1. 1 Status Of Implementation Of Municipal Solid Waste (Management & Handling) Rules, 2000 In Class-i Cities Of India As On 31/12/2003.

2. 2 PRESENTATION BY P. U. ASNANI URBAN ENVIRONMENT INFRASTRUCTURE REPRESENTATIVE, INDIA US~AEP/US-AID Education for a Sustainable Future CEE Ahmedabad 18 TH JANUARY, 2005

3. 3 MANDATORY DIRECTIONS CONTAINED IN THE MSWM RULES

4. 4 PROHIBIT LITTERING OF WASTE ON THE STREETS i.e. STORAGE OF WASTE AT SOURCE

5. 5

6. 6 PRIMARY COLLECTION OF WASTE FROM THE DOORSTEP

7. 7

8. 8

9. 9

10. 10

11. 11 DAILY STREET SWEEPING

12. 12

13. 13 ABOLITION OF OPEN WASTE STORAGE SITES

14. 14

15. 15 TRANSPORTATION OF WASTE IN COVERED VEHICLES

16. 16

17. 17

18. 18 PROCESSING OF WASTE BY COMPOSTING OR POWER GENERATION

19. 19

20. 20

21. 21

22. 22

23. 23

24. 24 DISPOSAL OF NON- BIODEGRADABLES ONLY AT THE SANITARY LANDFILL SITES

25. 25

26. 26

27. 27

28. 28 STATUS OF COMPLIANCE

29. 29 STORAGE OF WASTE AT SOURCE IN INDIA

30. 30 STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF MSW RULES 2000 IN 106 CLASS-I CITIES AS ON 01/04/2004 STORAGE OF WASTE AT SOURCE PERCENTAGE OF COMPLIANCE NO. OF CITIES COMPLIANCE 50% OR MORE COMPLIANCE BELOW 50% 100%8 5078 BETWEEN 75 & 100% 12 BETWEEN 50 & 75% 30 BETWEEN 25% & 50% 25 BETWEEN 10% & 25% 25 BETWEEN 0% & 10% 4 ONLY 0% 12 NA12 TOTAL128

31. 31

32. 32 STORAGE OF WASTE AT SOURCE CONSTRAINTS  Lack of public awareness, motivation, education  Lack of civic sense, bad habits of the people to litter  Non cooperation from households, trade and commerce  Lack of powers to levy spot fines  Lack of stringent panel provision  Lack of litter bins in the city  Long distance between 2 community bins  Resistance to change in attitude  Lack of funds

33. 33 SEGREGATION OF RECYCLABLE WASTE AT SOURCE

34. 34 STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF MSW RULES 2000 IN 106 CLASS-I CITIES AS ON 01/04/2005 SEGREGATION OF RECYCLABLE WASTE PERCENTAGE OF COMPLIANCE NO. OF CITIES COMPLIANCE 50% OR MORE COMPLIANCE BELOW 50% 100%2 4484 BETWEEN 75 & 100% 13 BETWEEN 50 & 75% 29 BETWEEN 25% & 50% 23 BETWEEN 10% & 25% 22 BETWEEN 0% & 10% 5 ONLY 0% 25 NA9 TOTAL128

35. 35

36. 36 SEGREGATION OF RECYCLABLE WASTE AT SOURCE CONSTRAINTS  Lack of wide publicity through electronic and print media  Lack of public awareness, motivation, poor response from the citizens  Inadequate response from rag-pickers  Difficult to educate slum dwellers  Citizens not willing to spend for separate bin for recyclables  Lack of sufficient knowledge on benefits of segregation  Lack of finances to create awareness  People not cooperating, Negative attitude of the people.  Lack of effective legal remedy  Lack of facilities

37. 37 PRIMARY COLLECTION OF WASTE FROM THE DOORSTEP

38. 38 STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF MSW RULES 2000 IN 106 CLASS-I CITIES AS ON 01/04/2005 PRIMARY COLLECTION FROM THE DOORSTEP PERCENTAGE OF COMPLIANCE NO. OF CITIES COMPLIANCE 50% OR MORE COMPLIANCE BELOW 50% 100%8 4286 BETWEEN 75 & 100% 15 BETWEEN 50 & 75% 19 BETWEEN 25% & 50% 31 BETWEEN 10% & 25% 17 BETWEEN 0% & 10% 7 ONLY 0% 21 NA10 TOTAL128

39. 39

40. 40 COLLECTION OF WASTE FROM THE DOORSTEPS CONSTRAINTS  Lack of awareness and lack of motivation  Non availability of primary collection vehicle and equipments  Lack of financial Resources  Difficulty in motivating slum dwellers  Insufficient response from Citizens  Lack of manpower  Non – availability of Containerized

41. 41 DAILY STREET SWEEPING

42. 42 STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF MSW RULES 2000 IN 106 CLASS-I CITIES AS ON 01/04/2005 DAILY STREET SWEEPING PERCENTAGE OF COMPLIANCE NO. OF CITIES COMPLIANCE 50% OR MORE COMPLIANCE BELOW 50% 100%35 10127 BETWEEN 75 & 100% 33 BETWEEN 50 & 75% 33 BETWEEN 25% & 50% 11 BETWEEN 10% & 25% 3 BETWEEN 0% & 10% 0 ONLY 0% 1 NA12 TOTAL128

43. 43

44. 44 DAILY SWEEPING OF STREETS CONSTRAINTS  Shortage of Manpower  Excessive leave and absenteeism of Sanitary Workers  No works on Sundays and Public holidays  Kuchha roads  Lack of Financial Resources

45. 45 ABOLITION OF OPEN WASTE STORAGE DEPOT/PROVISION OF CLOSED CONTAINER

46. 46 STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF MSW RULES 2000 IN 106 CLASS-I CITIES AS ON 01/04/2005 ABOLITION OF OPEN WASTE STORAGE SITE (INTRODUCING CLOSED CONTAINERS OR OTHER DEVICES) PERCENTAGE OF COMPLIANCE NO. OF CITIES COMPLIANCE 50% OR MORE COMPLIANCE BELOW 50% 100%5 3890 BETWEEN 75 & 100% 10 BETWEEN 50 & 75% 23 BETWEEN 25% & 50% 12 BETWEEN 10% & 25% 20 BETWEEN 0% & 10% 1 ONLY 0% 43 NA14 TOTAL128

47. 47

48. 48 ABOLITION OF OPEN WASTE STORAGE DEPOTS CONSTRAINTS  Shortage of Containers  Lack of Financial Resources  Lack of Planning of Waste Storage Depots  Inaccessible Areas/Narrow lanes – difficult to put containers

49. 49 TRANSPORTATION OF WASTE IN COVERED VEHICLES

50. 50 STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF MSW RULES 2000 IN 106 CLASS-I CITIES AS ON 01/04/2005 TRANSPORTATION PERCENTAGE OF COMPLIANCE NO. OF CITIES COMPLIANCE 50% OR MORE COMPLIANCE BELOW 50% 100%27 6959 BETWEEN 75 & 100% 18 BETWEEN 50 & 75% 24 BETWEEN 25% & 50% 8 BETWEEN 10% & 25% 10 BETWEEN 0% & 10% 0 ONLY 0% 30 NA11 TOTAL128

51. 51

52. 52 TRANSPORTATION OF WASTE IN COVERED VEHICLES CONSTRAINTS  Lack of Financial resources to purchase covered vehicles  Insufficient vehicles  Old vehicles difficult to replace  Lack of exposure to new technologies

53. 53 PROCESSING OF WASTE

54. 54 STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF MSW RULES 2000 IN 106 CLASS-I CITIES AS ON 01/04/2005 PROCESSING OF WASTE PERCENTAGE OF COMPLIANCE NO. OF CITIES COMPLIANCE 50% OR MORE COMPLIANCE BELOW 50% 100%4 10118 BETWEEN 75 & 100% 2 BETWEEN 50 & 75% 4 BETWEEN 25% & 50% 5 BETWEEN 10% & 25% 7 BETWEEN 0% & 10% 5 ONLY 0% 95 NA6 TOTAL128

55. 55

56. 56 PROCESSING OF WASTE CONSTRAINTS  Lack of Financial Resources  Lack of Technical know how  Difficult to find appropriate technology for treatment of waste  Lack of skilled Manpower  Nonavailability of appropriate land/ Land acquisition –Time consuming  Low quality of Municipal waste  Insufficient organic matter  Lack of Basic facilities to setup Treatment Plants

57. 57 DISPOSAL OF WASTE AT THE ENGINEERED LANDFILL

58. 58 STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF MSW RULES 2000 IN 106 CLASS-I CITIES AS ON 01/04/2005 CONSTRUCTION OF SANITARY LANDFILLS PERCENTAGE OF COMPLIANCE NO. OF CITIES COMPLIANCE 50% OR MORE COMPLIANCE BELOW 50% 100%0 1127 BETWEEN 75 & 100% 1 BETWEEN 50 & 75% 0 BETWEEN 25% & 50% 2 BETWEEN 10% & 25% 1 BETWEEN 0% & 10% 1 ONLY 0% 116 NA7 TOTAL128

59. 59

60. 60 DISPOSAL OF WASTE AT THE ENGINEERED LANDFILL CONSTRAINTS  Lack of Financial Resources  Lack of Financial Support  Landfill Technologies very expensive and unaffordable  Lack of Technical Staff  Lack of Technical know how for scientific disposal of waste  Nonavailability of appropriate land  Delay in clearance of disposal sites  Acquisition of land

61. 61 OBTAINING AUTHORIZATION FROM STATE PCBs

62. 62 AUTHORIZATION FROM STATE PCBs STATUS NO. OF CITIES AUTHORIZATION OBTAINED 33 APPLIED41 NOT MOVED 39 NA15 TOTAL128

63. 63

64. 64 STATUS OF AREA OF THE LANDFILL SITES AVAILABLE IN ACRES

65. 65 STATUS OF AREA OF THE LANDFILL AVAILABLE IN ACRES S. NO. CITY POPULATION (2001) IN LAKHS Land required for treatment & disposal @ of 18 acres/1 Lakh population Area of the land available Shortfal l or excess in land 1Pune25.400457.200 43.000-414.200 2Surat24.330437.940 500.00062.060 3Nagpur21.000378.000 55.000-323.000 4Indore16.250292.500 136.000-156.500 5Vadodara14.924268.632 9.000-259.632 6Agra12.590226.620 21.250-205.370 7Nashik10.640191.520 72.000-119.520 8 Kalyan- Dombivli 10.614191.057 31.250-159.807 9Rajkot10.200183.600 100.000-83.600

66. 66 CONSOLIDATED PICTURE OF COMPLIANCE

67. 67

68. 68 WAY FORWARD………….