Get involved in YOUR city and locality - Improve Your World
Get involved in YOUR city and locality - Improve Your World
Get involved in YOUR city and locality 
Improve Your World Home | About Us | Sitemap | Search | Contact Us 


  Home >> Cleanliness >> Mission: Mumbai Chakachak

 

Executive Summary 
Of 
Mission : Mumbai Chakachak 
'A Policy Framework for a Clean Mumbai'

Recommendations by Civil Society Organisations / NGO Council   

The floods of July 2005 in Mumbai not only paralyzed the city and its citizens, but later also galvanized large groups of people into helping themselves and each other in times of crisis. One of the principal lessons learnt from the floods was that effective partnerships between the Government and citizens is the key to the better management and functioning of the city.  

An NGO Co-ordination Committee for flood relief was formed by the MCGM Commissioner, with a view to network and coordinate the work between various agencies, both private and public, and this Committee considerably assisted in the delivery of timely flood relief. With a view to continue this large scale networking of NGO’s in the city, an NGO Council was formed on August 22, 2005,
where this Council is the representative body of all NGOs and the NGO sector in Mumbai.
 

The MCGM and the NGO Council are now working on creating formal engagement mechanisms with each other. The first area of work that has been taken up is regarding the Cleanliness in Mumbai.  

A series of meetings and discussions have been held with all participating NGO’s and Groups, and also with the MCGM, in order to :

  • understand the situation and problems faced
  • analyse the existing mechanisms/strategies used for keeping Mumbai clean
  • share experiences: both successes and failures
  • draw up recommendations to be implemented
  • identify areas that need further discussion/study before a solution is reached.

As a result of these meetings, a draft set of recommendations has been drawn up, and this document titled, “Mission: Mumbai Chakachak”, is divided into 29 sub-points, each with either recommendation, or discussion points listed.  

At the meeting of 28th Oct. 2005, this draft set of recommendations will be discussed with the MCGM, and based on the feedback and responses received, a final set of recommendations will be prepared. Thereafter, the structure of the implementation for these recommendations will be drawn up, again through a consultative process, with all parties concerned.  

The Mission: Mumbai Chakachak, undertaken by the MCGM and NGO Council, will be one of the pioneering Government-NGO partnerships in the city and country, where people play an active role in the functioning of their city, and where the Government takes cognizance of the role and contribution of responsible citizens.  

Mission : Mumbai Chakachak

 

'A Policy Framework for a Clean Mumbai'

Recommendations by Civil Society Organisations / NGO Council

 Submitted to MCGM on 28 Oct 2005

Latest version will always be posted at www.karmayog.com/cleanliness/chakachak.htm
Email: info @ karmayog . com

 

MCGM’s Mission Statement:

 

To discuss:

 

Mumbai will be Zero-Garbage by 200_?

 

From about 8000 Tons / day of Solid Waste going to the landfill area currently, milestones will be 7000 tons/day by ……, 6000 tons by  ……, 5000 tons by ……,  4000 tons by  ……, 3000 tons by  ……, 2000 tons by  ……, 1000 tons by  ……

 

All solutions will be environmentally friendly and socially acceptable while following the relevant acts and rules.

 

 

1. Relevant Acts / Rules / Recommendations:

 

The following relevant acts have been referred to while preparing these   recommendations:

  1. S 61 of MCGM Act lists Obligatory functions of MCGM incl. provision of daily cleaning of streets, daily removing of garbage, etc.
  2. S 365 - 371 define how the activity is to be done. Citizens responsibilities are defined. Citizens are required to act as directed by Mun Comm. Citizens are also required to pay certain fees. Citizens are also required to deposit waste where directed. etc. etc.
  3. Since 1992, Solid Waste Management Dept is responsible for all cleaning except that of drains above 10 ft diameter which is responsibility of Storm Water Drain Dept.
  4. Areas that developed after 1992 are poorly serviced e.g. Lokhandwala, Thakur, Bandra-Kurla, Malvani.
  5. MPCB (Mah Pollution Control Board) responsible for medical waste management i.e. it is not responsibility of MCGM.
  6. MPCB has to follow Hazardous Waste Management and Handling Rules though this is only for trade waste.
  7. Supreme Court Committee Report for Solid Waste Management in India 1999; Municipal Solid Waste (Management & Handling ) Rules 2000, SAARC's Dhaka Recommendations Oct 2004 to be taken into account also.


2.
Overview of the Policy Framework for a Clean Mumbai:

Flow chart is at www.karmayog.com/cleanliness/swmflowchart.htm

          (discussed in detail below in this note)

 

  1. keep waste unmixed at source, with incentives for reduction
  2. make arrangements to keep unmixed waste separated throughout the chain till the end.
  3. treat at source (e.g. wet waste), recycle i.e. sell/give (e.g. dry waste), re-use / re-process (e.g. debris), special treatment (e.g. medical & hazardous) - with penalties for failure
  4. transport the (hopefully) very little balance waste to landfill
  5. wet waste / compost / unsegregated waste to be collected daily; dry waste to be collected weekly; debris to be transported by generator to nearby debris bank or designated land-hill after sanitising. Different colours for vehicles carrying different types of waste.
  6. demonstration precincts for zero garbage to be announced
  7. incentives, penalties, fines, awards, etc. to be introduced
  8. objectives -- reduce, recycle, reuse disposal sites through creation and expansion of zero-garbage neighbourhoods / Wards with aim to be zero-garbage by 200... Sri Lanka has done it this year (?)
  9. comprehensive Policy of Solid Waste Management with specific time bound commitments / milestones on different types of Solid Wastes will be announced by …Nov 2005.

 

3. The Seven Types of waste - i.e. which need to be treated separately:

 

  1. wet waste i.e. bio-degradable (e.g. food)
  2. recyclable dry waste (e.g. plastics, rubber, metal, polyethylene, leather, coconuts?, etc.) including  2-a) office waste & e-waste e.g. computers & accessories, CDs, floppies, etc.
  3. construction & demolition waste i.e. inerts, including road digging and drain silt
  4. medical waste 
  5. non-recyclable waste (to be specified)
  6. hazardous waste (e.g. chemicals)
  7. fish / slaughter waste (e.g. carcasses, blood, bones)

 

4. Generators of waste & their main waste:

 

No

Generator

Types of wastes generated

Remarks

1

households & housing societies & slums

all 7 types of waste

wet, dry & construction are main

2

eating places - restaurants, hotels, hawkers

wet & dry waste

wet is main

3

food & flower markets & temples 

wet & dry waste

wet is main

4

shops, stablishments, and institutional complexes

Wet and dry waste

 

5

hospitals, pathology labs, doctor clinics, nursing homes

wet, dry & medical waste

medical is main

 

6

industrial areas

wet, dry, & hazardous waste

hazardous is main

7

abattoir

 

animal waste is main

8

road repairs

tar, concrete,

debris is main

9

builders - demolition & building

 

construction waste is main

 

10

kabadiwalas

 

non-recyclable & hazardous waste is main

Different policies for each of the above.

   

5. Areas where waste gets thrown:

 

  1. vacant sites, service lanes, streets & footpaths, gardens, markets, beaches, water bodies (lakes, rivers, sea), railway tracks, gutters & nalas
  2. different solutions needed for each problem

 

6. Receiving centres / transfer areas and thus areas needed to be provided by MCGM:  

  1. bio-bins in service lanes
  2. kiosks at near distances where building sweepers, etc., can bring segregated dry waste, medical waste, etc. (Advertisers can sponsor these.)
  3. common treatment areas for wet waste for households, specific markets, etc.,    
  4. sorting areas for ragpickers
  5. waste receving centres for all wastes - maybe ragpickers can sort there    
  6. sites for debris banks and operating machines to make products from the construction waste
  7. landfills (low-lying areas) for silt, mud and non-recyclable debris; landhills for hazardous and non-recyclable. (recommendation European Union)
  8. any other area that may be needed under the Plan of Action e.g. for kabadiwalas (problem needs to be addressed anyway)
  9. specific facilities to be provided at each area

 

To discuss:

a)      MCGM to provide open spaces under its possession which do not have immediate alternate uses by amending the development plan.

b)      Does this need a PIL?

c)      Some NGOs feel that public spaces should not be used for this prupose?

d)      As a compromise, is it ok for public space to be used for this if the local community agrees to such use of public spaces in their neighbourhood?

e)      On the other hand, if choice is dependent on their agreement, will they really agree? What is their motivation to do so? Is a zero garbage locality enough motivation?

f)        Anyway, if this is an agreeable suggestion, are there NGOs who would be willing to do a quick survey jointly with MCGM staff in every Councillor ward on a fee basis. This would be to identify suitable public spaces and to gauge the local community's willingness.

g)      It should be noted that unless enough public spaces are available, most recommendations in this policy framework will not be viable as there will not be enough space to make a major impact.

 

To discuss:

Should MCGM incentivise Councillors and local communities by using savings in transport costs to give them better roads, footpaths, and gardens. Accountability also needs to be factored in. So savings can be put in a Budget from which Councilors and NGO Council can prioritise what should be done and where, to reward areas which help in waste minimization. OR MCGM should do it anyway with the savings without showing a formal link as a formal link makes it a quid pro quo approach which could be a bad precedent for any other future MCGM initiatives.

 

To discuss: (recommendation of European Union)

      a) landfills (low-lying areas) for silt, mud and non-recyclable debris

      b) landhills for hazardous and non-recyclable and abattoir wastes. Leachate is visible and can be treated effectively when seen which is not possible in landfill.
      c) No waste to new Kanjur Marg site unless waste is bio-inoculated for sanitizing before it reaches the site, and is 100% aerobically windrowed and turned whether or not compost is to be sieved and sold from it or not, after successfully doing this at existing sites.  Since Kanjur Marg is a low lying marshy area, it will need to be raised at least 2-3 meters above highwater mark to comply with landfill conditions.  This can be an opportunity for disposal of clear debris to raise the level sufficiently for accepting municipal waste.

 

7. All waste to be kept unmixed / segregated at source by the waste-

      generator.

 

1.      Mandatory: at household level & commercial food eating / selling places should be kept in 3 categories - wet / construction / all other.

2.      Further segregation of the 'all other' waste to be done at the dry waste collection centres.

3.      Mandatory: at all others -- their main waste (as in 7) to be segregated separately.

4.      Small but regular generators to be targeted first e.g. bio-medical waste generators (such as clinics and pathology labs) and commercial and other establishments that generate hazardous or e-waste in significant quantities as many of these escape the MPCB scanner.

 

Note:

·        Construction & demolition waste should be stored separately wherever and whenever it is generated.

·        Some non-segregated waste will still exist e.g. in litter bins.

·        All big garbage bins in public areas to be eliminated.

 

 

8. Wet waste i.e. bio-degradable

(i.e. waste of plant and animal origin e.g. food & flower waste, garden waste, animal dung, fish/meat waste, slaughterhouse waste,)

 

8 a) housing societies:

Mandatory:

  1. Wet Waste has to be treated in the building itself via vermiculture / bioculture or
  2. taken by building society at its cost to nearby common treatment area handled by private org (or MCGM).
  3. MCGM has to offer to pick up and buy the end-product i.e. compost / manure / unsieved compost at fixed price. 

To discuss:  If can't / won't be done by housing society, then MCGM will have to pick up the wet waste and take to the common treatment area made by MCGM (five 50-ton-per-day sites in each ward may work). This has to be done at a deterrent cost. What is the payment collection procedure?

To discuss: How much area is needed per ward?

  1. Already mandated: All new building proposals must contain in-situ bioculture pits. 

            To discuss: It's not being followed and MCGM is losing in court.

  1. Mandatory:  Existing large complexes also to mandatorily install. “Large to be defined by sq.ft. as for rainwater harvesting”

 

 

 8b) restaurants and hotels:

 Mandatory:

  1. compost in-situ or in nearby common treatment area; or
  2. can also do bio-methanation.
    To discuss:  BM is better version of gobar gas plant. It is an online processing system of hopper, shredder, etc. The methane can be used to run a DG set to run the BM plant or piped to nearby restaurants via a protected storage balloon. 1 ton per day plant costs Rs. 10 lacs and requires 10,000 sq. ft. (which is lesser than that required for bio-composting). Restaurant wet waste per ward is 50 – 100 tons per day. (Currently all going to landfill.) What are the economics of bio-methanation? It has been tried since 1998 so why is it not expanding. To study BARC’s experiences

 

To discuss:  MCGM to reduce trade refuse charges suitably in proportion to waste minimized if hotels adopt bio methanation or  composting. Discuss with association of restaurants and hotels before deciding on compulsion or incentive option.

 

  8c) institute campuses, clubs, hospitals, etc.:

Mandatory: as above

 

  8d) food markets (veg / meat)

Mandatory:  

  1. sellers to put waste into nearby common treatment area provided by MCGM in / near market & handled by private org (or MCGM).

To discuss:  If some fail to do so, how to identify them for fining. If there is a market assoc, then that can be fined, as the licences are through MCGM. But what to do with unauthorized / informal markets.

 

Notes: a) non-veg nitrogenous waste is best composted together with carbohydrate veg wastes

b) waste shredders are too noisy  / compactors are too costly and not of any use in India

 

8e)  hawker areas 

Mandatory: 

  1. All to have basket / gunny bag slung beneath to prevent littering.
  2. to put waste into nearby common treatment area provided by MCGM & handled by private org (or MCGM)

To discuss:  If some fail to do so, how to identify them for fining. If there is a market assoc, then that can be fined, as the licences are through MCGM. But what to do with unauthorized / informal markets?

 

8f) temples:

  1. for pooja offerings -- not-mandatory in trial period.

 

8g) tabelas:

Mandatory: Cow dung to be bio-composted. MCGM be banned from buying / using cow dung from tabelas  (so as to encourage composting). Implement the High Court order on tabelas being re-located outside the city but composting to be done till they actually move out.

 

 

8h) Deonar abattoir – discussed later

   

General Notes regarding wet waste:

  1. MCGM to empanel orgs that can train sweepers / provide vermi-bioculture services at pre-determined cost to be paid by whoever wants their services. 
  2. No distinction to be made in facilities even if market / hawker area / slum is currently unauthorised i.e. either remove the sellers or provide clean facilities to citizens.
  3. Bioculture & vermiculture are both options. Bins to be ventilated but covered to avoid access to dogs, rats, flies, insects, etc and rain.
  4. Some capital cost, operating expense, water, and area for 60 days composting are thus the requirements.

 

 

9. Dry waste - recyclable & non-recyclable

       (recyclable examples -- plastics, rubber, metal, glass, etc.;)

 

Basic Choice is: Who to pick-up? MCGM or ragpickers?

From where to pick-up? From building or from nearby kiosk?

 

  1. Our recommendation is that Ragpickers should pick up from kiosks for small Quanitities, and from generator if trade waste.
  2. So the mandate could be: All dry-waste (except construction waste) to be taken to kiosk by small quantity waste generator at its cost.
  3. Dry waste to be picked weekly. To discuss: Should MCGM pick-up dry waste at all or not?

 

All of the following need discussion:

    1. Mandatory: building sweeper / servants to be trained to collect wet & dry waste from flat to flat / office to office going with 2 separate bags. 
    2. they can either sell directly or the building will give it to waste-pickers or take it to nearby kiosk or collection centre.
    3. if kiosks -- how many will be needed to cover Mumbai, who will man these, how to prevent them becoming a residential quarter, how to ensure that sorting is not done on the area nearby, etc.
    4. where there are no building sweepers, ragpicker / waste-picker co-operatives / contractors to do so.
    5. every waste picker to get photo ID card, uniform, tools thru any one co-operative only. No individual waste picker can operate on own.
    6. collection area allotment to co-ops by uniform workload distribution and effectiveness, & financial capability, but not by competitive pricing tender bids. Will Hyderabad model and drawing of lots for areas work? Or can the co-ops divide territory on their own?
    7. how to ensure that ragpickers are capable of doing so? Even in one ward? MCGM to help NGOs. Onus should be on MCGM.
    8. ragpicker co-op will sell to market i.e. their income will be through this. They will have to sustain market forces.
    9. areas for sorting to be provided in nearby locations e.g. pumping stations. How many defunct pumping stations are there and where located? MCGM to give list.
    10. waste generators can bring the waste to these areas directly at their cost.
    11. waste buyers / kabadiwalas can lift directly from these areas.  
    12. suitable support be given to wastepickers & families e.g. children education, microfinance loans, special insurance policies, medical treatment, medical camps, etc. By whom? By only the existing Central and State Govt. schemes and not by MCGM? A co-ordinated effort is needed. In Pune, insurance is provided by PMC. Waste pickers independent cooperative with help of NGOs as facilitators. SJSRY  funds can be utilized for training , infrastructure and tool kits.
    13. in waste-removal respects, co-ops to be treated as commercial orgs and not NGOs.
    14. in due course, will these co-ops uplift the status of ragpickers or not? And, if not, is this system morally desirable? Ultimately there should be no waste pickers. There should be only collectors / service providers / trained workers.
    15. back-up collection plan needed if prolonged strike.   

 

 

 

 

 

Notes for information only

There seem to be three financial options:

1. - MCGM to offer to buy different categories of waste at fixed specified prices for

both recyclable / non-recyclable. Price fixed such that it is commercially viable for waste picker co-ops to function. MCGM to sell the recyclable back-to-back, and deal with the non-recyclables. 

[Problem: MCGM normally unwilling to do any selling. A minimum floor price should be offered to the ragpicker cooperatives. Suppose certain material buyers form a cartel and refuse to buy from ragpickers at a decent price or even at all. How are ragpickers supposed to handle the situation? Suppose they then, in turn, refuse to pick up the refuse. It will be a crisis situation.]

2.  MCGM to pay based on thumb-rule estimated transport costs saved. [problem:

different areas have different per family amounts of dry waste / also varies seasonally & year-to-year. Measurement problems.]

3. Charge on a per-family basis e.g. Rs. 10. payment made by MCGM or family or

both. [problem: failed in Thane as Corporators objected. Also why should citizens be burdened?]

 

To discuss: 

  1. How to prevent recycled packaging containers e.g. toothpaste tubes, cosmetic bottles, mineral water bottles, being re-filled with spurious products and coming back into the market as orginals?  Is puncturing possible?
  2. We need to explore mandatory obligation of Manufacturers on EPR Principle.  The manufacturers should offer incentives to consumer to return packing to original producer.  But what will mfrs do with it? Are we just transfering the waste to another part of the country?
  3. More technical know how needed by MCGM on how to recycle / re-use the different materials. How to obtain this information?

 

10. Construction & demolition waste

(all types - marble, mosaic tiles, ceramic tiles, plaster, cement, concrete)
See and respond to MCGM Construction and Demolition Waste Guidelines at www.karmayog.com/images/desilting_guidelines.pdf

 

1. household : to discuss:

a.       debris banks to be created in, say 25 (ward-wise), different areas throughout the city; waste generators to bring debris here at their cost;

b.      debris can be completely converted to usable products e.g. bricks, paving blocks (CIDCO-YUVA pilot plant is too noisy and dusty);

c.       tenders be floated for private orgs to take up this conversion activity;                   

d.      no product buy-back support to be provided;

e.       processing machinery to be put up preferably at the debris bank itself;

f.        processor can not refuse to take waste. 

g.      Apex Builders Association to be made responsible for these projects.

 

1.      If suitable spaces available, then to be mandated. Else MCGM to pick up weekly.

2.      Mandatory: MCGM road specs to favour specified recycled aggregate for laying subgrade e.g. tiles, marble, are ok; bricks and plaster are not.

3.      Mandatory: builders & contractors: must set-up own debris conversion machines at large demolition & construction sites (as cost is not much) or tie-up with debris processor; if latter, MCGM to ensure debris is transported to the debris processing station.

 

2. road repairs / digging

tar, concrete, dirt. – Appropriate policy to be framed for disposal of this waste.

 

  11.  Medical waste

(hospitals, pathology labs, nursing homes, doctor clinics)

 

  1. MPCB is responsible, detailed rules exist, need to be implemented.
  2. MCGM's own hospitals are major generators of medical waste so MCGM has provided autoclaving at Sewri, and incineration at Taloja.
  3. i.e. MPCB IMPLEMENTS. MCGM FACILITATES.
  4. nursing homes, doctor clinics should have to deposit their waste to nearby hospital or designated containers in that area. List to be prepared ward-wise by MCGM + NGOs. 
  5.  Mandatory:  Begin with Sharps - Collection to be done by specialised biomed service provider.

To discuss: Needle / syringe breakers to be carried by them so that conscientious doctors can see that they break the items.

  1.  separate container to be provided at pumping station for waste pickers to deposit such waste that they may have collected.

 

12. Office waste or e-waste

(computers & accessories, CDs, floppies, etc.)

  To discuss:

a)      Toxic Links has detailed proposal

b)      waste pickers to be involved too - as mostly recyclable

c)      authorised collection centres to be set-up as in Bangalore . By whom done in B'lore?

 

13.  Non-segregated Waste: 

 

  1. from public litter bins: MCGM to pick up. This waste to be sent to the sorting area used by wastepickers. Waste pickers to treat wet waste via bio-culture and sell compost to MCGM. Waste pickers to treat other waste as above. 

 

  1. from private waste generators:  Traders must segregate wet and dry.
  2. Mandatory for all:  If waste is unsegregated, then MCGM to lift it daily but with a daily fine. 

 

Note: user charges for lifting of household waste can be introduced after making the costs transparent and improving efficiency. Trade refuse charges can be rationalized with options and incentives for bulk generating entities.

 

14. Non-recyclable waste :

(list to be specified)

To discuss:

a.       MCGM to pay and collect from wastepickers' sorting centres

b.      send to landfill areas

c.       list of compulsory facilities at landfill area to be made

d.      no incineration or waste-to-electricity or Refuse Derived Fuel (e.g. for coconut shells) to be done.  SAARC's Dhaka reco of 12 Oct 2004 disallow burn technologies.

e.       take out suitable policies to discourage manufacturers from making / using such products e.g. one out of the six plastics can not be re-cycled.

f.        ban if suitable alternative products exist even if little costlier.

g.       force product manufacturers to give buyback scheme for return of empty packs even if it only results in collection and can not be used again?  It should not result in waste simply being transported from Mumbai to other parts of India . (Refer Ashok Dattar’s paper on the subject,)

h.       dirt and silt to be transported to separate landfill area so that that land can be ultimately used?

 

15. Hazardous waste:

(e.g. chemicals, pesticide spray cans, oils, paints, tubelights, batteries) 

 

To discuss:

a.       detailed list of wastes to be prepared by NGOs

b.      decide where it is taken i.e. to which landfill

c.       leachate to be treated as per NEERI recommendations;

d.      bulk trade waste covered by Hazardous Waste Mgt. & Handling Rules but this is for trade generators.

e.       Separate Policy required for regular private generators.

 

 

16.  Slaughter houses:

 

To discuss:

a.       slaughter houses to be banned within city limits to avoid entry of cattle, sheep & chicken into the city.

b.      How to deal with illegal slaughterhouses?

c.       to ban live cattle, sheep & chicken into the city?

d.      Probably can be decided only by a PIL

e.       PETA to prepare a note

f.        BARC’s 5 ton per day bio-methanation plant at Deonar to be studied.

 

17. Beaches:

 

  1. Mandatory:  Throwing garbage / litter / pooja articles into the sea and water bodies to be banned.
  2. trained workforce needed for cleaning
  3. machines e.g. suction seivers may be needed
  4. provide Kalashes to collect pooja articles only and inform that these will be dealt with in appropriate religious manner

To discuss:  examples of how do temples dispose off the flower offerings? e.g. Siddhi Vinayak converts to soil enricher by Excel's OWC m/c and sells to devotees.

 

18. Lakes :

 

1. Mandatory: Maintain a buffer of green zone all around all the lakes to stop the silt from getting in the lakes.

2. Mandatory: No waste can be dumped in the watershed (catchment area) of any lake.

3. Mandatory: Desilting of Powai -Vihar lakes to be done by MCGM.    
    Recommendatory: Desilting of Mithi river

4. Mandatory:  All the lakes to be kept deep and clean to ensure continuation of clean water supply and of the great legacy we have inherited. Besides, its a natural heritage we must protect. For this purpose, all the watersheds of these lakes/Mithi river should be declared as `No Development Zones'.

 

 

19. Gutters & Nallahs:  

  1. Obligatory:  MCGM to do or pay for cleaning.  
  2. Mandatory:  to include in 'Saaf Aangan' concept

 

To discuss:     

a.       leachates to be treated with bio-culture by MCGM; recyclables to be treated how?

b.      jet-cleaning to be done every six months

 

20. Responsibilites of keeping areas clean:

 

  1. Mandatory: "Saaf Aangan" concept of 'I Clean Mumbai': Every housing society, shop, establishment to be responsible for keeping its area and surrounding footpath and drain / road gutter clean.

To discuss: Formation of ALMs, Dattak Vastis to be encouraged and suitable empowerment & incentivisation to be done.

 

  1. Mandatory: MCGM Roads - sweeping & mopping as per logical schedule via MCGM staff, Mahila Mandals, or private contractors. 

To discuss: non-MCGM areas - Railways, MMRDA, MHADA, MIDC, MSRDC, MPT, SEEPZ, PWD, etc. - they to bring segregated waste to their own SWM spaces from where MCGM can take over; or give MCGM charge for entire cleaning.

 

  1. Mandatory:  Also when roads being dug up

To discuss:  Eastern & Western Highways, and all Railway Tracks to be immediate areas to be taken up under Mission "Mumbai Chakachak" so as to give visible areas. To do by machines if necessary.

 

21. Slums: 

 

To discuss: 

a.       Sanitation is an important aspect and needs to be discussed after the Solid Waste Management Plan of Action finalised.

(Mrs. Almitra Patel to be requested to suggest four immediately implementable models.)

b.      Dattak Vasti Yojanas not to be combined with each other. Some specific suggestions have been received.

 

 

 

22. Continuing Education, Awareness-Raising and Training:

 

1.      Provision of environmental education, awareness-raising and training should be a permanent and ongoing activity for selected NGOs and CSOs, for which they should be paid by MCGM.

 

2.      NGOs / CSOs who have the capacity and ability in this field must be selected and approved by MCGM-NGO committee.

 

3.      MCGM-NGO committee must identify the different stakeholders within Mumbai and their different educational and training needs with regards to cleanliness. (eg. schools, citizens, housing societies, slums, shops, hawkers, office complexes, industrial units, unions, corporators, civil society orgs, ALMs, media).

 

4.      A coordinated plan of action to tackle education, awareness-raising and training of stakekholders needs to be drawn up, with NGOs/CSOs submitting project proposals to the MCGM-NGO committee in this regard. 

 

5.      Methodologies of how to teach eg. vermicomposting techniques or waste segregation must be coordinated between NGOs and CSOs, to ensure that firstly the correct information is being shared and that personal agendas are kept to a minimum.

 

6.      MCGM should take help from the MCGM-NGO Council to train all their staff members (irrespective of department) on environmental issues facing the city, including cleanliness and waste management.  This will help ensure capacity building within the MCGM, so all staff can carry out their individual duties in an environmentally-sustainable manner.

 

7.      MCGM should aid and assist NGOs who are part of the Council to establish an Environmental Resource Centre that will be a comprehensive centre where anybody can avail of books, CDs, audio-visuals, reports, legislative documents, archival materials and other information pertaining to environmental issues affecting Mumbai. 

 

8.      At a city level, MCGM to consider the effectiveness of a media campaign.

 

23. MCGM & NGO Sector Co-ordination  

 

A MCGM - NGO Council SWM Co-ordination Committee be set up immediately.

 

New SWM policy changes by MCGM to be discussed by this Co-ordination Committee before being announced / launched. Relevant information for decision-making will be shared with this Co-ordination Committee.

 

The Co-ordination Committee to comprise of Additional Municipal Commissioner (City), Chairperson, and other MCGM SWM-related officials as nominated by AMC (City), and Co-ordinator, NGO Cleanliness Group, Convenor, NGO Council, and other members as nominated by the NGO Council, NGO Cleanliness Group, etc. Invitees will also be called as appropriate.

 

MCGM to pay for / reimburse expenses which are approved by this Co-ordination Committee for SWM related activities, meetings,  and reports of the NGO Cleanliness Group and its members.

 

 

 

24. Citizen Monitoring and Feedback and Action

[this is the most critical aspect of all and a necessary role that the NGO / CSO / Citizen Sector will play on a continuing basis]

24a. Background info/note on the LACC: Local Area Citizens' Committees - since Dec 2004.

a.       Geographic spread: one per Councillor Ward i.e. 227 LACCs

b.      Purpose: cleanliness, garbage, water, sanitation, hawking, pedestrians, parking, roads, footpaths, etc.

c.       Committee: Asst Comm (Convenor), Councillor, Jr. Engr. (maint), Jr. Engr (water), Jr. SWM Overseer, Jr. Pest Overseer, ALMs, selected citizen reps (VARs)

d.      Meetings: every Saturday in MCGM school. Asst Comm level must attend. Medical Officer, police, BEST, utility officers to attend / be invited.

e.       Responsibility: J.E. / J.O. to minute, circulate, prepare action taken reports. Mun Comm himself will review monthly.

f.        LACCs however have too much to discuss in each meeting to be easily effective. So our suggestion is of separate Task Forces along with Nuisance Detectors.

 

24b. The "Cleanliness Task Force" Concept:

 

a.       Let Cleanliness & Garbage Collection be done via a Cleanliness Task Force, which is to be part of an LACC. This gives them focused responsibility. There job will be two-fold -- primary would be reporting locations where garbage is piling up and, if possible, reporting who is repeatedly not following the garbage rules.

b.      The Task Force to consist of the Councillor (ex-officio), a MCGM official (ex-officio), 5 citizen group representatives.

c.       Citizen Groups would include ALMs, NGOs, resident welfare associations, etc.

d.      The citizen groups would be recommended by NGO Council - system to be evolved. The idea is to keep out 'front' orgs of political parties.

e.       Meetings would be convened by Citizen Reps at defined periods. To be chaired by Councillor, failing which by MCGM rep, failing which by Citizen rep.

f.        The prime role of the Cleanliness Task Force would be to arrange a daily report on the situation of cleanliness in their area as per a standardised format.

g.       This report would be sent daily through an online form (hopefully using the existing Praja system).

h.       Daily reports would go automatically to LACC.

i.         Weekly and monthly reports would get automatically compiled and go to LACC, MCGM ward office, MCGM officials, NGO Council, etc.

j.        Appropriate reports would also come to Karmayog for public display.

k.      The basic idea is that this will enable reports of the true situation to come to the higher MCGM officials.

l.         Info can thus also flow top down instead of only bottom up as is the case now.

m.     Each Cleanliness Task Force should be funded with Rs. 10,000 per month by MCGM / Councillor's fund to give these daily reports. –Cleanliness Task Force to be constituted in any case.

n.       Beat details for MCGM staff for every lane to be recommended by CTF.

o.      If CTFs work out well, then LACC be divided into such Task Forces for each of its functions.

 

24c. The "Nuisance Detector" concept

a.       NDs to be appointed by the Cleanliness Task Force. All Cleanliness Task Force members to have ND status also.

b.      NDs to be empowered to fine. Separate amounts and methods for non-complying individuals and organisations.

c.       NDs to go in group with MCGM person. This is so as to not enable 'Goonda Raj'. Wrong behaviour by even a few NDs will give this initiative a bad name.

d.      Part of the fine money goes to the Cleanliness Task Force, and balance to MCGM. Give ND duty to those who can't pay fine.

e.       The idea is similar to the pay-and-park and towing concept throughout the city.

f.        Prevention of dumping e.g. at specifically-known sites, into the sea or other water bodies -- NDs to be paid separately for that guard role.

g.       Police participation / co-operation may be also needed and to be accordingly defined.

 

24d: Home Guards to be utilized for disciplining

 

a.       There are 2000 Home Guards in Mumbai

b.      Home Guards to be used for fining for spitting, littering, etc.

c.       Fine to be Rs. 10 to Rs 20 for each offence

d.      Can be paid Rs. 50 per day plus 50% of fine collected.

 

 

25. Conservancy Staff of MCGM:

 

  1. to ensure dignity, hygiene, health & safety of the 35000 strong work force.
  2. re-training where required / supervisory roles where required. MCGM has training institute infrastructure with residential facility at Borivali. NGOs role for motivation & capacity building can be used.
  3.  special teams to focus on areas pointed out in the Daily Reports of the Cleanliness Task Forces.
  4. to man areas which NDs find are regularly problematic; do composting at some places.
  5. utilise knowledge, experience & expertise of ex-MCGM staff.
  6. To understand how and where the proposed recommendations affects the current working of the Conservancy staff
  7. Clear documented job descriptions for every level with division of roles is necessary along with fixed responsibility and performance linked strategy.
  8. Senior officials should visit SWM areas monthly and encourage the organizations by solving civic problems.

 

26. Empowerment of MCGM officials:

 

  1. discretionary approval powers upto one month's salary for lower levels, and Rs. 1 lakh / 5 lakhs / etc. at higher levels
  2. Surat model of decentralized empowerment of Mini-Commissioners at Zonal Level for prompt grievance redressal to be studied as an example.

 

 

27. Fines:

To discuss:

1. Each violation to be fined as follows:

    1. Individuals: Small amounts (Rs. 10 – Rs. 50) as deterrent
    2. Non-trade: Small amounts (Rs. 250 – Rs. 1000) as deterrent
    3. Trade: Increasing amounts (Rs. 500 – upwards) till punitive.
    4. Specific violations: Large amounts as penalty / punitive

 

28. General:

 

  1. all concerned entities to be registered with MCGM - either automatically or via procedure. pre-qualification criteria / transparent procedure needed.
  2. all info - policies, contacts, procedures, reports - to be publicly accessible 

 

29. Assumptions:

  1. MCGM to offer floor prices for compost, ragpickers sorted waste, various processed waste, as appropriate.
  2. Sharing of cost-savings is possible but difficult to quantify

2.a) (To discuss: How can one determine cost savings year after year? Also, how to define costs? The saver does not like to include overheads in the calculation, while the doer has to incur them.)

  1. Funding by MCGM is possible including subsidies and appropriate commercial terms.
  2. Land can be made available by MCGM. NGOs to keep in mind that land has an opportunity cost.
  3. MCGM willing to work with NGOs but will not formulate a policy which depends on NGOs only.  
  4. The practical operating experience and expertise of NGOs should be tapped by being commissioned by MCGM to submit detailed documentation / action plans which can then be used as a basis to prepare the final Plans.
  5. Existing contracts to transporters, etc., need to be suitably modified.
  6. While cost per ton / cost per capital are important points, basically no solutions to be pursued that are expensive, or unproven, or environmentally-unfriendly, or encouraging waste increase, or non zero-garbage. All solutions should be socially acceptable, of commercial scale, with appropriate financial structuring by MCGM.
  7. NGO roles to be defined and appropriate support given -- anticipated NGO roles are education, training, monitoring, feedback, evaluation, review, fines.
  8. Delivery of any service is not an anticipated NGO role i.e. NGOs providing that to be treated as commercial service providers.
  9. Views of Trade associations should be invited e.g. Hotel & Restaurant Assoc, Plastic Producers Assoc, Builders Assoc. for policies, procedures, incentives, penalties.
       

30. Elements needed in a Plan of Action:

 

1.      Types of waste, handling & treatment for each, who does what, who pays for what, what is the end-product and how is it to be dealt with. Life-cycle analysis of each is needed. Flow diagram of each would be helpful.

2.      Deadlines, Infrastructure needed before deadline, Awareness needed to be done before deadline, Incentives, Penalties, Monitoring, Feedback

3.      Specific localities / geographical areas to be identified for immediate visible inspiring results and for learnings and making detailed operating manuals.

4.      Detailed operating manuals for each category of stakeholder -- waste generator, collector, transporter, treater, re-user, etc.

5.      Targeted milestones for waste reduction / implementation.

6.      To discuss: Which NGOs are interested to submit the detailed Plan of Action for which areas below.

 

 

This Policy Framework made by: 

A Policy Framework for a Clean Mumbai is the outcome of the discussions, papers, experiences, expertise of the following: 
(This in no way implies their approval or acceptance of the same.)  

 

Mr. Sudheendra Kulkarni

Co-ordinator, Cleanliness Group, NGO council 

Ms. Almitra

Member, Supreme Court Committee for Solid Waste Mgt for Class 1 Cities 

Jai Prakash Soans

Action Aid   

Kamini Kapadia

Action Aid 

Gerson Da Cunha

AGNI - Action for good Governance & Networking in India  

Rajkumar Sharma

AGNI - Action for good Governance & Networking in India  

Leena Joshi

Apnalaya uuu

Mrs Mehra 

Bandra - H/West ALM 

Valerian Fernandes 

Bandra - H/West ALM 

Mrs Parab 

BCPT - Bombay Community Public Trust 

Dr. Kavi Arya 

Chetana Forum 

Priya Ubale  

Forum Clean Sweep 

Kunti Oza 

Clean Sweep Forum 

Rashneh Pardiwala 

CERE -Centre for Environmental Research and Education 

Kitayun Rustom (Katy)  

CERE -Centre for Environmental Research and Education 

Janet Geddes 

CERE -Centre for Environmental Research and Education 

Shanta Chatterji 

Clean Air Island      

Rita Sujan 

Clean Air Island  

Harshad Gandhi 

Excel Industries 

John Almeida 

Federation of Centres for Community Organisations 

Poonam Hudar 

FORCE - Forum for Recycler’s Communities and Environment 

Amruta Prabhu 

FORCE -Forum for Recycler’s Communities and Environment 

Ragini Jain 

Geetanjali Industries 

Aparna Inamdar 

Geosense 

Madhu Sawant    

I Clean Mumbai 

T K Bandopadhay 

India Centre for Plastic & Environment 

Ramita Mehta 

Kandivli ALM 

Vibha Singh 

Karmayog 

Poornima Chikarmane 

KKPKP, Pune 

Vinda Wagh 

Mah. Eco. Devp Council 

Rishi Aggarwaal  

MESN / Lokhandwala CEAG 

Deepika D'souza 

Mumbai Medwaste 

Farida Lambay 

Nirmala Niketan, College of Social Work  

Dr Meena Galliara 

Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies 

Dr Sujata Mukherjee

Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies 

Rashmi Dighe 

Pestom Sagar Citizens Forum, ALM 

Mr Pratapan 

Pestom Sagar Citizens Forum, ALM 

Mr. Narayana 

Pestom Sagar Citizens Forum, ALM 

Dr. Sangole 

Pestom Sagar Citizens Forum, ALM 

Jayasimha 

PETA India  

Sunita/Mohan 

Reefwatch 

Kavita Ingle 

ROOTS 

Rajendra Agarwal 

Rotary District 3140 

Shabnam Javed 

Sanskar India  

Kiran Madan 

Sanskar India  

Kisan Mehta

Save Mumbai Committee / Prakruti 

Priya Salvi 

Save Mumbai Committee / Prakruti 

Jyoti Mhapeskar 

Stree Mukti Sangathan 

Dayanand Jadhav 

Triratna Prerna Mandal 

Umesh Sawant 

Triratna Prerna Mandal 

Amita Bhede 

Tata Institute of Social Science 

Shibani Sachdeva 

United Way of Mumbai 

Ellen Staine 

United Way of Mumbai 

Vag Shantharam Shenai 

Waste to Wealth 

Prabha Nair 

WIT -Women's India Trust 

Shyamla Nath 

WIT -Women'sIndia Trust 

Francis Dias 

WVI -World Vision India  

Bejoy Davis 

YUVA 

Santosh Surve 

Yuvak Pratisthan 

Tanya Mahajan

Architect 

Vinay Somani 

Karmayog.com/ Convenor-NGO council

 













 


It is one of the beautiful compensations of this life that no one can sincerely try to help another without helping himself. --Charles Dudley Warner