Refuse Management
o
in Developing Nations
This publication was prepared for the
Office of International Activities
by the
Office of Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
August 1981

-------
Refuse Management
in Developing Nations
This publication was prepared for the
Office of International Activities
by the
Office of Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
August 1981

-------
PREFACE
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has received
numerous requests from developing nations for information and assistance on
management of refuse collection and disposal. In response to this need, the
Office of International Activities requested that the Deputy Assistant
Administrator of the Office of Solid Waste prepare a report that could be used
by developing nations to help them understand and implement an improved refuse
management system.
Refuse management is difficult in any nation since it requires a
combination of land, labor, capital and management on a continuing basis.
Often national and local governments are not fully aware of the many options
in equipment and facility selection that can reduce long-range costs and
labor/management problems and assure the success of the refuse system. Thus,
this report is directed at decision makers in developing nations, to help them
understand the problems and ramifications of their decisions on the success or
failure of the refuse collection and disposal system.
This project is part of a broad program of technical assistance being
carried out by EPA, Office of Solid Waste, to help improve the collection and
disposal of refuse in the United States as well as developing nations. This
report was written by John W. Thompson, Local Program Manager, and is based on
discussions and visits to developing nations.
ii

-------
CONTENTS
Page
Introduction 		1
Collection Methods and Funding Policies		3
Estimating Equipment and Vehicle Requirements		10
Landfills and Transfer Stations			12
Processing; Recovery of Waste Materials				13
Operational Management 	 		15
Contract Collection and Disposal 		21
Summary		22
iii

-------
REFUSE MANAGEMENT IN DEVELOPING NATIONS
Objectives of a National Program
Refuse management is the orderly process of picking up the discards of a
community from many locations and hauling them off to processing or disposal
sites. The objectives of the collection disposal cycle should be to:
(1) protect the health and aesthetic conditions of the community by collecting
and disposing of refuse in a sanitary fashion; (2) provide a desired level of
service in terms of frequency and point of collection on a continuing basis;
(3)	achieve these objectives with the highest productivity and at the least
cost to the government.
By definition, increased productivity means more tons collected per hour
with the same or less labor. Generally, this will result in the lowest cost.
Many think the only means to increase productivity is for laborers
to work harder. In general, this is not true. Higher productivity can be
achieved in almost any refuse system through the correct policy decisions and
improved management techniques in operations. Primary management decisions
affecting productivity are: (1) system policies on method of collection
and funding; (2) equipment selection; (3) vehicle routing—scheduling;
(4)	distance and time to the disposal site; (5) management of the operation.
The objective of a national refuse program is to promote the protection
of health and the environment by the following actions:
•	Provide technical and financial assistance to provincial and local
government agencies for the development of refuse management plans
that will promote improved refuse management techniques, more
effective organizational arrangements, new and improved methods of
collection, processing, or recovery of refuse and the environmentally
safe disposal of refuse.
•	Provide grants (funds) for the design, construction, acquisition, and
maintenance of refuse systems, equipment, and facilities.
•	Prohibit future open dumping of refuse and require the conversion of
existing open dumps to sanitary landfills, which do not pose a danger
to the environment or to health.
•	Regulate the transportation and disposal of hazardous or industrial
wastes that have adverse effects on health and the environment.
•	Provide for the promulgation of rules, regulations, and guidelines for
solid waste collection, transportation, separation, recovery, and
disposal practices, and systems.
1

-------
•	Promote national research and development programs for improved solid
waste management and resource conservation techniques, more effective
organizational arrangements, and for new and improved methods "of
collection, processing, and environmentally safe disposal of refuse
and non-recoverable residues.
•	Promote the demonstration, construction, and application of refuse or
solid waste management practices that preserve and enhance the quality
of the environment.
•	Establish cooperative efforts among national, provincial, and local
government agencies.
•	Institute permit or licensing systems for private haulers of indus-
trial, commercial or hazardous wastes to ensure that the refuse is
disposed in a sanitary landfill and is not dumped in a promiscuous
manner.
Definitions of Terms Used Throughout This Report
1.	The term "refuse or solid waste" means any garbage, refuse, sludge from
a wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution
control facility, and other discharged materials, including solid, liquid,
semi-solid, or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial, commer-
cial, mining, and agricultural operations, and from community activities.
2.	The term "refuse management" means the systematic administration of
activities to provide for the collection, separation, storage, transportation,
transfer, processing, recovery, treatment and disposal of refuse.
3.	The term "refuse facility" includes: (a) any collection, processing or
resource recovery system or component thereof; (b) any system, program, or
facility for resource conservation; (c) any facility for the treatment of
refuse, including hazardous wastes, whether such facility is associated with
facilities generating such waste or otherwise.
4.	The term "refuse planning" includes refuse management, comprehensive
planning, implementation planning or management, as well as guidelines, rules,
regulations, and agreements which further the objectives of refuse management.
5.	"Hazardous waste" means any refuse or combination of refuse or solid
wastes, which, because of the quantity, concentration, physical, chemical, or
infectious character, may: cause or significantly contribute to an increase
in serious irreversible, or incapacitating reversible, illness; or, pose a
substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment
when improperly treated, stored, transported, or disposed of, or otherwise
managed.
2

-------
COLLECTION METHODS AND FUNDING POLICIES
The initial decisions on the type of collection-disposal practices should
be predicated on the long-range funding commitment by the local government to
operate the system. In many instances, local governments have acquired vast
amounts of new equipment, but did not make provision for the follow-up on
funding to adequately maintain and operate the collection-disposal system. It
is not unreasonable to assume that annual operating costs will be about equal
to the initial capital investment made in the equipment. Thus, a city pur-
chasing two million dollars worth of new trucks must also plan on spending two
million dollars annually over the next five years for labor, repair, mainte-
nance, insurance, overhead and administrative costs. In a typical collection
system in the United States, costs for various functions are: labor, 60%;
maintenance and truck operation, 20%; depreciation, 10% and administration,
10%. (In developing nations, labor costs would be proportionately less, due
to lower wages, and vehicle operating costs higher due to the greater cost for
imported equipment and parts.) In the United States (U.S.), collection costs
generally represent 85% and land disposal 15% of total collection-disposal
costs.
The larger the annual operating budget, the higher the level of service
that can be provided to the public. Cities with large budgets often have
twice-per-week household collection from the backyard, whereas cities with
smaller budgets have once-per-week refuse collection at the street.
An often overlooked fact is that 15% of the refuse in the U.S. is not
collected on a regular basis. This generally applies to rural areas where the
homeowner must transport the waste to a centralized location for bulk bin
collection. Often, the bulk bins are 1-8 km from the resident's home.
Very few governments in developing nations are sufficiently affluent to
afford a high level of refuse collection service. Therefore, bulk bin collec-
tion appears to be the least costly, most productive means of collection, and
ordinary sanitary landfilling the least costly means of disposal. Average
U.S. collection-disposal costs is presented below to help decision makers
understand the economics of various collection-disposal options and their
costs (Table 1).
Type of Refuse and Generation Rates
In general, the more affluent a community, the more waste is generated.
While the U.S. generation rate by citizens is 1.25 kg per person per day, a
typical generation rate in a developing nation is about 0.5 kg per person per
day. Another big variation is in the composition of the waste. In the U.S.,
about 75% of the waste stream is combustible materials, whereas in developing
nations, about 75% of the waste stream is non-combustible^vegetable matter.
The density of uncompacted organic refuse is 180 kg per m or about 3 times
greater than inorganic refuse. Therefore, the type, size, and kind of
equipment utilized for collection and disposal of organic wastes should take
this into consideration. For example, compacting inorganic waste to 650 kg
per cubic meter is difficult, whereas compacting waste containing 75% organic
materials is much easier. The waste composition will influence the size and
type of truck (chassis, frame, axles and body) needed to do the job.
3

-------
TABLE 1
Average U.S. Costs per Tonne for Various
Refuse Options, 1981
(Costs include Interest and Depreciation on Capital)
Activity	Dollars per tonne Ratio to landfill costs
Landfilling	6.00	1.0
Collection
(individual houses)	46.00	7.7
Collection Bulk Bins
(a)	Rear Loaders 6m	34.85	5.8
3
(b)	Front Loaders 6m	18.70	3.1
(c) Tilt Frames 26m^	8.60	1.4
Transfer Station to
Landfill
(24 Km-1 way distance)	9.20	1.5
Incinerators
(80% combustibles)	43.15	7.2
Incinerators-Supplemental
Fuel
(80% non-combustibles)	69.00	11.5
4

-------
In developing nations, Che large amount of organic material and its
corresponding density have not always been considered in the selection of
equipment. For example, three men can usually lift a barrel of inorganic
material into a packer truck, whereas a barrel full of organic matter would
be too heavy. Organic waste, being more dense than inorganic waste, can be
easily compacted to a high density, and blowing or loose refuse is not a
serious problem. Thus, the weight and density of vegetable wastes is a reason
for the utilization of bulk mechanical collection of refuse in many developing
countries.
Door-to-Door Collection
Door-to-door collection is the highest level of service a community can
provide its citizens. It is also the most expensive: about $60 per household
per year, or $43 per tonne (Mg). It assumes: every citizen or household to
have a container, or to purchase plastic refuse bags; that trucks can maneuver
down the streets; that a dependable, highly organized labor force is available
for collecting the refuse. About 75% of the households in the U.S. have their
refuse collected once a week at the curb. For those citizens in the U.S., as
well as in developing nations who desire a higher level of service such as
more frequent collection or backyard carryout service, it is customary to
contract with private haulers of refuse and to pay a higher price directly to
the hauler for this higher level of service. This same principle can be
applied to collection from affluent citizens in developing nations.
Bulk Bin Collection
Bulk bin collection is the lowest level of service and the least costly
method of, refuse collection a government can provide the citizens. Bulk bins
or containers ranging in size from 6m to 26m are common throughout the
world. About 15% of the U.S. residential refuse and all of the U.S.
commercial and industrial waste is collected in this manner. The bulk bins
are placed at strategic or convenient locations and citizens transport their
waste to the centralized bin locations.
Bulk bins can and should work well in developing nations for the
following reasons:
a.	It is the most cost effective means in terms of labor and equipment
necessary to do the job. Costs per ton, depending on size of con-
tainers, are only one-fourth to one-half of the costs of door to door
collection.
b.	Management is simplified. Fewer trucks and workers are needed,
thereby reducing management problems.
c.	Maneuvering trucks down narrow streets is avoided.
d.	Collection can be done at night and, since the time lost negotiating
day-time traffic may decrease productivity by 50%, costs can be
lowered. All large U.S. cities do night-time collection in central
areas of the cities.
5

-------
e.	Injuries are reduced, since laborers do not lift the refuse.
f.	If night collection is instituted, truck maintenance can be done
during the day.
g.	Most cities in developing nations now have centralized points for
locating bulk bins such as markets, dust bins, and night soil
stations; these points are known and used by the citizens.
h.	Based on the U.S. experience, 97% of the citizens can and will trans-
port their refuse to a central collection point (bulk bin) and there
is no reason to think citizens in developing nations will not follow
the same trend.
i.	Weight of refuse (organics) is heavier in developing nations and thus
mechanical means for loading vehicles is warranted.
Common objections to bulk bins are:
a.	Some citizens want pickup at their houses. Affluent citizens should
either pay a private hauler or have their household help carry the
refuse to a centralized location.
b.	That there will be an excess of laborers. (Excess laborers should be
utilized with wheelbarrows, shovels, and brooms in cleaning up the
streets, ditches, gutters, and around the centralized bin locations
and depositing the refuse into the bulk bins for collection.)
c.	Drivers must be paid a night wage differential. This is a valid
argument for bulk bin collection at night, but the increased produc-
tivity will more than make up the difference. The higher night wage
differential can also help the city attract and hold qualified,
trained drivers.
d.	When trucks are left alone in bulk bin collection, they are subject
to robberies and equipment is subject to vandalism. (Conventional
dumping of bulk bins does not require drivers to leave the truck,
therefore, robbery is difficult.) Trucks can be equipped with
floodlights on top of the cab and the driver and helper can carry
mace or other gas repellants to discourage vandals.
Selection and Placement of Bulk Bins
It is not unusual |or a city to operate two types of bulk bin systems.
Small bins of 6m to 9m are placed in strategic locations in residential
areas, perhaps one per city block. Larger 26m to 45m bins are placed at
market areas, public housing developments, apartments, government buildings,
and other areas where there is a high population concentration. Although the
body of the truck is quite different for collecting each type of bin, selec-
tion of the truck chassis, motor, etc. may be the same. About 80% of all
truck repair costs are for the chassis and only 20% for the packer (body).
6

-------
Cities which can standardize the truck frame, engine, and transmission, will
have lower maintenance costs, since the mechanics need only to learn to repair
one kind of truck and the city can reduce the number of spare parts in its
inventory.
When utilizing bulk bins for refuse, it is important to keep the sides as
low as possible so citizens can throw their refuse over the side. If the
sides are high, wood or concrete platforms must be constructed so citizens can
walk up a ramp to throw their refuse into the bin. In general, a 1.2m high
bin is the recommended height. Cities need not reduce the volume of the bin
to have low sides, but merely change the length or width of the bulk bin.
Although the initial capital cost for bins is high, they usually have a
10-year life and can be easily fabricated by local companies. Hinged tops or
sliding sides are not worth the extra investment. Their purpose is to reduce
blowing paper, insects, rodents, and odor, however, in practice, it has been
found that only one lid per 100 containers is ever entirely closed, both in
developing nations and in the U.S. Also, problems with lid maintenance and
filling the bulk bins full are eliminated if lids or sliding sides are not
used.
There are four primary types of bulk bin collection equipment on the
market: rear-loading, front-loading, and tilt frame compactors (Figure 1),
and side-loading compactors (not illustrated).
a.	Rear-loading compactors are the least efficient method and costly,
for several reasons. Trucks must back up to the container and often
laborers must push, pull, or position the container before hooking
onto it. Even bulk bins with wheels are difficult to position, since
they get caught in mud, on stones, or in depressions. Also, mainten-
ance of the wheels is difficult and expensive. Dumping the con-
tainers with a cable and winch is slow. Because of the time and
extra labor needed for emptying the bins, the cost of this system is
estimated at $43 a tonne in the U.S. This assumes two tr^ps a day to
the landfill, loose inorganic waste at 64 kg pounds per m and $60
for the vehicle. Naturally, hydraulic dumping systems, compaction
cycle time, traffic, and distance between bins and to the landfill
will, influence all the cost examples.
b.	Front-loading compactor trucks are the most customary type of
commercial or bulk bin collection vehicle used in the United States.
In practice, it can be operated with only the driver. Truck costs
range from $60,000 to $90,000 depending on the size of truck and
packer. Based on two trips a day to a disposal site, these vehicles
generally mo^e 18 tonnes a day at $21.50 per tonne. Bin sizes are
generally 3m to 6m . Larger trucks must have tandem rear axles
which have higher operating costs than do smaller, single rear axle
trucks.
c.	Tilt-frame, or roll-off noncompaction trucks are generally used to
move large amounts of heavier density wastes such as the organic
wastes prevalent in developing countries. Container (bin) size and
truck^size can be varied to accommodate weight and density of refuse.
A 26m bin hauling loose refuse generally does not need a tandem axle
7

-------
FIGURE 1
Three Types of Bulk Container Trucks
A. Rear-Loading Compactor—Average Capacity 9 Tonnes Per Day
u.
b. Front-Loading Compactor—Average Capacity 17 Tonnes Per Day
c. Tilt-Frame or Roll-Off Container Truck — Average Capacity 34 Tonnes Per Day
8

-------
truck. Costs for this system are estimated at $10.75 per tonne for
about four trips daily to the disposal site. Nets or tarpaulins
should be provided for covering the load if it is overly full, windy
conditions exist, or the refuse is high in inorganics, such as paper.
However, most vegetable refuse found in developing countries is
sufficiently moist so that nets are not necessary.
d. Side-loading compactor trucks are a fourth means of dumping bulk
bins. Laterally moving arms extend 30 inches out from the truck to
grab the bin and hoist it up high enough tg dump its contents. Host
of the systems employing these arms use lm round plastig or steel
containers, but the arms are adaptable to rectangular 6m bins. The
advantages of this type of mechanical loading are that the truck can
collect bins in streets as narrow as 3.65m, the truck never needs to
back up, and the compaction is all done from front to rear, elimi-
nating the need and cost for multi-push and.packing blades. Also,
the empty vehicle weight is less than conventional rear packers,
allowing a greater payload. Typical cost estimates are $21.50 per
tonne for moving 18 tonnes per day.
Conventional side-loading packers for using bulk bins have been on
the market for years, but, like rear packers, additional labor is
required to position the bins. Consequently, these are not as cost
effective as the newer type side loaders.
9

-------
ESTIMATING EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLE REQUIREMENTS
The first and most important determination administrators must make is
the volume of waste generated in the city on a daily basis and the weight of
the refuse. If we assure a generation rate in developing nations of 0.5kg per
person per d^y and 200kg per cubic meter, then a city of 1 million inhabitants
needs 1,250m of bin capacity daily. Twenty percent additiona^ should be
added for seasonal variations and contingencies. Thus, 1,500m in bins are
needed for each million persons. If we assume the city plans to empty each
bin every two days, and operate the system six days a week using the 20|
seasonal variation to take care of the seventh nonwork day, then 3,000m in
bulk bins are needed per million residents.
3	3
A more difficult problem is to determine the mix of 26m bins and 6m
bins. Since the larger bins are the least costly to collect, planners should
first attempt to locate sites where the large bins can be placed and serviced.
Population density and truck services should also be considered. If a 6m bin
were placed at the corner of a city block to service more than 2,000 persons,
it would have to be serviced daily. In general, for cost effectiveness and
service, it works best to locate as many 26m bigs at strategic locations as
possible. If w| assume 60 sites where large 26m bins were located, ^hen the
need for 1,190m of bin capacity are satisfied. The remaining 1,100m needed
for collection every two days would require 250 of the 6m bins. Planning for
the location, size and frequency of collection is never perfect, and adjust-
ments will be needed after the collection system is started. Rather than
change the size or location of bulk containers, the easiest adjustment is to
change the frequency of service.
3	.	.
^ For example, a 26m bin at a market might need servicing daily, whereas a
26m bin at an apartment mig^t only need to be collected twice per week. The
same principle applies to 6m bins. Radio equipped trucks and a supervisor
who reports when bins are full will pay for itself quickly in mileage costs
saved servicing partially filled bins.
Determining the number of trucks needed is more difficult than determin-
ing the number and size of bins. Time and motion studies are needed to
determine: minutes needed to service each container; time between containers;
time to disposal site; time needed at disposal site; time to return; and time
to and from the garage; allowances for breakdowns and other variables. This
phase of a refuse system design should be done by a multi-disciplinary task
force of engineers, planners, and transportation experts who, collectively
will not overlook the fact that time delays at a landfill or transfer station,
adverse weather conditions, or accidents on main roads, can and will impact
seriously on the number of trucks needed. Collection at night can help reduce
the error in the number of trucks needed because of reduced traffic congestion
and delays occuring at night.
There is no rule of thumb or standard for determining the number of
trucks needed for a city. Each municipality must, by necessity, calculate
the time needed for each vehicle to service a given number of bulk bins and
then add at least 20% to the fleet of trucks for downtime; repairs, and
contingencies.
10

-------
If we assume the tilt frame^trucks make four trips a day to the disposal
site and there are 30 of the 26m sites to be serviced nightly, then 8 trucks
are needed. If each of the front loading compactor trucks can make three
round trips to th^ disposal site with 5 tonne loads, Jjhen each truck can ser-
vice 12 of the 6m bins nightly. Since 125 of the 6m bins must be serviced
nightly, 13 trucks are needed. This does not allow for breakdowns and
contingencies.
3
In summary, for each one million^persons, the city would need 60-26m
bins and 8 trucks, plus 250 of the 6m bihs^ and 13 trucks. To accommodate
breakdowns, repairs, and maintenance, every municipality must have spare
vehicles. Some cities with excellent maintenance programs are able to operate
with only 10% spare vehicles, but the normal amount is 20-30% spare vehicles.
Some small municipalities share spare vehicles on a rental basis to the owning
municipality.
All cities must make extensive plans for phasing in new collection
practices over a 1-3 year period, since training of drivers, mechanics, and
supervisors, and routing of vehicles, takes time and diligent work. It is
imperative that a city do one area at a time and do a thorough, complete job
before moving to another area. The introduction of crews and trucks over an
entire city can lead to chaos and a breakdown of what might otherwise be a
good system if initially confined to one area.
11

-------
LANDFILLS AND TRANSFER STATIONS
The least costly means of refuse disposal is landfilling (Table 1). The
second least costly means of disposal is to process the refuse through a trans-
fer station onto transfer trailors, generally hauling 13.5 tonnes each to the
landfill. The general rule of thumb of when it is advisable to initiate the
use of transfer stations for hauling refuse to remote landfills is: when the
round trip time to the landfill requires more than one hour driving time, or
when the haul distance is more than 25km one way.
Assuming a city has a landfill in the south and east quadrant, often the
most cost effective means of collecting and disposing of refuse is to direct
haul from these quadrants to the landfill and erect transfer stations for the
north and west quadrants.
Many cities today have one or two primary roads bisecting the main city
and these roads can provide fast access to a new landfill 15-25km from the
center city if the landfill is located adjacent to the main highway and if
refuse is hauled at night when traffic congestion is limited.
Sanitary landfilling is the least costly operation in refuse collection
and disposal and should be utilized when and where practical. In the U.S.,
the average cost in 1978 was $6 per tonne. In general, as tons placed per day
increase, costs for landfilling decrease. Taking refuse through a transfer
station adds an estimated $9.20 per tonne to refuse costs. This assumes an
average 54km round trip haul. Hauling costs are estimated at 10 cents per
tonne per km for truck and driver.
New York City, disposing 12,000 tonnes a day in one landfill had an
average cost of $2.72 per tonne in 1977, and Dallas, Texas, operating
7 landfills in 1978, had average costs of less than $3.30 per tonne. Over
80% of all landfill costs are for equipment and the labor to operate this
equipment.
There are five primary principles to operating a sanitary landfill around
which policymakers should center their decisions: (a) protection of the
ground water for the present and forseeable future, especially if it will
contaminate a public water supply; (b) discouragement of scavengers, usually
through the use of fences; (c) control of insects and rodents; (d) prevention
of open burning; (e) periodic, and preferrably frequent, compacting and
covering of the waste with dirt. This last principle is the most expensive
part of landfill operation.
Although bulldozers have been the favored piece of landfill equipment
over the years, use of landfill compactors is rapidly gaining acceptance. The
big advantage of compactors is that the refuse is more densely packed,
therefore more refuse can be put in the same amount of space at no additional
cost. Hauling of cover materials should be done with a scraper which moves
15-30m of dirt.
12

-------
PROCESSING; RECOVERY OF WASTE MATERIALS
Incineration
Only 4% of the U.S. waste stream is burned in incinerators. To date
incinerators have not proven economically feasible due to high capital and
operating costs. They are also a major source of air pollution and only about
seven incinerators have been able to meet the U.S. air pollution standards.
In the 1950's, over 300 municipalities operated incinerators, and by 1978 this
had decreased to about 42 cities.
The feasibility of operating incinerators in the U.S. is much more favor-
able than in developing nations because the refuse is 80% inorganics, such as
paper and plastics, which burn without supplemental fuel. In order to burn
organic refuse of the type found in most developing nations, supplemental fuel
must be used. This is both expensive and directly opposed to energy conser-
vation. In addition to the technology needed to build the plants, skilled
trained workers are needed to operate the plant on a 24-hour basis for economy
of scale.
Typical personnel needed to operate an incinerator are certified welders,
electrical and mechanical engineers, tool and die mechanics, and firebrick
masons. Explosions do occur from paint, propane cans, and other volatile
materials, putting the incinerator out of use, often for long periods of time.
While they are effective at controlling air pollution, electrostatic precipi-
tators require considerable amounts of electricity and periodic maintenance.
Electrical brownouts or blackouts of a power supply for even a short period of
time can result in long and costly delays in restarting the operation. In all
cases, there is an incinerator residue of 10-35% by weight, depending on the
completeness of the burn and amount of glass, metal, and other non-combustibles
present which must be transported to the landfill. The decision to install
incinerators in developing countries before an adequate refuse collection
disposal system is instituted cannot be considered a prudent, rationaL
decision.
Composting
Composting of organic wastes is a viable solid waste disposal alterna-
tive. However, composting is much more expensive than landfilling and has
several disadvantages. The separation of the organic from inorganic wastes
with a high degree of reliability is a problem. Pieces of glass in compost
are not wanted by farmers since it cuts their feet and the feet of their
animals. Aerobic digestion of the organic matter must occur before the
compost is trucked to the farm and this requires some technical ability for
controlling the time, temperature, air, and turning of the organic matter
before it becomes compost. A major problem is trucking the compost to farms
and spreading it. Trucking is expensive, and farmers don't want the compost
during either the growing or rainy season. Most farms do not have equipment
to spread the compost and the city might have to purchase a compost spreader
or pay the farmer to spread the compost. Finally, compost is not a
fertilizer. Over the years, urban dwellers in all nations have held the
mistaken idea that compost is a substitute for organic fertilizer. Compost is
13

-------
a soil conditioner, especially good for loosening up clay-type soils. The
fertilizer value for increasing crop yield, especially nitrogen, is less than
0.2%. Thus, one ton of compost has a fertilizer value equal to a 2.5kg bag of
urea (nitrogen) fertilizer. Experienced farmers will always select fertilizer
over compost. In summary, the best use of compost is to spread it on
undeveloped land before the land is brought into production.
14

-------
OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT
Assuming that several policy decisions have been made on funding, type of
service, and equipment needed to do the job, operational management decisions
must be made and implemented that will result in a viable refuse collection-
disposal system.
Operational management of any refuse system in any city or nation is
difficult. Most municipal administrators have the ability to manage white
collar workers and their related functions in an office situation. When this
same expertise is applied to the management of blue collar workers, a fleet of
trucks and a big repair-maintenance facility, something goes wrong. Often,
municipal administrators cannot communicate with the blue collar workers, or
cannot identify with the basic problems and needs of the workers to keep the
system functioning in an efficient manner. In one instance, maintenance of 50
trucks was in chaotic condition because the city's purchasing department held
up the paperwork for the purchase of vehicle parts for two months, even though
the refuse budget adequately provided for parts acquisition. Labor unrest
existed in another city because some drivers worked only 3 hours a day while
others worked 6 hours daily. Administrators and planners had not balanced the
workload equally among the crews. This should be done on an annual basis and
is always supported by labor unions.
Many management studies in recent years have pointed out that wages are
not the highest priority issue in developing and maintaining a contented labor
force. More important factors are working conditions, good equipment, a fair
equitable workload, a grievance procedure, and support of management in their
work.
Based on the U.S. experience, the management skills and chain of command
that will work best in any municipal refuse collection and disposal system is
similar to the military chain of command. The Administrator (battalion major)
passes orders to his department heads for collection, disposal, and mainte-
nance (lieutenants). The department heads pass orders to supervisors (first
sergeants), on to foremen (staff sergeants), to drivers or mechanics
(corporals), who direct laborers (privates). The key to drawing this parallel
between Army organization and municipal waste management is the supervisor or
first sergeant. In the Army, as well as in refuse collection systems, super-
visors or first sergeants must have the ability to communicate between the
blue collar workers and managers (officers).
Based on a large number of observations, retired military personnel have
been very successful when placed in corresponding positions in refuse manage-
ment. Often, supervisors or foremen from large construction companies provide
another source of trained personnel who have the ability to communicate
between blue collar workers and management.
The three primary problems in refuse management which lead to a breakdown
of the system are (1) vehicle maintenance, (2) span of control over vehicles
and crews, and (3) "permissiveness" in management. Overcoming these problems
requires diligent management effort.
15

-------
Vehicle maintenance is the number-one management problem contributing to
missed collections and a breakdown of the refuse collection-disposal system.
New York City, with 1,700 refuse trucks generally has 600 down for repair
daily. No other vehicle takes the abuse of a refuse truck. It must make
hundreds of starts and stops a day in congested traffic, often over poor
roads, and then negotiate a landfill with a full load. Although driver abuse
is a contributing factor to vehicle breakdowns, most vehicle malfunctions are
attributable to improper truck specifications. For these reasons, it is
almost impossible to over-spec a refuse truck. Frames should be extra heavy
duty, axles should be over-specified by 30-35% to take the wear and tear of a
landfill. Engines, transmissions, drive shaft and rear end should be the best
available. No one has ever complained that a refuse truck was too strong for
the job.
While many cities base their purchases on low bid, the trend is toward
life cycle costing. Under this method, truck purchases are based on what the
total lifetime cost of the vehicle will be over 5 years, not the initial pur
chase price (Table 2). Almost all refuse trucks are depreciated over 5 years.
It is much more important to develop cost data on the truck chassis over
a five-year period than on the body or packer mechanism. About 80 percent of
truck total maintenance costs are for the chassis and only 20% for the body.
Often, bodies in good condition can be removed from old chassis and placed on
new trucks for several additional years of life.
Well managed maintenance garages are generally divided into three units:
(1) normal or periodic maintenance for oil and lubrication, (2) small repairs
such as brakes, fuel, electrical, tires, and (3) major maintenance for the
drive train. There have been two trends in recent years for major mainte-
nance. First, complete dealer or truck manufacturer maintenance of the drive
train and, second, the use of modular or replacement engines rather than
rebuilding engines in the maintenance shop. If a chassis manufacturer must
also prepare a bid for drive train maintenance over a five-year period, it
will force life-cycle costing on the decision makers and the initial purchase
of the truck chassis will be more favorably spec'd for the job. Performance
bonding should accompany the drive train maintenance contract.
Poor maintenance of refuse trucks often occurs when the work must be
performed in garages which service highway, police, and other municipal
vehicles. Most mechanics don't want to work on big, old, smelly, dirty refuse
trucks and thus these vehicles are serviced last. Therefore, a separate
garage for refuse vehicles' repair and maintenance is recommended.
Selection of mechanics and training is difficult. In any nation there is
a shortage of heavy equipment mechanics. In general, these workers require
higher pay if a city is to retain competent, qualified truck mechanics. Many
municipal garages servicing refuse trucks often employ the wrong type of
mechanics or do not provide them with the proper equipment. A study in a
major U.S. city of the maintenance requirements over 30 days of 200 refuse
trucks indicated 117 needed electrical repairs, 90 brake service, 89 body
work, and 61 fuel repairs. Only 48 trucks needed engine work. Thus, this
garage needed more mechanics who knew and understood electrical problems and
brakes than they did engine mechanics.
16

-------
Year
Capital Investment and Depreciation
Trade-in value (% of delivery price
Investment, start
Year-end value
Yearly capital cost
Debt Service and Insurance:
Average yearly investment
Yearly debt cost @ 12%
Operation and Maintenance:
Yearly estimated cost
Downt ime:
Availability factor
Hours not available
Cost @ $13/hr for reserve vehicle
Obsolescence:
Productivity factor
Extra hours required to match
production of new model
Cost @ $13/hr
Total Annual Cost
Cumulative Vehicle Cost
TABLE 2
EXAMPLE OF LIFE-CYCLE COSTS
12 3	4	5
75% 55% 40%	30%	25%
70,000 52,500 38,500	28,000	21,000
52,500 38,500 28,000	21,000	17,500
17,500 14,000 10,500	7,000	3,500
61,250	45,500	33,250	24,500	19,250
7,350	5,460	3,990	3,940	2,310
4,000	6,000	8,000	12,000	16,000
95%	94%	91%	88%	85%
60	120	180	240	300
780	1,560	2,340	3,120	3,900
98%	96%	94%	92%	90%
40	80	120	160	200
520	1,040	1,560	2,080	2,600
$30,150	$28,060	$26,390	$27,140	$28,310
$30,150	$58,210	$84,600	$111,740	$140,050

-------
Training of mechanics is generally best accomplished by sending the men
off to school rather than trying to train them on the job. In addition, apti-
tude for the type of training offered is very important. A man who has an
interest in brakes or transmissions may not have the same inclination to learn
electrical repairs. Tire changers might not have a desire to learn hydraulic
cylinder repair. An electrical system repair mechanic might best be recruited
from an electronic school. A good brake mechanic might be obtained from a
farm implement dealer. If the mechanics, even after specialized training, are
not capable of doing the job, they should be put to work on something else and
the training of replacement mechanics started over again. In the U.S., it is
not unusual to employ one good mechanic and helper for every 5 trucks. While
this ratio may not be possible in developing nations, one quality mechanic can
often do the work of several uninterested, poorly trained or inept mechanics.
The role of the foreman and supervisor of the maintenance garage is to
continually circulate through the shop, monitoring the mechanics and the work
being performed.
Periodic maintenance is a necessity. Often, the excuse is used that
there is no time available. If this is a problem, schedule oil changes and
grease jobs on weekends or when the vehicle returns from collection, even
though overtime must be paid to mechanics. Tires and batteries should be
checked daily and replaced if they show any signs of malfunctioning during
operation. It is false economy to utilize tires and batteries on vehicles
until they break down. The lost time of drivers and workers, as well as the
expense of on-route repair or towing, is higher in the long run than discard-
ing tires and batteries before they are worn out.
For some refuse collection systems, it has worked well to schedule
periodic and small maintenance repair jobs at night, if collection is made
during the day, or during the day if the trucks are operated at night.
Standardization of truck chassis types, body engines, transmissions, etc.,
will facilitate a higher level of performance by mechanics since they only
need to learn to repair one type of truck. It also allows the maintenance
garage to carry a minimum number of parts. All garages should carry a large
number of the common parts, and inventory control of these parts is very
important. An adequate replacement supply of belts, radiators, fuel injec-
tors, clutches, generators, starters, etc. will, in the long run, make it
possible to keep the fleet operating. The worst practice appears to be over-
stocking of infrequently used parts or carrying an inventory of parts for
obsolete or salvaged vehicles.
A service contract with the seller of truck chassis for repair of the
drive train components has several advantages for local municipal governments.
The need for highly skilled mechanics necessary to repair or overhaul trans-
missions and engines is avoided. Often, the city wage scale is not sufficient
to attract these specialized mechanics for servicing this equipment. Some
dealer contracts guarantee the minimum number of trucks that will be opera-
tional each day or provide for backup trucks when an excessive number are in
the shop for major repairs. In general, the number of vehicles down for
repair in a well managed maintenance facility is 10% of the fleet. In poorly
managed maintenance facilities, 25-35% down for repairs is not uncommon. In
general, each lost truck hour costs the city $13 for not having the use of the
truck.
18

-------
Everyone subscribes to the ideal of "periodic maintenance", but in
reality that objective is seldom achieved. Too often, the words "we don't
have time" or "every truck has to go out today" is the excuse used for not
performing periodic maintenance. This is false economy and will quickly lead
to serious and costly breakdowns. Clogged oil, air, and fuel filters on
diesel trucks can ruin engines quickly, causing onroute breakdowns and expen-
sive repairs. A leaking hydraulic cylinder can quickly lead to a scored
cylinder and the need for replacement at a cost of several thousand dollars,
all because a few dollars worth of gaskets or packing wasn't installed at the
first sign of deterioration.
It is very easy for the casual, uninformed observer to determine the
quality of a refuse maintenance garage. Is the garage clean and neat? Are
tires and tools put away? Is the floor covered with oil and grease? Are
tires, batteries, and parts lying all over the place, or are they neatly
stored? Is the garage large and well-lighted or small and dingy? Does the
outside yard look like a truck salvage yard or a new truck dealer's parking
lot? The answer to these questions will almost always determine the quality
of the service of the maintenance garage.
Span of control over vehicles, drivers, and crews is the second largest
contributing factor to poor refuse management. Depending on the size of the
city, a large number of trucks and workers leave a central garage each morning
with a $70,000 piece of equipment to do a job and report back to the garage 8
hours later. During this period of time, drivers and crews are often out-of-
touch with any sort of management. They have no supervision to keep them
working and will tend to featherbed. Often, they are confronted with unusual
situations or problems. The truck breaks down, a traffic jam or detour ruins
their work schedule and productivity. Often, a man is injured. The crew or
driver may not know the route if they are substituting for the regular crew;
overlap of routes, half-filled trucks and missed collections result.
Two methods are generally helpful in overcoming the problems associated
with span of control. The use of radio-equipped trucks and foremen in pickup
trucks driving the area and providing supervision generally work best. If a
driver can communicate his problem to a central office, and if the supervisor
can shuffle tracks or crews around, the seriousness of productivity losses
from onroute problems can be minimized. In cities utilizing bulk bins for the
collection of refuse, the supervisor can radio decisions about which con-
tainers are full and need tipping, thus increasing productivity and reducing
costs. Foremen and supervisors should have the ability to reroute trucks to
save time and be able to place containers so they are in the most advantageous
position for refuse collection. Other duties of foremen are to switch and
interchange crew members who work well together and train new drivers on
routes. In practice, about one foreman is needed for each 5-7 routes. Radio-
equipped trucks can and will increase productivity, thereby lowering costs
and recovering the initial investment in a short period of time. They are
especially helpful if the city is divided into areas for collection and all
trucks and crews must stay in the area until the entire job is completed.
Permissive management of labor is the third factor contributing to poor
refuse collection and disposal. Collection of refuse is not a choice vocation
even for blue collar workers. Refuse collection is dirty, smelly, heavy,
19

-------
boring, and a physically exhausting occupation with little chance of advance
ment. For these reasons, the drivers and workers attracted into the occupation
are not of the highest caliber. In the U.S., as well as other nations, many of
the employees are functional illiterates. However, this does not prevent these
individuals from being excellent sanitation workers providing they are trained
and given incentives such as pay, vacations, and the opportunity to go home
early when the job is done. In practice, low I.Q. drivers may be more desir-
able because they concentrate on one thing—driving—while high I.Q. drivers
often have their minds on other things.
In the U.S., as well as developing nations, poor refuse management can
generally be attributed to permissive management. Absenteeism is not dealt
with harshly; many cities have no grievance procedure; drinking on the job is
allowed; truck abuse by drivers is overlooked; accidents forgiven; feather-
bedding and loafing tolerated. A normal 8-hour workday with one hour of
nonproductive time quickly can degenerate into a 4 or 5 hour workday. In
essence, workers will do no more than they are required to do. If administra-
tors and supervisors tolerate permissiveness in the maintenance garage,
onroute or at the landfill, then the solid waste system will be very costly to
operate and may eventually break down.
For these reasons, management must develop and enforce rules and
regulations regarding employee relations. A grievance procedure with several
steps to dismissal is the recommended method. Common problems and courses of
action practiced in some cities are automatic 3-day suspension for drinking on
the job, grounding the driver for accidents at a reduced pay level until the
accident is investigated, and dismissal of employees for several unexcused
absences or instances of truck abuse. Many drivers have caused $5-$10,000
damage to a truck by trying to "clutch" it out of a hole in a landfill. No
refuse system should tolerate this kind of truck abuse from drivers.
20

-------
CONTRACT COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL
Management of any refuse system is difficult under the best of conditions,
thus many U.S. cities are contracting with private firms for collection. Some
of the large U.S. cities which have turned part of their collection service
over to private firms are New Orleans, Oklahoma City, and Phoenix. Several
hundred smaller cities have turned over the entire operation to private firms.
Common reasons given by these cities for contracting the service are:
(1) no new capital for equipment, (2) labor problems are too difficult to
resolve, (3) present management cannot implement the changes needed, and
(4) private firms can do it at a lower cost. All of these statements are
valid except the last one concerning cost. By definition, any city should be
able to collect refuse at less cost because cities don't pay the same taxes
and are non-profit. In reality, refuse collection-disposal in many U.S.
cities is so poorly managed that private firms can often provide the service
at 25-40% less cost because of their better management practices. In general,
private contractors pay higher wages than do cities, but productivity per
worker or per truck is usually double that of cities. Private firms tend to
purchase only the best equipment and often depreciate it over 3 years. They
dismiss employees who do not produce. Maintenance is considered to be of
primary importance. Laborers are placed on an incentive system to get the job
done quickly and thoroughly. In essence, private firms provide diligent
management. However, some U.S. cities such as Pontiac and Flint, Michigan,
St. Petersburg, Florida, and Springfield, Massachusetts, have municipal
systems that are lower in cost than would be the service if it were done by
private firms. Thus, the decision of whether to contract the refuse
collection-disposal operation or do it with city equipment and employees
should rest on the capability of the city to effectively manage and
continually fund the system.
21

-------
SUMMARY
Successful refuse management in developing nations requires that sound
policies must be practiced on both the national and local level to achieve a
dependable, cost-effective and environmentally healthy refuse collection and
disposal system. A national refuse program should provide provincial and
local governments with the technical, financial and regulatory impetus to meet
health and operational objectives; while local decision-makers should match
their community's needs with the most efficient collection, disposal, funding
and overall management options available.
Two constraints are common to developing nations and will govern their
waste management policies. First, many of these governments are not
sufficiently affluent to afford a high level of collection service or capital-
intensive disposal technologies. Second, 75 percent of their waste stream is
organic and, therefore, equipment must be utiliEed which can best collect and
dispose of this type of waste. Given these constraints, the least costly and
most efficient means of waste collection and disposal appears to be mechanical,
bulk bin collection and sanitary landfilling.
Mechanical, bulk bin collection simplifies management by requiring fewer
trucks and workers than other, more expensive methods and it facilitates the
collection of heavy, organic wastes. Selection of bin size, location, and
quantity must be based on the community's daily waste volume and population
density. Truck fleet size should be determined by thorough time-motion studies
conducted by engineers, planners and transportation experts.
Vehicle maintenance is the primary management problem contributing to
system failure. It cannot be too strongly stressed that collection equipment
should be the most sturdy and dependable available and that, once bought, it
should receive regular, periodic maintenance by quality labor.
Two other problems often exist in operation management and can lead to
system breakdown—an insufficient "span of control" over vehicles and crews
on-route, and management-level permissiveness regarding careless or lazy
behavior by crew members. These can be resolved by increased supervision
through radio-equipped trucks, foremen in trucks driving the service area and
strict rule enforcement.
Sanitary landfilling is the least costly and most feasible waste disposal
technology for most developing nations. The cost-effectiveness of landfilling
can be maintained by erecting transfer stations once hauling waste directly to
a landfill becomes a non-productive use of collection labor and vehicles. To
encourage environmental health and aesthetics, sanitary landfill operators
should prevent groundwater contamination, discourage scavenging, control
insects and rodents, prevent open burning and frequently compact and cover the
waste with dirt.
Some communities have chosen to contract out their waste collection and
disposal services because private companies do the job at a lower cost. This
22

-------
can be true when a city's waste management practices are less efficient than
those of a private enterprise. However, if a community practices diligent
management policies, municipal collection and disposal should be more cost
efficient than private services.
23

-------