EPA/600/S-22/153 | September 2022
vvww.epa.gov/emergency-response-research

United States
Environmental Protection
Agency

Technical Summary Report:
Supporting Community
Capacity in Disaster Waste
and Debris Management
Decision-making



By Marissa Matsler (ORISE Postdoctoral Fellow) and Keely Maxwell
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development
Center for Environmental Solutions and Emergency Response

Office of Research and Development

Homeland Security Research Program

-------
Introduction

Hurricanes, floods, chemical accidents, oil spills, disease outbreaks, radiological releases, and
other incidents produce significant quantities of waste and debris (see Photo 1). Disaster waste
and debris management (DWDM) is needed for effective emergency response, timely
community recovery, preventing secondary environmental and human health problems, and
promoting sustainable materials
management and resilient rebuilding.

However, it involves extensive
operations that place logistical, financial,
and emotional burdens on communities
at a time when residents, government
offices, and infrastructure systems are
already overwhelmed.

DWDM begins at the community level:
residents and first responders are
affected by the incident and first on-
scene; local jurisdictions initiate
technical and financial assistance from
other levels of government. Community
capacity is thus a critical component of
DWDM. The research presented here
employs social science methods and
theory to better understand DWDM challenges and solutions, and their connections with
community capacity. The research team spoke with disaster waste management professionals
from various levels of government about on-the-ground decision-making. This qualitative
research reveals new insights for improving DWDM outcomes and provides evidence to support
existing practices. The team found that;

1)	because of the complicated technical and administrative processes involved in managing
and getting reimbursed for disaster debris removal, there is an important role for
federal and state agencies in supporting community capacity for DWDM;

2)	cited benefits of pre-planning include having contracts in place, pre-identifying waste
staging sites, and incorporating recycling and reuse into debris management plans;

3)	carrying out pre-planning in a way that builds relationships across and within local,
tribal, state, and federal levels provides co-benefits to DWDM after an incident;

4)	coordination among agencies and communication with the public are important steps in
post-incident operational planning and actions; and

5)	the cultural norm of an urgency to "get back to normal" as quickly as possible after a
disaster can preclude managing waste materials in more resilient and sustainable ways.



Photo 1: Hurricane Katrina generated more than 99
million cubic yards of debris that took several years
and cost over $3.7 billion to remove (EPA 2019).

1

-------
Disaster Waste and Debris Management

Disasters generate large volumes of debris and waste materials that are often comingled and
need to be separated into distinct waste streams for treatment and disposal (see Appendix 1).

Contaminated wastes pose immediate risks to
human health or secondary environmental and
health problems if not managed properly (see Box
1). Figure 1 displays a generalized cycle of DWDM
actions. The specifics differ depending on the
incident type, scale, and waste material. Who is
involved varies as well, usually necessitating
coordination of many people with different
jurisdictions, authorities, perspectives, and goals. For
example, the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) tasks the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USAGE), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), and other federal agencies with
mission assignments for Emergency Support
Functions under the National Response Framework.
Treatment and disposal of waste materials depends
on the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) as well as state and local policies.
DWDM funding is similarly complex. Incidents that have been declared "major disasters" under
the Stafford Act (P.L. 93-288) are eligible for debris removal assistance from FEMA. One
commonality across disasters is that DWDM depends on local decision-making: by households,
businesses, elected officials, landfill operators, waste haulers, public works, and emergency
responders. Community capacity thus influences DWDM and its outcomes.

Box 1: Secondary contamination
"[We] work with bulging drums arid
unknowns that, if you just had a
regular debris contractor out there,
they're going to get hurt, it's going to
be a major problem for the
neighborhoods... Mixed waste going
to an inappropriate, unlined
potentially; non-haz landfill is going
to be a long-term problem for these
communities and potential
downstream, downwinddownhill
downgradient communities as well."
(Federal-level Participant, FG1)

Incident

Figure 1: A generalized cycle of disaster waste and debris management (DWDM) actions.

2

-------
Community Capacity and Disaster Waste and Debris Management

Community capacity (see Box 2 for definition) underpins effective, sustainable, and resilient
DWDM. A community capacity lens helps identify factors that enable or impede
implementation of DWDM guidance and decision-support tools (see List of Resources for
examples). The dimensions of community capacity that come into play with DWDM are:

1.	Interorganizational networks. The ability of
local entities (e.g., residents, county agencies,
businesses, community-based organizations,
tribal elders) to make and carry out DWDM
decisions in conjunction with other public and
private entities (e.g., state transportation
department, U.S. Coast Guard, recycling facility)
affects response, recovery, and resilience.

2.	Knowledge, skills, and learning. Expertise in the
technical, financial, and jurisdictional aspects of
disaster waste is needed to manage the
complex mix and high volumes of potentially
novel waste streams (see Appendix 1).

3.	Leadership and administrative capacity. Pre-
disaster planning only happens if communities
can address possible future problems alongside
everyday needs and leadership can bring
together necessary parties; timely response depends on administrative capacity to navigate
complicated institutional arrangements and documentation for reimbursement.

4.	Values and norms: Management actions are influenced by local to national values and
norms related to disaster response, resilience, and sustainability.

Not all community capacity literature is applicable to DWDM. Because disasters overwhelm
local social, governance, and infrastructure systems, pre-incident efforts to build capacity for
DWDM will be dampened by the disaster itself. It is still useful to strengthen local capacity by
carrying out debris removal planning under 'blue skies.' Furthermore, this research shows that
capacity building for DWDM cannot only be done at the local level to see gains; federal and
state coordination is needed to properly handle and treat large volumes of potentially novel or
hazardous waste materials, navigate jurisdictional issues, and shore up local communities in a
time of need. DWDM takes place in exceptional institutional, emotional, environmental, and
administrative circumstances. It also plays out over distinct time periods. Studying it thus
reveals new insights about community capacity overall.

Research Methods

The findings presented in this technical summary are the result of a qualitative social science
research project that analyzes on-the-ground DWDM decision-making undertaken by the
Homeland Security Research Program (HSRP) in the U.S. EPA's Office of Research and
Development (see Box 3). The research team conducted 14 focus groups and nine interviews

Box 2: What is community capacity
It is "...the interaction of human,
organizational, and social capital
existing within a given community
that can be leveraged to solve
collective problems and improve or
maintain the well-being of a given
community. It may operate through
informal social processes and/or
organized efforts by individuals,
organizations, and the networks of
association among them and
between them and the broader
systems of which the community is
a part." (Chaskin 2001: 294)

3

-------
with over 70 participants with experience with DWDM planning and execution (see Appendix 2
for details on participants). Research protocols were reviewed and approved by the University

of North Carolina Chapel Hill's Office of Human
Research Ethics (Study # 21-1601, Reference ID
331909). Sessions were held virtually via Microsoft
Teams, recorded, and transcribed. Thematic
qualitative analysis was conducted on transcripts
using an a priori codebook and inductive coding
methods. Data quality objectives were to ensure that
questions were appropriate, transcripts were
accurate, and coding was consistently and
appropriately applied. Meeting these objectives was
achieved by pilot testing focus group and interview
protocols, performing quality control checks on
transcripts, and consensus reviews of coding.

Box 3: HSRP social science research
HSRP research helps solve technical
challenges in DWDM: how to
estimate volumes and sample
materials, what treatments to use,
and where to put staging sites.

HSRP social science research helps
identify and address socioeconomic,
institutional, and cultural
challenges of DWDM by analyzing
who is involved, how they interact,
and what decisions they make.

Research Findings

This research reveals key social processes at work in DWDM decision-making and actions (see
Figure 2). Analysis of these social processes showcase insights from on-the-ground decision-
makers and highlights ways to support capacity building for DWDM (see Table 1).

Incident

| Relationship
, Building
\

Pre-lncident
Debris
Planning

Figure 2: Key social processes (in orange) revealed by this research within the generalized

cycle of DWDM actions (in green).

4

-------
Table 1: Summary of Research Findings

Key Insights on DWDM Decision-making

Social Processes to Support Capacity Building

Pre-incident Debris Management Planning

•	Having a debris management plan enables effective response.

•	A key co-benefit of pre-planning is that it helps personnel in
different agencies get to know each other and build trust.

•	Pre-planning is an important area for DWDM decision-making
because it provides time for inclusive processes without the
urgency or pressure of an incident.

•	Three actions were highly recommended by practitioners to
reduce operational planning challenges:

o Pre-establish contracts with experienced and affordable
waste management contractors to speed up response and
secure access to specialized expertise,
o Pre-identify waste staging sites to allow time to identify
environmentally and socially appropriate sites through a
more collaborative process,
o Incorporate recycling and reuse into plans to 'normalize'
sustainability and resilience in DWDM.

•	Routinize and prioritize relationship-
building as part of debris management
planning, including training, plan writing,
and scenarios or exercises.

•	Integrate resilience and sustainability goals
and actions into debris management plans
and exercises to 'normalize' sustainability
and resilience actions in organizational
culture, enabling long-term materials
management.

Operational Planning

•	Pre-incident debris management plans are not always able to
be followed precisely because each incident presents unique
circumstances.

•	This is a crucial decision-making space for assessing and
altering plans for specific incidents.

•	Success relies on previous relationship-
building and coordination.

•	Flexibility and adaptability are key.

Communication with Public

•	Specific attention to communication with and from the public
is highly recommended by practitioners.

•	Response teams can bring on communications specialists and
use a variety of outreach and engagement mechanisms.

•	Attention should be paid to local cultural
contexts and post-incident trauma.

•	Space should be provided for bidirectional
discussion that addresses local concerns.

Agency Coordination

•	Federal mission tasks and authorities are siloed by waste and
incident type. It is hard for state, tribal, and local entities to
understand these complexities.

•	Unique state-specific statutes, rules, and regulations affect
implementation of federal guidance in local plans and actions.

•	State and county agencies appreciate it when they learn from
their counterparts in other parts of the U.S. who have dealt
with novel waste streams and incident types.

•	Ongoing coordination and relationship
building across local, state, tribal, and
federal levels enable post-incident DWDM.

•	Two types of relationship-building are
important: 1) with people likely to be
directly involved in an incident; and 2) with
people who have been through similar
incidents.

5

-------
Operational Planning is a Critical Time for DWDM Decisions

In an ideal scenario, pre-planning occurs well before an incident so preparing a debris
management plan can be completed with ample time, resources, and participation. This
research shows that post-incident operational planning is also an important decision-making
space (see Figure 2). Every disaster is unique, making it impossible to plan for every eventuality
(see Box 4). Unexpected circumstances require
pre-incident plans to be altered, sometimes
drastically. Operational planning is where the
'rubber meets the road.' Pre-planned actions are
implemented as-is, modified, or disregarded;
new actions must be figured out in short order.

These decisions affect affects community
experiences with response, recovery, and
rebuilding, making it a critical moment to
understand. The research team's examination of
operational DWDM decision-making found social
processes at work that affect decision making
and outcomes, described in more detail in the
following sections.

Institutional and Community Capacity Challenges in DWDM

This research identified institutional and community challenges to planning and carrying out
DWDM. These challenges correspond to four aspects of capacity: values and norms;
interorganizational networks; knowledge, skills, and learning; and leadership and administrative
capacity (see Table 2). The challenges described here are common and interactive, posing
obstacles not only within communities, but at multiple institutional and governance scales (see
Figure 3).

Table 2: Key Community Capacity Aspects Relevant to DWDM

Values and norms that balance urgency to 'get back to normal' with long-term sustainability and resilience.

Interorganizational networks build relationships needed to support planning, response, and recovery.

Leadership and administrative capacity to dedicate resources to pre-planning and navigate post-incident
technical, jurisdictional, and financial aspects of DWDM.

Knowledge, skills, and learning about the regulatory and technical aspects of DWDM, and strategies for
managing novel waste materials in different incident types.

Box 4: Every disaster is unique
"If you've been in one disaster, you've
been in one disaster(Federal-level
Participant, FG1)

"[There's] pre-disaster waste planning
and then post-disaster waste planning,
which can be significantly different
based on the type of event and the
magnitude of that event." (Federal-
level Participant, FG4)

6

-------
Figure 3: Capacity challenges at federal, state, and local levels.

Values and norms

An overarching challenge across DWDM actions a1
all levels is the taken-for-granted urgency to 'get
back to normal' as quickly as possible after a
disaster. This urgency reflects cultural values and
norms in emergency response and an
understandable desire to support survivors.

Political pressure, capacity, and cost
considerations can also come into play. While
well-intentioned, these cultural values and norms
present unintended consequences for DWDM.

The desire to complete debris removal and
disposal quickly can mean that technically ideal
DWDM actions are not implemented or 'blue
skies' waste management protocols are waived
(see Box 5). Recycling and reuse aspirations are
typically the first to be passed over.

Box 5: Urgency values
"I've never seen a situation that models
what I've seen EPA's guidance say,
which is: you've got your pile of white
goods, your pile of electronics, your pile
of putrescible waste ... I don't know
how realistic or prepared a community
is to do that level of waste
management... What's deemed
important by local decision makers is:
'how do we help citizens of our
community get back on their feet as
efficiently and quickly as we can?"'
(State-level Participant, FG12)

7

-------
Because managing disaster waste is so expensive, municipal and county governments rely on
state and/or federal cost sharing, most commonly via FEMA public assistance. Cost and funding
influence DWDM significantly (see Box 6). First, lower-cost treatment and disposal options are

more likely to be selected. Second, while the
FEMA Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide
(or PAPAPG) does not mandate technical
specifications for debris removal, it does influence
state and local decision-making. Debris removal
contracts, for example, must be compatible with
PAPAPG. State, tribal, and local agencies work to
ensure that their debris removal operations are in
alignment with public assistance policy to ensure
their eligibility for reimbursement. Another way
that cost affects how wastes are managed is that
the percentage of local cost sharing increases when an incident moves from the response phase
to the recovery phase. This time pressure creates additional urgency to complete waste
disposal quickly, which can preclude use of recycling, composting, and other alternatives to
landfill disposal.

Interorganizational networks

Governance of disaster waste and
debris involves complicated
jurisdictional and statutory
authorities. DWDM is siloed by
waste streams in ways that are often
opaque and confusing to the federal,
state, local, and tribal entities
involved. This confusion can
lengthen operational planning and
delay response. Multiple agencies,
each with different authorities and
missions, need to be coordinated with depending on the waste materials, applicable rules,
property rights, and incident location (see Box 7). Confusion at the local level was exacerbated
by a lack of experience with different types of incidents.

State rules and regulations affect local authority (e.g., home rule), and federal authority (e.g.,

state-specific waste regulations) over DWDM decisions (see
Box 8). (Note: Tribes and territories have unique governance
issues, which will not be covered in this report). Federal
agency assistance is most useful when it is tailored to state
specifications. Federal and state responders can coordinate
most effectively when they are aware of and can work with
local cultural considerations.

Box 6: Funding plays a significant role
"Who's gonna pay for it?...Nothing is
going to get started until that gets
figured out. You can have the greatest
plan, but is the federal, state, local
[government paying for it]? Are folks on
their own? How is the cleanup getting
funded? 'Cause we're talking lots of
dollars." (State-level Participant, FG11)

Box 7. Interorganizational coordination & confusion
"Whether we have to coordinate with Coast Guard or
Army Corps of Engineers on things depend on the
water body, the channel. Is it a state channel? a
federal channel? Who's responsible for it?" (State-level
Participant, FG14)

"...government at the local [and] county level are
confused and think that 'Oh well, [state environmental
agency], you're responsible for cleaning up our
streams that have vegetative debris in them.' And it's
actually the property owners' responsibility." (State-
level Participant, FG14)

Box 8. States are different
"we have 50 states, which is
like [working with] 50
nations." (State-level
Participant, FG8)

8

-------
Leadership and administrative capacity

DWDM begins at the local level, which means that local leadership and administrative capacity
play a significant role (see Box 9). In pre-incident planning, for example, it is counties that

produce debris management plans. FEMA, EPA,
and other federal agencies do not require debris
management plan, but do offer guidance,
specifications, and training (see Links and
Resources). Effective pre-incident planning
depends on whether communities can address
possible future incidents alongside everyday
needs. It requires leadership that can bring
together necessary parties, both public (e.g., parks
and recreation, public works), and private (e.g.,
waste haulers, community-based organizations).

Federal and state assistance for response and
recovery are dependent on local invitation. Local
governments request disaster assistance from
states, who in turn request federal assistance. In a
Stafford Act disaster, federal agencies such as EPA
and USACE must wait for mission assignments
from FEMA, which takes time to negotiate. This entire chain depends on locals to initiate and
specify the need for disaster debris removal.

Meeting requirements for FEMA reimbursement involves careful documentation and tracking
of wastes, placing an administrative burden on state and local agency personnel (see Box 10).
This burden is especially acute since it occurs at
a time when community capacity is dampened
by the disaster. Local government office
buildings might be closed; local government
personnel might need to attend to their own
families' well-being along with addressing
community needs. Research participants
highlighted the rigorous documentation and
uncertainty of successful reimbursement as a
major point of local anxiety.

Knowledge, skills, and learning

Some communities already have experience-based knowledge in making and implementing
debris management plans and workers with skills in the technical aspects of debris removal. A
less commonly recognized aspect of community capacity is knowing when and how to activate
assistance for debris removal. This aspect of capacity comes into play when a community
experiences large and/or uncommon incidents (e.g., snowstorm in Texas, building collapse in
Florida, wildfire in Oregon) (see Photo 2). Local governments with little experience with large

Box 9: DWDM begins at the local level
"Local government recovery priorities
are communicated through their request
for assistance to [the state]. They'll give
[the state] the objectives and we execute
them within the incident management
team." (State-level Participant, FG13)

"We can provide technical guidance as
requested, but as feds we're not going to
step in and tell the state what to do,
how to do it, where to do it, or anything
like that. We'll offer up any type of
consultant services to assist in their
capacities should they want." (Federal-
level Participant, FG6)

Box 10. Administrative burden
"Just recording and documenting
everything, whether it's pictures, logs,
manifests for load tickets and delivery
and all that kind of stuff to document
your debris management for disaster
cost recovery from FEMA ... it's very
important to have that documentation
in place." (State-level Participant, FG14)

9

-------
volumes of debris, novel waste materials, or potentially hazardous mixed debris might not
recognize the need for DWDM assistance in the aftermath of an incident, delaying technical

Box 11. Knowing when to ask for help
"[a local responder might say,] 7 don't
understand, we had a house burn last
year...We didn't have a hazmat crew
come out and collect all this.' Yeah, it
was one house, but when you have
4,000 homes... instead of 10 or 30
gallons, now you have 150,000 gallons
of hazardous material, now you have
a problem. You have this bulk problem
that you certainly don't want
untrained, inexperienced folks
collecting and moving it." (Federal-
level Participant, FG1)

Social Processes to Support Community Capacity for DWDM

Analysis of these findings suggests that there is an important role for state and federal
governments to support capacity building for DWDM. This section details social processes that
can be nourished at varied administrative levels to build relationships and create
interorganizational networks, access knowledge, skills, and learning, align values and norms
with desired goals, and develop leadership and administrative capacity for debris-specific issues
(see Table 3).

Table 3: Supporting Social Processes for DWDM Capacity Building

Relationship-building across agencies and levels of government before an incident is critical to
managing novel waste materials and navigating reimbursement requirements.

Communication with the public and coordination among agencies are important steps in operational

planning and response.

Recognize and engage cultural norms to better incorporate resilience and sustainability into response,

recovery, and rebuilding.

assistance that other levels of government could
provide (see Box 11).

Photo 2: Wildfires present risks from potentially
hazardous building materials at large scales.

10

-------
Box 12. Communication and coordination
"You don't want to meet someone for the
first time in a disaster." (Federal-level
Participant, FG1)

"[We need to be] communicating to the
public on the ground what is happening,
what they can expect, when they can expect
it. ...It allows the public to somewhat be able
to participate, having that anxiety level
reduce into 'how can I cooperate to make
this happen?' and just knowing again who is
available to do what." (County-level
Participant, FG14)

Relationship-building was identified as a
central part of pre-planning and is an
overarching social process from which other
solutions emerge (see Box 12). Study
participants described how relationship-
building among federal, local, state, and
tribal entities before and after an incident
has improved DWDM. This analysis suggests
that these actions are effective because they
build the network connections that
communities need to access and use
technical information and specialized
expertise in a time of crisis and navigate the
complicated technical and administrative
requirements of managing disaster waste

materials. Relationship-building strengthens interorganizational networks and knowledge, skills,
and learning. Research participants described the importance of having connections before
disaster strikes (see Photo 3).

Intentionally incorporating relationship-
building into pre-planning activities (e.g.,
existing trainings, table-top exercises, debris
management planning processes) brings
people together in lower-stakes situations
where they can build trust, learn about and
from one another, and begin to understand
the roles different institutions play in
DWDM. Participants discussed the
importance of regular meetings, inclusion of
representatives of multiple agencies, and
explicit focus on getting to know others'
roles and areas of expertise. Relationship
building was accomplished at the same time
as general planning activities, exercising
plans, attending professional meetings, or running scenarios.

Photo 3: Making connections before an incident
enables coordination for post-disaster waste
collection and disposal.

Coordination and communication were highlighted by study participants as key actions to
invest in for DWDM (see Box 12). An extension of relationship-building with a wider community
is communication with the public. EPA held several public meetings about oil cleanup after the
Deepwater Horizon, for example (see Photo 4). Research participants recommended that public
communication be recognized as its own discrete step in DWDM (see Figure 2). Doing so could
avoid it being overlooked or combined with other actions to less effect.

11

-------
Several factors affect what communication is most
effective for building community capacity, including
property rights, waste-related hazards, incident-
related trauma, and public involvement in cleanup
work. For example, oil spill incident command relies
on professionals for removal of potentially
contaminated debris. After a flood, in contrast,
home-dwellers and volunteers are often the ones
moving water-damaged belongings to the curb. After
a wildfire, homeowners might be restricted from
entering their property because of safety concerns. In wildfire situations, emergency
responders have deployed communication specialists to great effect to meet with property
owners to answer questions about debris removal and coordinate retrieval of specific items
(see Box 13).

Box 13: Post-vvildt'ire communication
"We have [a team]... their whole
specialty is talking to these
homeowners. They'll go...out there
and they'll be talking to them for
multiple hours. They'll calm [them]
down, talk to them about our
process, what we do, etc." (State-
level Participant, FG13)

_ DULAC
COMMUNITY
CENTER

Photo 4: A public meeting after the
Deepwater Horizon oil spill fostered
communication about the cleanup.

The research presented here highlights both inter- and intra-organizational coordination at all
levels as an important means of supporting community capacity. Local, tribal, and state
agencies that regularly communicate with each other (e.g., agriculture and environment, public

health and emergency response), and with federal
agencies, are more readily able to activate waste-specific
expertise in a disaster. Continued coordination is
particularly needed to navigate the complicated
jurisdictional landscape of disaster waste and reduce the
anxieties and local administrative burden of the FEMA
reimbursement processes for disaster debris removal
assistance. Research participants requested curation of
the complicated process for accessing technical
assistance for specific waste streams at the federal and
state levels to encourage local capacity building (see Box 14).

Networking and learning from others who have been through similar disasters and dealt with
specific waste problems was also identified as an important process for providing specialized

12

Box 14. Fostering networks
"...something on a federal level
[that] might be helpful is a
network of people who do this
kind of work, who would be
available to assist a different
organization." (Municipal-level
Participant, FG11)

-------
technical expertise to the state, tribal, and local levels. One representative from a state
agricultural department talked about being able to learn from counterparts in other states who
had already dealt with very specific issues in
animal carcass disposal, for example.

Pre-incident disaster debris planning

fosters post-incident operational planning
and response. However, waste and debris
issues are not always integrated into wider
disaster preparedness activities. Even when
pre-incident debris planning takes place, it
is not always done as effectively as it could
be (see Box 15). Federal and state agencies
have a role in fostering local leadership and
administrative capacity for disaster debris planning (see Links and Resources). This research has
found that pre-planning provides two key benefits. First is the output of a debris management
plan that provides a starting point for post-incident operational planning. Second, doing pre-
planning in a way that prioritizes relationship-building provides the co-benefit of improved
operational DWDM efficiency because of improved communication and coordination capacity,
regardless of whether the actual plan is implementable due to unique disaster circumstances.

In addition to shorter and more digestible
plans, two aspects came up repeatedly as
some of the most useful items to have in a
debris management plan: pre-identified
contractors and pre-identified waste staging
sites. Having debris removal contracts in
place (e.g., waste haulers, landfill operators,
recycling facilities) before disaster strikes
offers a large return on investment (see Box
16). It speeds up operational planning and
reduces time to implementation by making
sure that needed expertise is lined up and
pricing negotiated without urgency. If
resources are only available to do part of a pre-planning process, establishing contracts with
experienced local and out-of-region contractors (in case local contractors are at capacity or
themselves overwhelmed by a disaster) is a top priority.

Box 15. Making pre-planning work
"I've worked with about a dozen communities
on their plans. Many of them are very, very
big, as many as 900 pages. They're not
understood, they're not read, and they're
typically not approved. I think there's a lot of
room for improvement in writing plans that
work versus monuments on the wall." (State-
level Participant, FG11)

Box 16: Pre-planning for contracts
"There's some things that have to be
addressed ahead of time... the larger
communities know who their haulers are, and
they know what the resources are that they
can bring in the event of the large disaster
(State-level Participant, FG12)

"... Trying to lock in some of those prices with
some of the vendors, should we need to use
them for debris removal." (Tribal Government
Participant, FG10)

13

-------
Transportation bottlenecks, debris volume, and the need to separate waste materials for
different treatment and disposal methods, particularly if there are potentially hazardous
materials, means that waste staging sites are often used in DWDM (see Photo 5). Urban areas
with limited space often rely on public amenities such as parks to stage waste. Pre-identifying
temporary waste staging sites
enables coordination after an incident
(see Box 17). It helps protect
environmental and human health
(e.g., by avoiding locations with high
water tables susceptible to
contaminant release). It fosters
inclusion of local social and cultural
considerations (e.g., proximity to
historical landmarks, keeping some parks clear to retain recreational opportunities. Taking time
for inclusive planning processes in which staging decisions are made transparent to community
members can improve trust and set expectations, increasing community capacity.

Supporting community capacity also
involves attention to values and norms.

The cultural norm of urgency to 'get
back to normal' as quickly as possible in
emergency response, and operational
practices that separate response,
recovery, and rebuilding into distinct
phases (see Figures 1 and 2) have
implications for waste management in
the short and long term. The urgency
norm can preclude recycling and other
alternatives for waste treatment and
disposal after an incident. The response
phase involves distinct phases that
involve distinct personnel, funding, and
timing from recovery and rebuilding. This institutional separation limits consideration of
'building back better' in ways that support more sustainable materials management and
resilient rebuilding in the long term (e.g., forward-looking design for climate change).

Incorporating resilience and sustainability into pre-planning can help shift cultural norms. In
addition, if such actions become part of standard operating procedure under 'blue skies,' then
the 'normal' in 'getting back to normal' is a more resilient and sustainable system. For
example, respondents described how state policies mandating recycling in everyday waste
management smoothed the way for recycling post-incident. Not only had it become a cultural
norm, the contracts, relationships, and knowledge firmly cemented in 'blue skies' waste
management processes served as a countervailing force to landfill disposal becoming the
default in more urgent situations. This suggests that there is potential for a similar transition in
other jurisdictions if such actions can be tailored to local cultural and institutional contexts.

Box 17. Pre-planning for waste staging
"It's: 'well, this soccer field is far away enough from
the community. It's close enough that they can go in
and dump their stuff, but it's far away that it won't
provide any problems for them.' It's coordination
with other agencies as to what are the assets
available." (County-level Participant, FG14)

Photo 5: Staging area for household hazardous waste
in the Virgin Islands after Hurricanes Irma and Maria.

14

-------
Conclusion

Using a community capacity lens, the research team applied social science theory and methods
to the realm of DWDM to reveal potential points of invention in decision-making processes to
support debris clean-up actions and outcomes (see Table 1, Figure 2). It illuminates new
considerations in understanding how community capacity translates from 'blue skies' into
disaster situations. This technical summary describes the importance of relationship-building
with outside-community networks that can temporally fill disaster dampened gaps in
community capacity during times when local systems are overwhelmed yet technical
specifications and detailed documentation are necessary for DWDM that meets regulatory and
reimbursement requirements. This application of community capacity theory approaches
capacity as not simply an intra-community characteristic, but as contextual, within a wider
ecosystem of relationships and with distinct temporal dimensions. The team illustrated the
importance of values and norms; interorganizational networks; leadership and administrative
capacity; and knowledge, skills, and learning to community capacity for disaster waste and
debris management (see Table 2).

Using a community capacity lens to analyze the social processes underlying disaster debris
management points to strategies for strengthening the four dimensions of capacity that can be
undertaken at varied administrative levels (see Table 1, Table 3). Achieving more sustainable
materials management during response and recovery, and rebuilding for a more resilient
future, entails normalizing these objectives in cultural values and norms. Emphasizing
relationship-building as part of pre-incident debris management planning fosters development
of interorganizational networks that are necessary for disaster response and recovery. Inclusion
of public communication and agency coordination as discrete steps or action areas in
operational planning and response is also important. Relevant knowledge, skills, and learning
for DWDM includes local knowledge about where to situate temporary staging sites, access to
workers with expertise in waste treatment and disposal, and advice from communities and
agencies that have dealt with novel waste materials and similar incident types. It also includes
knowing when and how to ask for help. Leadership and administrative capacity enable
communities to dedicate time and resources to pre-planning before an incident, and to access
technical assistance and secure financial reimbursement during response and recovery. Pre-
incident disaster debris management plan components that are particularly helpful in getting
post-incident operational planning off the ground are pre-establishing contracts and pre-
identifying waste staging sites. Attention to social processes as part of technical specifications,
pre-planning, operational planning, guidance, training, and exercises can support capacity-
building at all levels for disaster waste and debris management.

Acknowledgements

Contributions of the following individuals and organizations to this report are acknowledged:
the experienced and knowledgeable staff at all levels of government that took the time to meet
and share insights with the research team; reviewers Amy Schwarber, Kathleen Williams, Jenna
Tilt, Sara Meerow, Terra Haxton, and Sang Don Lee. All photos are from EPA.

15

-------
Disclaimer

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), through its Office of Research and

Development, funded and managed the research described herein under Interagency

Agreement (IA # DW08992524701) with Department of Energy's Oak Ridge Associated

Universities (ORAU). The contractor role did not include establishing Agency policy. This

document has been reviewed in accordance with EPA policy and approved for publication.

Links and Resources

•	EPA. Waste and materials management for homeland security and natural disasters.
https://www.epa.gov/homeland-security-waste

•	EPA. Emergency response research, waste management, https://www.epa.gov/emergency-
response-research/waste-management

•	EPA. 2019. Planning for natural disaster debris report.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-05/documents/final pndd guidance O.pdf

•	EPA. 2021. Resiliency and Natural Disaster Debris Workshop Report.
https://www.epa.gov/svstem/files/documents/2022-03/final-epa-rndd-summarv-
report 12.02.21 web 508 compliant.pdf

•	Congressional Research Service (CRS). 2017. Disaster Debris Management: Requirements,

•	Challenges, and Federal Agency Roles.
https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20170906_R44941_6ec2743flacel80blfe57d04870
0c78e9a40ed90.pdf

•	FEMA. 2017. Public Assistance Program and Policy Guide.
https://dps.sd.gov/application/files/5215/1982/7809/2017_FEMA_Public_Assistance_Progr
am_and_Policy_Guide.pdf

•	FEMA Emergency Management Institute, courses on debris planning and operations
https://training.fema.gov/emicourses/emicatalog.aspx

•	EPA. Disaster debris recovery tool, https://www.epa.gov/large-scale-residential-
demolition/disaster-debris-recovery-tool

•	EPA. 2019. Pre-incident All-hazards Waste Management Plan Guidelines: Four-step Waste
Management Planning Process, https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2019-
05/documents/4 steps document.pdf

References Cited

Chaskin, R.J. 2001. Building community capacity: a definitional framework and case studies
from a comprehensive community initiative. Urban Affairs Review 36(3): 291-323.
https://doi.orE/10.1177/10780870122184876

EPA. 2019. Planning for Natural Disaster Debris. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, D.C. EPA 530-F-19-003.

16

-------
Appendix 1: Exam

Dies of Potential Waste Streams from Different Incident Types



Incident Type

Hurricane

Wildfire

Tornado

Avian
Influenza

Flood

COVID-
19

Oil
Spill

Chemical or
Biological
Release

Waste Stream

Construction &
demolition
debris

X

X

X



X





X

Household
hazardous
waste

X

X

X



X







White goods

X

X

X



X







Vegetation

X

X

X



X







E-waste

X

X

X



X







Animal carcass

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Personal
protective
equipment







X



X

X

X

Contaminated
soils



X





X



X

X

Human
remains

X

X

X



X

X



X

Food waste

X



X

X

X

X



X

Cars & trucks

X

X

X



X





X

Boats

X

X

X



X







Orphan barrels

X

X

X



X





X

Asbestos-
contaminated
materials

X

X

X



X







Medical waste

X

X

X



X

X



X

17

-------
Appendix 2: Focus Group and Interview Participant Expertise and Experience

Level of Government

Number of
Participants

Federal

31

Tribal

8

State

22

County

5

Local

5

TOTAL

71

Participant experience (anonymized)

Types of incidents

Agencies represented

Disaster stages

Animal disease outbreak

Agriculture

Preparedness

Flooding (different levels)

Coastal, ocean, marine management

Response

Hurricane

Emergency management

Recovery

Oil spill

Environment



Pandemic

Public health



Wildfire

Public works





Waste management



18

-------
xvEPA

United States
Environmental Protection
Agency

PRESORTED STANDARD
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA

PERMIT NO. G-35

Office of Research and Development (8101R)
Washington, DC 20460

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300

-------