of the implementation period of 12 months from the date of signing the agreement. The agreement also contained a performance evaluation and monitoring mechanism where the monitoring of the project was to be carried out by an independent engineer appointed by mutual consent of the corporation and the companies. MSV Pvt. Ltd. was appointed as the independent engineer to monitor the project. The section below dwells on the working and operation of Delhi based metro waste handling private limited, which is handling the collection, segregation and transportation of the solid waste in the west zone. West Zone Description The west zone of Delhi is, indeed, a true representation of the concrete jungle, an area of approximately 79.75 km2 having a residential population of 15.80 lakhs. The municipal solid waste generated from the 16 wards of which the whole zone comprises of, is well above 500 tons per day.
8.3.1 Implementation Team of Private Player

The whole task of collection, segregation and transportation is given shape by a team of field supervisors 45 in number, office/tech. staff 42 in number, drivers 50 in number, helpers 60 in number and dhalao workers 500 in number. All the 16 wards have been divided into 4 sets of 4 wards each and have been put under the governance of a team leader. Under every team leader there is a set of field supervisors who are responsible for the following: familiarizing with the assigned area(ward) Keeping a track of daily waste collection. Optimizing the number of dhalao workers and maximizing their productivity by assigning themadequate responsibilities.
Visiting the dhalaos within his scope of vigilance at least twice a day. Maintaining vehicle time and route plan. Identification of critical points under his area, where garbage is being dumped or there is a lack ofa dhalao and placement of adequate number of bins in those critical areas. Keeping liaisons with local residents, residential welfare associations (RWAs), councilors, MCD officials and to work in close co-ordination with them. Dhalao workers come next to the field supervisors in the organization hierarchy. Number of dhalao workers recruited at a particular dhalao depends upon the size of the dhalao and the load received by it. Optimization of dhalao workers at dhalaos in an area is done by the field supervisor. However, on an average 3 dhalao workers look after the maintenance of 1 dhalao. They are responsible for receiving the waste from the neighborhood directly in the dhalaos and from the bins that are placed in the area surrounding the dhalao.
8.3.2 The Waste Management System

Waste from the generators such as households, institutions etc. is brought either to the Waste Storage Depots (WSDs) or the Street Corner Bins (SCBs) according to their convenience. The responsibility of conveying the waste from the point of generation to the WSDs or the SCBs lies in the hands of the generators. Usually the street sweepers or the rag pickers are employed by the people for this purpose. The waste is segregated at the WSDs by the dhalao workers and the rest is taken away by the vehicles. An appreciable amount of wet waste is taken to the centralized compost plant at Bhalaswa . The rest is taken to the Bhalaswa landfill. The waste segregated at the WSDs is taken to the central workshop at Subhash Nagar where the waste is further segregated into different streams and is taken in bulk for recycling. The Collection and Transportation System The collection system has undergone a drastic change since the inception of the private sector in solid waste management. Prior to the privatization, waste from the waste storage depots was collected in open trucks. The problems such as waste spillage and odour were common. Moreover the staff carrying out the collection of the waste without the provision of any safety equipment such as the mask, gloves, boots etc. was highly vulnerable to potential health hazards. Also the whole system was inefficient and poorly managed. The waste in the WSD used to rot for several days. There was no proper scheduling or tracking of the waste collection vehicles. Also the waste was collected without any discrimination between the wet and the dry portion and was picked in the mixed form. Minimization of the waste going to the landfill was totally neglected. The system has undergone a huge transformation since the privatization
Compactor loaders are being used for the transportation of the waste. Containerized mechanical loading and unloading is done which avoids multiple handling, reduces spillage, ensures hygienic environment around the WSDs and also reduces environmental and health risks. Moreover separate vehicles are used for biodegradable (green) and non-biodegradable waste(blue). A major chunk of the biodegradable portion is sent to a centralized composting facility. The whole transportation activity is managed by a fleet of 34 vehicles including 16 compactors 9 mini Refuse Collectors (RCs) and 9 high capacity dumper trucks operated by a total of 51 drivers and 72 helpers. The capacity of the vehicles varies between 3m3 and 16m3. They are directly managed by a strong team of supervisors (including team leaders) which are 49 in number. The movement of the vehicles takes place according to the proper schedule and is tracked by a state of the art command and control system. Command and control communication devices comprise of 34 wireless sets on vehicles, 32 wireless handsets with operational and technical staff and 50 cellular phones. Moreover, the on road movement of the vehicles is tracked by a special Global Positioning System (GPS) enabled system. 100 per cent waste collection and disposal is ensured within 24 hours and is achieved in 3 shifts of 6 hours each. Breakup vehicles are also maintained to keep the stability of the system intact in the case of vehicular breakdown and also for handling complaints. Waste Segregation Waste segregation has been considered while handing over the responsibility of waste management to the private sector. Exhibit 8.7 below shows the segregation benchmark set for the corresponding months and the applicability of the penalty if the benchmark is not achieved.
Exhibit 8.7 Segregation benchmarks for private player in Delhi
Year operation
of Months from COD
SB = segregation benchmark for R corresponding terms*) month (in
applicable
penalty
for
% corresponding months (in % terms)
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7
1-12 13-24 25-36 37-48 49-60 61-72 73-84
0 5 10 12 15 18 20
NIL 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15%
99
Year 8 onwards
85 onwards
20
15%
Source: Environmental Engineering, DCE, Delhi *the percentage of the total number of vehicle trips to the landfill site during the preceding month which has duly passed the tests relating to level of biodegradability in accordance with the O&M requirements. If, the segregation level achieved for the particular month is lower than the segregation benchmark (SB) as in the table above, then the tipping fee payable shall be calculated in accordance with the formula given below: Tipping fee (TF) = [QB + QNB] * TFR * (1 R/100) Where, QB = total quantity of biodegradable substance during the preceding month (in tons) QNB = Total quantity of non-biodegradable substance during the preceding month (in tons) TFR = Tipping Fee rate payable by MCD per ton during year in accordance with the terms of contract. R = Reduction applicable for the particular month on non-achievement of Segregation Benchmark (SB) as presented in the table above Effect of Privatization on Rag-Pickers Prior to privatization, the only segregation done was by the rag-pickers or the informal sector. The segregation was done at different levels of the mass flow starting at the generation, waste storage depots and even at the landfills. Though the informal sector is still very prevalent and rag pickers continue to work under hazardous conditions, some relief has been provided by the inception of the private sector in the following manner: About 60% of the dhalao workers were rag pickers prior to privatization. Used to work under extremely hazardous and unhygienic conditions. Had to pick waste from dhalaos which overflowed with rotting waste and housed rodents and infections. Had to face harassment at the hands of dhalao attendants during the MCD regime who used to ask for money and other favors to allow access to the dhalaos. Were harassed by police and other social stratas due to lack of legal authorization. Working conditions have improved tremendously after privatization Dhalaos are disinfected every weak and proper cleanliness is maintained.
100
Provision of separate bins for biodegradable and recyclable waste, and sorting trolleys have made the task of segregation simpler. Workers have been provided with essential safety equipments such as gloves, masks etc. Regular trainings are organized on health and hygiene. They have been brought into a civil framework. Provided with a uniform and fixed monthly wages. Segregated waste acts as extra incentive.
8.4
Conclusion
The following may be concluded about the solid waste management in the west zone of Delhi since the inception of the private sector: 1. SWM, which was one of the most poorly managed civic activity, has transformed into one of the most well managed one. 2. Relevant technical inclusions, such as GPS based traction system for the vehicles, state-of-the art complaint redressal system, use of wireless and cell phones has resulted in better co-ordination, improved community participation and operation. 3. Waste segregation, which used to be a totally neglected affair, has witnessed improvement. 4. Partial formalization of the informal sector involved in waste segregation beginning of a new era. 5. Awareness is increasing among the people about the benefits of segregation at source.
101
9.
9.1
SWM system in Singapore

Introduction Singapore
Singapore is a highly urbanized and industrialized small island nation with a land area of 697 km2 and a population of 4.2 million. Land being extremely precious and valuable, the disposal of solid waste in Singapore (both domestic and non-domestic) has been both a challenge and opportunity. Singapore accepted this challenge and adopted incineration since 1979 as the best solution to the problem of mounting waste, both from volume reduction and public health point of view. In addition, this is also the most cost effective way of disposal since land at Main Island is so precious and electricity and scrap metal is recovered from incineration. The concept of incineration was taken from Japan and Germany but the technology was suitably modified to take care of high water content of the Singapore waste. Singapore went a step further and developed Semakau as the offshore landfill for the disposal of Incineration Bottom Ash (IBA) and non-incinerable waste. Even for this purpose, two small islands were joined by making a bund and a bigger island is now in the making with IBA. It is expected that this island should last till 2040-2045 for the disposal of IBA if the recycling takes off as envisaged. After exhausting the capacity of Semakau as a landfill, an island of the size of Sentosa would have been created which may have tremendous economic value for land-strapped Singapore.
9.2
Municipal SWM system in Singapore
9.2.1 Waste Quantity Generated

Solid waste in Singapore increased 6fold from 1,200 tones per day in 1970 to 7,600 tones per day in 2000. However, it has come down to 7,000 tones per day by 2005 as a result of various recycling measures targeted both at industrial and domestic sectors. Out of this, 3900 tones (55.6%) is domestic (around 340 kg per capita per annum) and 3100 tones (44.4%) is non-domestic.
Total Waste Generation = 5.02 million tons per year Waste Recycled (49%) = 2.47 million tons per year Waste Incinerated (46%) = 2.29 million tons per year Incinerated Bottom Ash (10%) =0 .47 million tons per year (80% reduction in wt & 90% in volume) Reject to Landfill (5%) = 0.26 million tons/yr Reject to Landfill (10-15% of total waste) 102 Waste Treated (51%) = 2.55 million tons per year Reject to Landfill (5%) = 0.26 million ton/yr
9.2.2 SWM system

However, total waste generated in Singapore is 5.02 million tons per annum out of which around 2.47 million tons (49%) is getting recycled. Of the remaining 2.55 million tones, 2.29 million tons (46% of the total) is incinerated to produce 0.47 million tons (80% reduction by weight and 90% reduction by volume) of Incinerated Bottom Ash (IBA) while 0.26 million tons (5% of the total) is non incinerable and sent to Semakau off-shore landfill. Thus, total waste sent to Semakau per annum is 0.73 million tons (around 15% of the total). Of the 49% recycling, majority comes from nondomestic, contribution of domestic sector being minuscule and therefore, there remains tremendous scope of increasing recycling in domestic sector to contain the waste. As a matter of fact, Singapore aims to achieve 60% recycling by 2012 to contain the waste at the level of around 7,000 tons per day. To cope with the waste, Singapore has invested billions of dollars to set up a comprehensive waste management system and constructed waste disposal facilities. Today, there are four refuse incineration plants and an offshore sanitary landfill for the disposal of IBA and non-incinerable waste. However, if the growth of waste is not curtailed, Singapore would need to build a new incineration plant every 5-7 years and a new landfill every 2530 years to cope with the waste generated. Arguably, this is not sustainable. The sustainable solution is to reduce waste through waste minimization at source and recycling.
9.2.3 SWM Strategies in Practice

To meet the goal of solid waste management, the National Environment Agency (NEA) has formulated strategies on five (5) focus areas; (i) volume reduction by incineration, (ii) waste recycling, (iii) reduce land filled waste, (iv) waste minimization, and (v) public awareness and 3P partnership. 1. Volume reduction The incinerable waste constitutes about 90% of the total waste generated and is disposed of at the four (4) incineration plants. Heat generated is recovered to generate electricity and ferrous metal is also recovered. The incineration bottom ash (IBA) is disposed of at the sanitary landfill. The remaining 10% of non-incinerable waste is also disposed of at the sanitary landfill. To discourage PWCs and licensed waste collectors from disposing incinerable waste at landfill, the gate fee at the landfill has been kept same as the IPs. The gate fee charged at IPs and the landfill (around $ 79 per tonne) recovers the entire cost of operation. As a matter of fact, the operating grant given to NEA by government is less than the revenue received from gate fee and sale of electricity and scrap metal.
103
Incineration reduces the volume of waste by 85-90%. However, this strategy of volume reduction alone is not sufficient and the demand for landfill is still high, considering Singapores limited land resources. 2. Waste recycling Waste recycling is targeted at two sectors, viz. industries and community and has yielded encouraging outputs with the total recycling reaching a level of 49% by 2005, mainly contributed by the industrial and commercial sectors. The biggest incentive for recycling for the industries is the cost saving, since they have to pay for each tonne of waste generated and handed over to the licensed waste collectors. Further, a healthy recycling industry has developed in Singapore engaged in the recycling of wood waste, construction and demolition waste, plastics, paper and cardboard, tyres etc. They receive their waste from PWCs and licensed waste collectors, who have to pay a smaller amount per tonne for disposal than the gate fee charged at IPs (around S$77.0 per tonne). Thus in Singapore, receiving waste tantamount to receiving money and the revenue earned from the sale of recycled products is an additional bonus. Wood waste is recycled to make home and office furniture and pallets, plastic waste is used to produce pellets which are then exported, construction and demolition waste is recycled to produce lining material for drains, roads etc. Even the IBA has been used as a base material for road on an experimental basis. 3. Reduce land filled waste Non-incinerable waste is directly disposed of at the Semakau landfill. The main fractions of nonincinerable waste are construction and demolition (C&D) waste from construction sites and used copper slag from the marine industries. There are four (4) C&D waste recycling facilities in Singapore that process C&D waste into aggregates for reuse in the construction industry. NEA is working closely with these recycling companies, the Building & Construction Authority (BCA) and the construction industry to develop the market for recycled products made from aggregates produced from the C&D waste recycling facilities. These products include nonstructural pre-cast drains and road kerbs. There are two (2) facilities to process used copper slag from the marine industry into recycled slag, concrete-paving blocks and to manufacture ready mix-concrete. There is also a facility processing steel slag from the scrap iron mill to produce road-building material. 4. Waste minimization
104
NEA, Singapore Environment Council (SEC), major supermarkets and the Singapore Retailers Association, (SRA) have jointly launched a campaign to encourage SRA members to use fewer plastic bags in their retail outlets. The Why Waste Plastic Bags? Choose Reusable Bags campaign was launched on 11 Feb 2006 to discourage wasteful consumption of plastic bags and to encourage greater use of reusable bags. NEA is also working with industries on the development of a voluntary packaging agreement to reduce packaging waste in Singapore, termed as Extended Producer Responsibility. This again is a challenge since most of the food items in Singapore are imported. 5. Public Awareness and 3P Partnership Changing mindset and influencing behaviour take time and needs the involvement of the community and support. NEA has therefore been promoting 3P Partnership (People, Private and Public sectors) to build this sense of ownership of the environment. The focus is on a sustained educational and awareness campaign aimed at the community, schools and in the work force in order to inculcate the habit of waste recycling in the population
9.2.4 Legal Framework for Privatisation

The Environmental Public Health Act, Singapore was suitable amended to provide for the privatization of waste collection. The relevant sections are reproduced below: Director-General may apply systems for collection and removal of refuse, etc. 8. (1) The Director-General may at any time apply to all premises within such area as he may determine any system which he thinks fit for the collection and removal of refuse and waste of every description from those premises. (2) In any area to which a system for the collection and removal of refuse and waste is applied under subsection (1) (a) No person other than a waste collector licensee whose specified area in its licence includes premises in the area shall collect or remove any refuse or waste; and (b) Every occupier of such premises as the Director-General may designate in the area shall use the service of collecting and removing refuse or waste provided by a public waste collector licensee whose specified area in its licence includes those designated premises. Licensing of persons carrying on business of collecting, removing, etc., of refuse or waste 31. (3) The Director-General may designate any person who has been granted a licence under this section as a public waste collector licensee. (4) A licence may be granted under this section following a public tender or in such other manner as the Director-General thinks fit.
105
9.3
PPPs in SWM Singapore
9.3.1 Implementing Agency

The National Environment Agency (NEA) is responsible for formulating and implementing strategies and programmes to reduce waste in Singapore. NEAs goal in solid waste management is to strive Towards zero landfill and then Towards zero waste.
9.3.2 Collection and Transportation on PPP formats

The waste collection in Singapore which was being done by NEA was corporatized in 1996 and fully privatized in September 2001. Singapore has been divided into nine (9) sectors for collection of domestic and trade premises waste and four (4) Public Waste Collectors (PWCs) collect waste from these 9 sectors. The sectors are allotted on the basis of open tenders and the duration of the contract is 7 years. The duration of 7 years and division of Singapore into 9 sectors has been done to ensure economy and efficiency of operation. However, industrial & commercial units are free to engage any licensed waste collector. To ensure the financial viability of PWCs, every household has to pay the charges for waste collection along with their utility bills, lest they avoid or delay payments. For flats in HDB estates, each household pays an amount of S$ 4.5-7.5 per month and individual landed property owners pay S$ 17-24 per month. The trade premises are charged on the basis of volume of waste with rates of S$23-630. Thus, the waste collection in Singapore is completely financially sustainable with no liability for NEA.
9.3.3 Waste Processing (Incineration) on PPP format

Project Background Singapore has decided to establish the fifth Incineration Plant (IP) under PPP at Tuas, for which contract has already been awarded. The driving objective of Singapore government is to increase efficiency and develop private sector expertise in incineration. It is more a strategic step on the part of the government, to be able to export the expertise to other countries in future.
106
The IP will be established under DBOO (Design, Build, Own and Operate) model. NEA will enter into long term Incineration Services Agreement (ISA) with the IP developer for the entire capacity of the plant and for the entire life of the plant. NEA will set and monitor performance standards for the plant and collect gate fees to fund ISA payments. If the IP developer can maintain the plant well, it may well be permitted to continue for an additional period beyond the estimated life of the plant. This would be an additional earning for the IP developer. Project Benefits The following are the benefits of this model: It allows for greater competition and private sector innovation; It allows for whole life-cycle costing; It allows for transfer of design, construction, operations and maintenance risks to private sector; It facilitates the check for project feasibility by private investors and financiers; It lets the government retain strategic control of the sector; and It allows greater opportunities for industry player Project Risk Allocation Since risk allocation is the key to a successful PPP model, accordingly only the controllable risks have been allocated to the IP developer to ensure value for money. The following table shows the risk involved and their allocation on this principle: S. No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Investment Operation & Maintenance Waste Quantity Waste Quality Electricity Price Change in law Force Majeure Risks Design & Construction IP Developer NEA
Payment Components The monthly payment to the developer by NEA would consist of: 1. Fixed monthly payment (Capacity + Fixed O&M) = A 2. Variable O&M (based on the quantity incinerated) = B
107
3. Electricity generation payment (generation and fixed O&M) = C 4. Energy market charges = D 5. Deduction of 98% of sale of revenue of electricity (2% incentive for producing optimum amount of electricity) = E Thus, the monthly payment becomes = A+B+C+D-0.98E
9.4
Conclusion and Key Learning
The following are the key learning points for a successful PPP model as envisaged by Singapore: 1. Capacity Building The PPP procurement process is complex. As such, it is important to have a strong public sector management team with competencies in the legal, financial and technical aspects of contracting through PPP. Public sector management teams would need to develop expertise in such issues as the crafting of contractable output/outcome based specifications, structuring viable payment mechanisms and ensuring fair termination rights. In addition to guidance on PPP from govt., the UK experience has been that the formation of a PPP facilitation body such as PUK (Partnerships UK) and the standardization of PPP contracts for common projects e.g. schools and hospitals have proven particularly useful in accelerating the development of public sector expertise in PPP procurement. 2. Project Coordination For long-term contracts like PPP deals, a key driver of value for money is competition at the point of tender. In view of the scale of typical PPP deals, it should be noted that the market would have a limited capacity to tender for PPP projects. It is thus important to coordinate the release of PPP projects to the market to ensure that there is maximum competition for each project (no crowding of projects) and to sustain market interest. 3. Risk Allocation PPP should not be viewed as a means to transfer all risks to the private sector. For a deal to give value for money, it is crucial that there is an optimal allocation of risks. As a principle, risks should be allocated to the party that is best able to manage it. Generally, from the UK experience design, construction, operation and maintenance risks are generally accepted by the market. The transfer of residual value risks also seemed to have a positive impact on PPP projects, particularly in the maintenance of PPP assets. On the other hand, demand risks are typically not viewed favorably by the market although there have been exceptions, particularly in the transport sector e.g. toll roads, public transport systems.
4. Procurement Costs PPPs deals are complex to structure and bid costs can be substantial for both the procuring public agency as well as private sector tenderers. PPP should therefore only be used for large projects where the Value for Money gains from PPP can potentially justify the high bid costs associated. The UK has set a threshold of 20 mil (S$62 mil) for PPP projects while in Singapore; MOFs threshold is $50 million.
109
10. SWM system in Malaysia

10.1 Introduction Malaysia
Malaysia is a multicultural and multiracial society of about 24.8 million people (2007) with total area of about 329,750 km2. The per-capita income in Malaysia is $14,400 (The World Fact Book, 2008). During the last decade and a half, Malaysia has experienced rapid urbanization and its economy has undergone major changes. These changes have led to a significant influx of rural people and migrants to urban centers, bringing about pressure on local and state governments to provide basic civic amenities including municipal solid waste management for growing urban population. The Malaysian government is also taking up this challenge and it has been able to tackle solid waste management skillfully and efficiently. The section below dwells on the challenges, efforts, plans and success story of the Malaysian government in disposing of and utilizing municipal solid waste.
10.2 SWM system in Malaysia

10.2.1 Quantity Generated
Table below outlines the trends in waste generation in major urban centers in Peninsular Malaysia from 1990 to 2006. Kuala Lumpur being the most waste generating city produces around 3,100 tons of domestic waste per day with per capita household waste generation of about 0.8- 1.3 kg per day. And around 50% of the waste produced in Kuala Lumpur is organic waste (Bavani and phon, 2009). Urban Centers 1990 Kuala Lumpur Johor Bharu Ipoh Georgetown Klang Kuala Terengganu Kota Bharu Kuantan Seremban Melaka TOTAL 586.8 174.8 162.2 137.2 122.8 121.0 102.9 85.3 85.2 46.8 1,625 Solid Waste Generation (tons/day) 2002 2754 215 208 221 478 137 130 174 165 562 5,044 2006 3100 242 234 249 538 154 146 196 186 632 5,677
Source: Statistics from Periathamby and Hamid, 2009
110
Graph below shows the increasing trend in per-capita generation of municipal solid waste from 1985 to 2007 in Peninsular Malaysia. The solid waste generation rate in the 1980s was 0.5 kg/day, which increased to 1.3 kg/day by 2006. According to Arugamuthu et al, (2006), the current rate of solid waste generation was expected to reach 1.5 kg/day in most cities in the year 2007.
10.2.2 SWM system in Malaysia

The management of solid waste in Malaysia has developed gradually. Municipal solid waste (MSW) management was quite primitive until the late 1970s at that time the local district health offices cleaned only the streets and carried away the household wastes to municipal disposal sites which were assigned as authorized dumping grounds. When the generation of household waste increased, the frequency of collection also increased, so that the organic waste did not cause harm to the health of the people. In order to increase the efficiency of the disposal of household waste, the government of Malaysia delegated waste management to four private consortia. The privatization of urban solid waste management in Malaysia was initiated in 1993 with the objective of providing an integrated, effective, efficient, and technologically advanced solid waste management system. At that time local authorities (LAs) dealt with the waste disposal management, but they faced some problems such as finance, lack of expertise, illegal dumping, open burning, and a lack of proper solid waste disposal sites. Although the work was privatized, privatization in fact did not solve the problems (Agamuthu et al, 2009). It is important to adopt campaigns among the general people about cleanliness and public health. Therefore, the Malaysian government undertakes such campaigns from time to time to make the people aware of environmental consciousness and the recycling process. In 1988, the government introduced the Action Plan for a Beautiful and Clean (ABC) Malaysia, and recycling campaigns. These campaigns continued for several years. The campaigns were successful
as the government was able to create environmental awareness and knowledge of waste management among the public to a satisfactory level. A survey carried out in 1999 showed that 59% of respondents were moderately aware with some basic knowledge and were mildly alert to the management of solid waste (Irra, 1999). Daily MSW generation in Peninsular Malaysia today exceeds 19,000 tons. Approximately 75% of this is collected and disposed of in 130 landfills and dumps (Agamuthu et al, 2006). 20% of the organic waste is burned or dumped into rivers or at illegal sites, while 5% is recycled. Malaysias main option of waste disposal has been landfills, although alternatives have been explored. Table below indicates the current waste management methods in practice since 2002 and it also indicates the proposed technologies to be used by 2020. Treatment Methods 2002 Recycling Composting Incineration Inert Landfill Sanitary Landfill Other disposal sites TOTAL 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 90.0 Percentage of waste disposed 2006 5.5 1.0 0.0 3.2 30.9 59.4 Target 2020 22.0 8.0 16.8 9.1 44.1 0.0
100.0 100.0 100.0 Source: Statistics from Periathamby and Hamid, 2009
Daily MSW generation in Peninsular Malaysia currently exceeds 19,000 tons. Approximately 75% of this is collected and disposed of in 130 landfills and dumps (Agamuthu et al, 2006). Around 20% of the organic waste is burned or dumped into rivers or at illegal sites, while 5% is recycled. Malaysias main option of waste disposal has been landfills, although alternatives have been explored. Table above indicates the current waste management methods in practice since 2002 and it also indicates the proposed technologies to be used by 2020. The Malaysian government proposes to gradually establish several MSW incineration plants, simultaneously emphasizing the 3Rs (reduce, reuse, and recycle) in the future.
10.2.3 Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act (SWPCM) 2007
To manage solid waste in Malaysia in an efficient way so that it does not cause environmental degradation, the Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 (SWPCM Act 2007) was passed as law in 2007. The SWPCM Bill was under review for 10 years before it was finally approved in August 2007 as an Act. The Act is administered by the Ministry of Housing and Local Government.
The main objective of the Act is to provide for and regulate the management of controlled solid waste and public cleansing for the purpose of maintaining proper sanitation and for matters incidental thereto (Yahaya, N., (2007). The Act improves and ensures high-quality services in solid waste management (Agamuthu et al, 2009). The Act (SWPCM Act 2007) was enacted based on the similar Acts in Japan, Denmark, Switzerland, Germany, and the United States and it mainly focused on public cleanliness management. It adopts the best management practices in solid waste management from the above countries. The main strategies are to implement efficient solid waste treatment, interim treatment, and final disposal of solid waste. The strategies also include the 3R issues, which cover management and regulations. The Act includes the management of amenities from roads and toilets to drains, food courts, and grassed areas by the roadside. The Act covers the management of solid waste from commercial centers, public sites, construction sites, households, industrial zones, and institutions.
10.3 Corporatization of SWM Services

Prior to the implementation of the SWPCM Act 2007, solid waste management and public cleansing were the responsibility of the Local Authorities (LAs), and were normally subcontracted to smaller waste management service providers. Appointing smaller designated parties to service specified areas resulted in more efficient management in the early stages of implementation. However, with the increasing costs of waste management, the situation resulted in subcontractors not being paid promptly, leading to drastically reduced efficiency. With the passing of the Act, the authority governing solid waste and public cleansing was shifted from state governments/ LAs to the Federal Government. The management cost is shared by these two former parties. LAs direct funds to a Federal Corporation that directly manages solid wastes. The new management system stops the unsustainable system that emerged from subcontractors and unprofessional contractors. A Corporation named Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Corporation (the Corporation) was established under the Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Corporation Act 2007 (Section 2 of SWPCM Act 2007). This Corporation works under the Federal government and the function of the Corporation includes every aspect that is deemed necessary to ensure the implementation and success of an effective and integrated solid waste management plan. The function includes recommending and implementing policies and strategies pertaining to solid waste management services, implementing improvement measures for existing solid waste management services, enforcing the law, and establishing institutions to undertake research activities. Its function also covers the recommendation and implementation of relevant standards, monitoring of compliance with the Act, and promoting participation by people and creating awareness among the public (Agamuthu, 2009).
The SWPCM Act requires residents to pay for the waste collection and disposal service provided by the licensed concessionaire (private authority) under the Act. The Act provides for penalty provisions for consumers who refuse to pay waste disposal fees. If any consumer fails to settle the waste collection fees, the licensed concessionaire may take the case to the Tribunal for Solid Waste Management (the Tribunal). o This Tribunal has the power to impose a fine of up to RM5000 (US$1316) and RM50 (US$13) for each day of the continuation of the offence. Charges will be imposed on the owners of facilities, the occupiers of residents, LAs, or any individual who receives solid waste management services (Tan, 2007).
The Act also listed the responsibility of the waste generator to conduct waste separation in order to promote recycling and retrieve valuable components from the waste stream. o Under clause 74 of the Act, it is an offence if a person fails to separate solid waste generated by the premises. On conviction of the offence, the person is liable to a fine of up to RM1000 (US$277).
The SWPCM Act introduces 3Rs: reduce, reuse, and recycle. The implementation and enforcement of the 3Rs are listed in the Act under Part X, in which solid waste generators are required to reduce the generation of solid waste; to use environment friendly materials; to limit the generation, import, use, discharge, and disposal of specified products; to implement coding and labeling on products to promote recycling; and to utilize any method to reduce the adverse impacts of MSW (Municipal solid waste) on the environment, i.e., to reduce, reuse, and recycle of MSW. Although waste minimization is emphasized in the Act, the techniques to reduce waste generation are not specified and the options are too generalized (Agamuthu et al, 2009). Failure to comply with the law will make the offender liable to a fine of up to RM10 000 (US$2632) or up to 6 months imprisonment, or both.
10.4 Conclusion
The Malaysian government has enacted the Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 (SWPCM Act 2007) to ensure proper and efficient management of the thousands of tons of waste produced in the country every day. The Act gives the duty of the collection and disposal of waste to private organizations under license. It is the duty of the Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Corporation (the Corporation) to look after the acts of the private organizations known as solid waste management concessionaires to make sure that they are carrying out collection and disposal properly and efficiently.
The SWPCM Act 2007 also requires residents to separate non-organic waste from the organic waste. It is compulsory for every house to separate the non-organic and organic waste. This rule has been provided in clause 74 of SWPCM Act 2007. If any person disregards this rule, he will be liable for an offence and on conviction will be fined RM1000. The case can be taken to the Tribunal for Solid Waste Management (The Tribunal) for a decision. Thus, the Act ensures that household waste is properly managed and disposed of and that it is separated for recycling. Such an attempt by the government of Malaysia undoubtedly will ensure good management of waste materials on the one hand and a neat, clean and healthy environment on the other hand. The SWPCM Act 2007 (Malaysia) has made it compulsory for all Malaysian to separate different types of solid wastes at home before it is collected by the designated concessionaries. This plan is a great plan for Malaysia and it must be implemented properly by the SWPCM Corporation. The Corporation must monitor regularly the recycling function of residents and supermarkets and implement this law effectively. On the other hand, the private authority which is responsible to return the used plastics, glasses, papers and cans to the relevant industries; can earn money by selling these recycling waste to those industries.
115

SWM PPP Tookit-Volume-II

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SWM PPP Tookit-Volume-II

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Public Private Partnerships

Government of India Ministry of Urban Development

Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Economic Affairs

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

10. 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

About this document

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

Integrated SWM Hyderabad

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

Municipal SWM system in Hyderabad

1.2.1 SWM Department:

1.2.2 Waste Generation

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

MSWM value chain and management in Hyderabad

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

100 200 3,063

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

Land for the project

Contract Signing 24 May, 1997 18

Private firm Rs 25 per ton

then Supplementary MoU signed on 18 May, 2006.

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

Exhibit 1.8 Compliance rate of MSW Rules in GHMC area

Source: IMaCS Analysis

Proposed PPP project for Integrated SWM

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

Lowest bid for a monthly rate for work a given of in quantity

represents quantity of work For processing

Coverage the project

around 40,000 population and a distance of 27 km

Penalty linked to unsatisfactory work at 2% of the contract amount

Comprehensive well laid

benchmarks by MoUD. Attached as annexure to this case study. 10

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs

1.4.1 Scope of Work for Private Operator

Jawarharnagar, Gandhamguda, Shamshiguda, Fatullaguda

Volume II Case studies of PPP projects

Improving delivery of MSWM services in India through PPPs