Towards Sustainable Industrial Waste Management in the Philippines: Siting Mechanism Establishment

1. ESTABLISHING DISPOSAL SITING MECHANISM TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE INDUSTRIAL WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THE PHILIPPINES R.P.RAMOS Univ of Queensland AUSTRALIA

2. Objectives • To discuss the current practices in storing, treating, and disposing of THIW in the Philippines • To assess the need for establishing disposal siting mechanisms through a participatory approach • To discuss the proposed 3-Level Land Surface Disposal Siting Selection/Screening Criteria System • To present the application of Geographic Information System (GIS) in disposal siting process

3. Outline Presentation • Philippine Situationer • Legal and Institutional Framework • Current Generation, Sources and Composition • Problems and Issues • Current Land Surface Disposal Siting Mechanism • The Establishment of Disposal Siting Criteria System • The Proposed Three-Level THW Disposal Site Selection/Screening Criteria System • Conceptual Framework of Disposal Siting using GIS

4. Philippine Situation • Urbanization and industrialization • Establishment of industrial processing zones • Metro Manila and CALABARZON are the highest generators of THIW • Current practices of managing (storage, treatment, and disposal) THW are guided by: 1986 constitution and (5) existing environmental laws and regulations

5. Legal Framework • Republic Act No. 6969 – Toxic Substances and Hazardous Wastes Control Act of 1990 • Environmental Impact Assessment System of 1978 • Pollution Control Decree of 1976 • Clean Air Act of 1999, R.A. 8749 • Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2001 or R.A. 9003.

6. COMPOSITION OF THW(719 registered generators) 280,000 tons per year 50% recycled or treated on-site 13% managed by treaters 37% stored on-site or off-site or illegally dumped Source: 2001 JICA Study Report

7. Toxic and Hazardous Industrial Waste Composition(229 generators) Source: 2001 JICA Study Report

8. Current Issues and Problems • Non-compliance from generators Low-awareness of THW management among the generators • Poor services offered by haulers and treaters • Laxity of the government to generators and lack of monitoring

9. Current Issues and Problems • Lack of thermal treatment facilities and available alternative technologies • Lack of THW treatment standards and regulations on technical requirements for TSD facilities • “NIMBY” and “NIMTO” Attitudes • “WHIFFY ATTITUDE” (we-hide-it-freely-for-years) • NO CENTRALIZED SURFACE DISPOSAL SITE/FACILITY AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTRY • LACK OF LEGAL AND STANDARDISED SITE SELECTION CRITERIA SYSTEM

10. Historical Background on THW Accidents • “Love Canal”, Niagara Falls, New York, USA (1978), chemical waste • “Valley of Drums”, Kentucky, USA (1979), drums of chemicals • “Housing Estate built on top of a chemical dump”, The Netherlands (1980), chemicals contaminated drinking water • “Housing Estate built on old mine spoil heaps, UK (80s), mining • “Minamata Bay Mercury Poisoning” Japan (50s), effluent from factory • “Exxon Valdez tanker accident”, USA, spillage • “Toxic Hill”., Kingston, Mount Taylor, Australia (1987) mining • “Asbestos tailings”, Western Australia (1978) • Chester Hill, Sydney (1989(, chemical accident -spillage • Bhopal chemical accident, India • Mine Tailings, Marinduque, Philippines • Former US Military Bases (Clark and Subic), Philippines

11. Existing Storage System DRUMS AND PLASTIC CONTAINERS

12. Existing Treatment System MELTING PLANT CENTRALISED CHEMICAL TREATMENT INCINERATORS

13. Existing Disposal System RIVERS & WATERWAYS LANDFILL SITES & OPEN DUMPSITES SHORT-TERM DISPOSAL LAGOON

14. DISPOSAL SITING DEVELOPMENT • Site selection is the initial stage and the critical stage of land disposal development which requires proper planning to reduce administrative cost and lower the degree of disapproval from the public or even to prevent the project being rejected. • Siting is a major part in waste management (Kao, et.al. 1997); it is the most important step in land disposal (Gera, 1988), very controversial (Bandy, 1988) • Successful siting for on-site facilities and mobile facilities, and on industrialised land (Apogee, 1995)

15. DISPOSAL SITING DEVELOPMENT • Failure in disposal siting is contributed to: LACK OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT, APPROPRIATE SITING METHODOLOGIES AND PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE (Kao, 1997) • PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IS AN INTEGRAL PART (Wentz, 1989), AND AN ESSENTIAL INGREDIENT DURING THE EARLY STAGE OF PLANNING AND PRIOR TO THE START OF THE SITE SELECTION PROCESS (Badilla, 2000).

16. UNDERTAKINGS FOR THW DISPOSAL SITING IN THE PHILIPPINES • 1998 – EU- ENTEC Study: identified (10) candidates sites • 2002 – JICA Funded Study: identified (9) additional suitable sites • 1994 – PNRI/NPC/PHIVOLCS/STII: identified (13) sites all over the country for repository of low radioactive waste FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. The initial site selection is based on the criteria set by the study teams, without consultations from the potential stakeholders of the project 2. There is a need to establish and standardize the screening criteria

17. THREE-LEVEL DISPOSAL SITING/SCREENING CRITERIA SYSTEM LEVEL I EXCLUSIONARY CRITERIA LEVEL II INCLUSIONARY CRITERIA LEVEL III SITE-SPECIFIC CRITERIA POTENTIAL DISPOSAL SITE (Adapted from Cahill & Holman, 1981)

18. RESPONDENT GROUPS DISTRIBUTION Source: Actual Survey, August – December 2002

19. EXCLUSIONARY CRITERIA LEGEND: RATING 1 = MOST IMPORTANT 2 = MODERATELY IMPORTANT 3 = LESS IMPORTANCE 4 = NO IMPORTANCE 1 2 3 4

20. INCLUSIONARY CRITERIA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

21. SITE SPECIFIC CRITERIA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

22. CONSTRAINTS FACTORS POTENTIAL FACTORS INPUT THREE-LEVEL CRITERIA SYSTEM LITERATURE REVIEW AND SURVEY BASE MAPS AND THEMATIC MAPS MULTI CRITERIA EVALUATION LAND SUITABILITY ASSESSMENT GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM PROCESS PROCESS RANKING AND PAIRWISE COMPARISON LAND SURFACE DISPOSAL FACILITY SITING WEIGHTED LINEAR COMBINATION MODELLING OUTPUT SUITABILITY MAP STATISTICS TABLES Conceptual Analytical Spatial Decision Support Disposal Facility Siting Model

23. CONCLUSION • In spite of government policies on THW management, problems and issues have persisted due to the lack of standard criteria for disposal siting as well as an institutionalized siting process. This is also aggravated by the lack of a centralized land surface facility • A participatory approach is an imperative, involving all stakeholders in the community to gain public support in disposal siting and development

24. CONCLUSION • The proposed three-level siting criteria system would significantly contribute to the improvement of the siting practices in the country which can be utilised in three ways: - to validate the existing criteria employed in the past siting projects - to validate using available computer-based spatial support systems such at the Geographic Information Systems (GIS) - as basis for guidelines for disposal siting and to be adopted as a standard criteria in the country

25. ACKNOWLEDGMENT • AusAID –ADS Grant • University of Queensland, School of Geography, Planning and Architecture • Tetra Tech EM Inc, Philippines

26. THANK YOU