Republic of the Philippines

Polytechnic University of the Philippines

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Sta. Mesa, Manila

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

(ENSC 2113)
Group I

SUBMITTED BY:

Bea, Beatriz
Campano, Hazel Christine
Felix, Anne Patricia
Florendo, Ma. Elaiza
Gamayo, Paula Nicole
Iballa, Ryna Paula
Lumba, Marie Grace
Villa, Luis Andres

BSIE 5-1

SUBMITTED TO:

Engr. Roland C. Viray

January 24, 2020

1|Page
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................... 2

BACKGROUND OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ......................................... 5

How it Started? ................................................................................................ 5

Waste Management Timeline .......................................................................... 6

Waste Collection .............................................................................................. 7

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9003: ................................................................................. 9

Ecological Solid Waste Management Act No. 2000 ......................................... 9

Chapter 1: Basic Policies ................................................................................. 9

Chapter 2: Institutional Mechanism ................................................................ 10

Chapter 3: Comprehensive Solid Waste Management ................................... 13

Chapter 4: Incentive Scheme ......................................................................... 16

Chapter 5: Financing Solid Waste Management ............................................ 16

Chapter 6: Penal Provisions .......................................................................... 17

Chapter 7: Miscellaneous Provisions ............................................................. 19

SUGGESTION ............................................................................................... 20

Solid Waste Generation, Sources and Composition ....................................... 21

TYPES OF WASTE ACCORING TO CLASSSIFICATION ............................. 22

The 3R’s of RA 9003 .................................................................................... 24

PROHIBITED ACTS ...................................................................................... 25

WASTE SEGREGATION .................................................................................. 26

Waste Can be segregated as......................................................................... 26

Importance of Waste Segregation .................................................................. 27

ZERO WASTE MANAGEMENT ........................................................................ 27

2|Page
 Zero waste programs include all of the following strategies: .......................... 28

Steps in Zero Waste ...................................................................................... 29

Zero Waste Management Model City ............................................................. 30

Zero Waste Management Model Schools ...................................................... 33

DUMPSITE AND LANDFILL .............................................................................. 34

Dumpsite ....................................................................................................... 34

Landfill ........................................................................................................... 36

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN DUMPSITE AND LANDFILL .............................. 38

NUMBER OF DUMPSITE IN METRO MANILA AND NEARBY PROVINCES 39

NAVOTAS SANITARY LANDFILL ................................................................. 46

INTERNATIONAL LANDFILL ............................................................................ 47

Steps on how to prepare an International Landfill .......................................... 48

Example of International Landfill .................................................................... 53

DO WE HAVE PROPER LANDFILLS WITHIN METRO MANILA AND NEARBY

PROVINCES? .............................................................................................................. 54

Typical Sanitary Landfill System .................................................................... 55

Three Landfills that Currently Absorb Metro Manila’s Waste .......................... 56

Landfills in Nearby Provinces ......................................................................... 58

LIFESPAN OF DUMPSITE AND LANDFILL ...................................................... 59

Different Classifications of Disposal Facilities ................................................ 60

Target Lifespan/Target Year .......................................................................... 61

Historical Perspective .................................................................................... 61

Safe Closure and Rehabilitation of the former San Mateo SLF ...................... 66

PAYATAS ......................................................................................................... 67

3|Page
 The Payatas Landfill Transformation Program: A Component of the City’s
Comprehensive Development Plan .......................................................................... 68

PAYATAS ALLIANCE RECYCLING EXCHANGE MULTIPURPOSE

COOPERATIVE ....................................................................................................... 77

PAYATAS DUMPSITE CLOSURE 2017 ........................................................ 78

2000 PAYATAS TRAGEDY COURT RULE ................................................... 80

REFERENCES .................................................................................................. 82

4|Page
BACKGROUND OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

How it Started?

(Early 1991–Mid-1992): Early 1991 marked an important transition in Metro Manila

waste disposal. Prior to this, the metropolis operated numerous dump sites, including the
internationally infamous Smokey Mountain dump site in the City of Manila. In 1991, and
as a result of mounting public pressure to improve waste disposal and close Smokey
Mountain, the World Bank-financed 73-hectare (ha) regional sanitary landfill facility
opened in San Mateo, Rizal. History of Waste Management in the Philippines.

(Mid-1992–Late 1997): Over time, operations at San Mateo and Carmona

progressively impacted local communities. Design, construction, and operation standards
declined with each operational phase, raising concerns about environmental risks.
Hundreds of trucks thundered through communities nightly, strewing garbage in their
wake. The presence of junk shops, waste pickers, and informal shanties brought social
impacts. Public opposition mounted.

(Late 1997–Late 1999): In early 1998, heightened public opposition forced the
suspension of operations at Carmona. This placed increasing pressure on San Mateo
and major dump sites to accommodate the additional waste. The impending crisis led to
the opening of the Lingunan dump site in Valenzuela, and the stockpiling of waste at Pier
18 in Manila. During 1998, waste disposal options were further limited by the passage of
the Clean Air Act, which effectively stalled plans to build incinerators.

(Late 1999–Early 2001): The waste disposal crisis was a sudden phenomenon,
marked by the forced suspension of operations of the San Mateo sanitary landfill in late
1999 due to immense public opposition. Within weeks, it brought about a near-
catastrophic collapse of the municipal waste system and severe public health risks. Metro
Manila was out of options for disposal, and waste went largely uncollected. Dumping at
the existing sites was accelerated, and small-scale, private dump sites were developed.

5|Page
 In 2000, Republic Act 9003 or the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act that
provides for a systematic, comprehensive and ecological waste management program to
ensure the protection of public health and the environment. It mandates the bureau to
provide secretariat support to the National Solid Waste Management Commission in the
implementation of the solid waste management plans and prescribes policies to achieve
the objectives of the National Ecology Center that is in charge of information
dissemination, consultation, education and training of various local government units on
ecological waste management.

Waste Management Timeline

1991 – Palanyag Dump Site (Paranaque) Opens, San Mateo Landfill Opens,
Operational Dumpsites: Smokey Mountain, Payatas, Catmon, Bagumbong Municipal.

1994 – Don Petra (Marikina) Dump Site Opens

1995 – Lupang Arenda (Laguna de Bay) Dumping commences

1996 – Bagumbong Private Dump Site (Caloocan) Opens, Small C4 Dump Site
(Navotas) Opens, Jancom Incinerator Initiative Considered by Government

1998 – European Union Toxic and Hazardous Waste Management Study

Completed, Lingunan Dump Site (Valenzuela) Opens, Passage of the Clean Air Act

1999 – JICA Solid Waste Masterplan Published, Dumping at Pier 18 Commences,

San Mateo Diisposal Facility Forced to Suspend Operations

2000 – Pro-environment Selected for Build-Own-Operate Regional Facility,

Payatas (Quezon City) Catastrophic Slide Kills over 200, Payatas reopens, Sanitary
Landfill Obtains ECC-Clarck Landfill (Capas)

2002 – Rodriguez Disposal Facility (Montalban) Opens, Pulang Lupa Dump Site
(Las Pinas) opens, ADB Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Study Commences,
Tanza Dump Site (Navotas) Opens

6|Page
 Waste Collection

The common collection practice is through house-to-house collection. Many local

governments have detailed local plans covering waste collection services, and detailed
route maps for collection vehicles.

Of Metro Manila’s 17 cities and municipalities, 11 contracts out garbage collection

to the private sector and 6 collect garbage themselves as part of their local government
functions.

Marikina

Marikina City has a separated waste collection service within its barangays. The
city collects solid wastes from households, markets, and commercial establishments, with
two trucks traveling in tandem collecting biodegradable or nonbiodegradable wastes.

Pasay City

Pasay City’s waste collection and disposal is undertaken through private sector
“total package” contracts. The contractors are responsible for the entire collection,
transfer, and disposal of wastes.

7|Page
Figure 1. Current Collection of Disposal System

8|Page
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9003:

Ecological Solid Waste Management Act No. 2000

Waste mismanagement has serious environmental effects making the passage of

the Republic Act (RA) 9003 or the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 a
landmark environmental legislation in the Philippines. The law was crafted in response to
the looming garbage problems in the country. RA 9003 declares the policy of the state in
adopting a systematic, comprehensive and ecological solid waste management program
that ensures the protection of public health and the environment and the proper
segregation, collection, transport, storage, treatment and disposal of solid waste through
the formulation and adoption of best environmental practices. Moreover, it illustrates the
potentials and benefits of recycling not only in addressing waste management problems
but also in alleviating poverty.

RA 9003 was passed by the Philippine Congress on December 20, 2000 and was
subsequently approved by the Office of the President on January 26, 2001. It contains
seven (7) chapters sub-divided into 66 sections setting out policy direction for an effective
solid waste management program in the country.

Chapter 1: Basic Policies

Section 1. Short Title. This Act shall be known as the “Ecological Solid Waste
Management Act of 2000”.

Section 2. Declaration of Policies. It is hereby declared the policy of the State

to adopt a systematic, comprehensive and ecological solid waste management program

• Ensure the protection of public health and environment;

• Utilize environmentally-sound methods that maximize the utilization of
valuable resources and encourage resources conservation and recovery;
• Set guidelines and targets for solid waste avoidance and volume reduction
through source reduction and waste minimization measures, including
composing, recycling, re-use, recovery, green charcoal process, and
others, before collection, treatment and disposal in appropriate and

9|Page
 environmentallysound solid waste management facilities in accordance with
ecologically sustainable development principles;
• Ensure the proper segregation, collection, transport, storage, treatment and
disposal of solid waste through
• the formulation and adoption of the best environmental practices in
ecological waste management excluding incineration;
• Promote national research and development programs for improved solid
waste management and resource conservation techniques, more effective
institutional arrangement and indigenous and improved methods of waste
reduction, collection, separation and recovery.
• Encourage greater private sector participation in solid waste management;
• Retain primary enforcement and responsibility of solid waste management
with local government units while establishing a cooperative effort among
the national government, other local government units, non-government
organizations, and the private sector;
• Encourage cooperation and self-regulation among waste generators
through the application of market-based instruments;
• Institutionalize public participation in the development and implementation
of national and local integrated, comprehensive and ecological waste
management programs; and
• Strengthen the integration of ecological solid waste management and
resource conservation and recovery topics into the academic curricula of
formal and non-formal education in order to promote environmental
awareness and action among the citizenry.

Chapter 2: Institutional Mechanism

The establishment of a National Solid Waste Management Commission (NSWMC)

and Solid Waste Management Board (SWMB) in each local government unit (LGU) is
mandated by RA 9003 to be represented by public officials, in their ex-officio capacity,
and the private sector. The Commission shall serve as the coordinating body and likewise
develop and implement the National Solid Waste Management Framework. The SWMB,

10 | P a g e
on the other hand, is directed to formulate a 10-year local Ecological Solid Waste
Management Plans instituting an effective and sustainable solid waste management plan
with primary emphasis on implementation of all feasible re-use, recycling and composting
programs. This is pursuant to relevant provisions under RA 7160 or the Local Government
Code.

Section 4. National Solid Waste Management Commission. --There is hereby

established a National Solid Waste Management Commission, hereinafter referred to as
the Commission, under the Office of the President. The Commission shall be composed
of fourteen (14) members from the government sector and three (3) members from the
private sector. The government sector shall be represented by the heads of the following
agencies in their ex officio capacity:

• Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR);

• Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG);
• Department of Science and Technology (DOST);
• Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH);
• Department of Health (DOH);
• Department of Trade and Industry (DTI);
• Department of Agriculture (DA);
• Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA);
• League of provincial governors;
• League of city mayors;
• League of municipal mayors;
• Association of barangay councils;
• Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA); and
• Philippine Information Agency.

The private sector shall be represented by the following:

• A representative from nongovernment organizations (NGOs) whose

principal purpose is to promote recycling and the protection of air and water
quality;

11 | P a g e
 • A representative from the recycling industry; and
• A representative from the manufacturing or packaging industry;

Section 7. The National Ecology Center. There shall be established a National

Ecology Center under the Commission which shall provide consulting, information,
training, and networking services for the implementation of the provisions of this Act. In
this regard, its shall perform the following functions:

• Facilitate training and education in integrated ecological solid waste

management;
• Establish and manage a solid waste management information data base, in
coordination with the DTI and other concerned agencies:
➢ on solid waste generation and management techniques as well as the
management, technical and operational approaches to resource
recovery; and
➢ of processors/recyclers, the list of materials being recycled or bought by
them and their respective prices;
• Promote the development of a recycling market through the establishment
of a national recycling network that will enhance the opportunity to recycle;
• Provide or facilitate expert assistance in pilot modeling of solid waste
management facilities; and
• Develop, test, and disseminate model waste minimization and reduction
auditing procedures for evaluating options.

Section 10. Role of LGUs in Solid Waste Management. Pursuant to the relevant
provisions of R.A. No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code, the LGUs
shall be primarily responsible for the implementation and enforcement of the provisions
of this Act within their respective jurisdictions. Segregation and collection of solid waste
shall be conducted at the barangay level specifically for biodegradable, compostable and
reusable wastes: Provided, That the collection of non-recyclable materials and special
wastes shall be the responsibility of the municipality or city.

12 | P a g e
 Section 11. Provincial Solid Waste Management Board. A Provincial Solid
Waste Management Board shall be established in every province, to be chaired by the
governor.

Section 12. City and Municipal Solid Waste Management Board. -- Each city
or municipality shall form a City or Municipal Waste Management Board that shall
prepare, submit and implement a plan for the safe and sanitary management of solid
waste generated in areas under its geographic and political coverage.

The City or Municipal Solid Waste Management Board shall be composed of the
city or municipal mayor as head with the following as members:

• One (1) representative of the Sangguniang Panlungsod or the Sangguniang

Bayan, preferably chairpersons of either the Committees on Environment
or
➢ Health, who will be designated by the presiding officer;
• President of the Association of Barangay Councils in the municipality or city;
• Chairperson of the Sangguniang Kabataan Federation;
• A representative from NGOs whose principal purpose is to promote
recycling and the protection of air and water quality;
• A representative from the recycling industry;
• A representative from the manufacturing or packaging industry; and
• A representative of each concerned government agency possessing
relevant technical and marketing expertise as may be determined by the
Board.

Chapter 3: Comprehensive Solid Waste Management

Section 16. Local Government Solid Waste Management Plans. To encourage

and facilitate the development of local plans, NSWMC is mandated to publish guidelines
for identification of areas with common waste management problems and appropriate
units for clustering solid waste management services. This is to reinforce provisions of

13 | P a g e
the Local Government Code for all provinces, cities, municipalities and barangays to
consolidate or coordinate efforts, services and resources to establish common waste
treatment and disposal facilities.

Section 21. Mandatory Segregation of Solid Wastes. -- The LGUs shall

evaluate alternative roles for the public and private sectors in providing collection
services, type of collection system, or combination of systems, that best meet their needs:
Provided, That segregation of wastes shall primarily be conducted at the source, to
include household, institutional, industrial, commercial and agricultural sources: Provided,
further, That wastes shall be segregated into the categories provided in Section 22 of this
Act.

For premises containing six (6) or more residential units, the local government unit
shall promulgate regulations requiring the owner or person in charge of such premises to:

• provide for the residents a designated area and containers in which to

accumulate source separated recyclable materials to be collected by the
municipality or private center; and
• notify the occupants of such buildings of the requirements of this Act and
the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto.

Waste Characterization and Segregation. The solid waste generated within the
area of jurisdiction shall be characterized for initial source reduction and recycling element
of the local waste management plan. A separate container is required for each type of
waste for on-site collection properly marked as “compostable”, “non-recyclable”,
“recyclable” or “special waste”. Waste segregation shall primarily be conducted at the
source including household, commercial, industrial and agricultural sources.

Source Reduction. This refers to the methods by which the LGUs can reduce a
sufficient amount of solid waste disposed within five (5) years. LGUs are expected to
divert at least 25% of all solid waste from waste disposal facilities through re-use,
recycling and composting activities. The rate of waste diversion is set to increase every
three (3) years.

14 | P a g e
 Collection and Transport of Solid Waste. The geographic subdivisions are taken
into account in the coverage of the solid waste collection area in every barangay ensuring
100% collection efficiency within 24 hours from all sources. The plan shall define and
identify specific strategies and activities taking into account the availability and provision
of properly designed containers in selected collection points while awaiting collection and
transfer, segregation of different types of waste, hauling and transfer of solid waste from
collection points to final disposal sites, issuance and enforcement of ordinances for
effective implementation, and provision of properly trained officers and workers. All
personnel directly dealing with collection of solid waste must be equipped with personal
protective gears for their protection.

Recycling Program. The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), in coordination

with other concerned agencies, is directed to publish an inventory of existing markets for
recyclable materials, product standards for recyclable and recycled materials, and a
proposal to stimulate demand for the production of recycled materials and products.
Moreover, a coding system for eco-labeling is expected from DTI. Non-environmentally
acceptable products shall be allowed within one (1) year after public notice as alternatives
available to consumers but at cost not exceeding ten (10) percent of the disposable
product. The use of non-environmentally acceptable packaging is strictly prohibited by
the Act.

LGUs are mandated to establish Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) in each

barangay or cluster of barangays designed to receive, sort, process and store
compostable and recyclable materials efficiently. The residual wastes shall then be
transferred to a long-term storage or disposal facility or sanitary landfill. All solid waste
disposal facilities or sites in the country shall be published by the Department of Natural
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). No open dumps nor any practice or
disposal of solid waste that constitutes open dumps for solid waste shall be allowed. The
Act further provides for conversion of existing open dumps to controlled dumps within
three (3) years.

Composting. The Department of Agriculture (DA) shall publish an inventory of

existing markets and demands for composts that is updated annually. These composts

15 | P a g e
intended for commercial distribution should conform to the standards set by the DA for
organic fertilizers.

Section 37. Prohibition Against the Use of Open Dumps for Solid Waste. No
open dumps shall be established and operated, nor any practice or disposal of solid waste
by any person, including LGUs, which constitutes the use of open dumps for solid waste,
be allowed after the effectivity of this Act: Provided, That within three (3) years after the
effectivity of this Act, every LGU shall convert its open dumps into controlled dumps, in
accordance with the guidelines set in Section 41 of this Act: Provided, further, That no
controlled dumps shall be allowed five (5) years following effectivity of this Act.

Chapter 4: Incentive Scheme

An incentive scheme, pursuant to Omnibus Investment Code, is provided by the

Act to encourage participation of individuals, private organizations and entities, including
non-government organizations,in developing outstanding and innovative projects,
technologies, processes and techniques or activities in re-use, recycling and reduction.
This includes 10-year tax and duty exemption on imported capital equipment, vehicles,
legacies, gifts and donations used for collection of solid waste and tax credit equivalent
to 50% of the national internal revenue taxes and custom duties. Non-fiscal incentives
are granted to businesses and industries engaged in recycling of waste in the form of
simplified procedures for importation of equipment, spare parts, new materials and
supplies, and for the export of processed products.

Other forms of incentives include extension of financial services to individuals,

enterprises or private entities engaged in solid waste management and grant entitlement
to outstanding LGUs. Those LGUs who host common waste management facilities can
likewise receive incentives.

Chapter 5: Financing Solid Waste Management

Section 46. Solid Waste Management Fund. There is hereby created, as a

special account in the National Treasury, a Solid Waste Management Fund to be
administered by the Commission. Such fund shall be sourced from the following:

16 | P a g e
 • Fines and penalties imposed, proceeds of permits and licenses issued by
the Department under this Act, donations, endowments, grants and
contributions from domestic and foreign sources; and
• Amounts specifically appropriated for the Fund under the annual General
Appropriations Act.

The Fund shall be used to finance the following:

• products, facilities, technologies and processes to enhance proper solid

waste management;
• awards and incentives;
• research programs;
• information, education, communication and monitoring activities;
• technical assistance; and
• capability building activities.

LGUs are entitled to avail of the Fund on the basis of their approved solid waste
management plan. Specific criteria for the availment of the Fund shall be prepared by the
Commission.
The Act provided a special account in the National Treasury called the Solid Waste
Management Fund. This will be sourced from fines and penalties imposed, proceeds of
permits and licenses, donations, endowments, grants and contributions and amount
allocated under the annual General Appropriations Act. The Fund will be utilized to
finance products, facilities, technologies, and processes that would enhance proper solid
waste management; awards and incentives; research programs; information, education,
communication and monitoring activities; technical assistance; and capability building
activities.

Chapter 6: Penal Provisions

Section 48. Prohibited Acts. provides a comprehensive list of prohibited acts

including: (1) littering, throwing, dumping of waste matters in public places; (2)
undertaking activities in violation of sanitation operation; (3) open burning of solid waste;

17 | P a g e
(4) causing non-segregated waste; (5) squatting in open dumps and landfills; (6) open
dumping, burying of biodegradable materials in flood-prone areas; (7) unauthorized
removal of recyclable material; (8) mixing of source-separated recyclable material with
other solid waste; (9) establishment or operation of open-dumps; (10) manufacturing,
distributing, using, and importing consumer products that are non-environmentally-
friendly materials; (11) importing toxic wastes misrepresented as “recyclable” or “with
recyclable content”; (12) transporting and dumping in bulk in areas other than facility
centers; (13) site preparation, construction, expansion or operation of waste management
facilities without an Environmental Compliance Certificate and not conforming with the
land use plan of LGUs; (14) construction of establishment within 200 meters from dump
sites or sanitary landfills; and (15) operation of waste disposal facility on any aquifer,
groundwater reservoir or watershed area.

Section 49. Fines and Penalties –

• Any person who violates Sec. 48, paragraph (1) shall, upon conviction, be
punished with a fine of not less than Three hundred pesos (P300.00) but
not more than One thousand pesos (P1,000.00) or render community
service for not less than one (1) day to not more than fifteen (15) days to an
LGU where such prohibited acts are committed, or both;
• Any person who violates Sec. 48, pars. (2) and (3), shall, upon conviction,
be punished with a fine of not less than Three hundred pesos (P300.00) but
not more than One thousand pesos (P1,000.00) or imprisonment of not less
than one (1) day to not more than fifteen (15) days, or both;
• Any person who violates Sec. 48 pars. (4), (5), (6), and (7) shall, upon
conviction, be punished with a fine of not less than One thousand pesos
(P1,000.00) but not more than Three thousand pesos (P3,000.00) or
imprisonment of not less than fifteen (15) days but not more than six (6)
months, or both;
• Any person who violates Sec. 48 pars. (8), (9), (10) and (11) for the first
time shall, upon conviction, pay a fine of Five hundred thousand pesos

18 | P a g e
 (P500,000.00) plus an amount not less than five percent (5%) but not more
than ten percent (10%) of his net annual income during the previous year.
• The additional penalty of imprisonment of a minimum period of one (1) year,
but not to exceed three (3) years at the discretion of the court, shall be
imposed for second or subsequent violations of Sec. 48, paragraphs (9) and
(10).
• Any person who violates Sec. 48, pars. (12) and (13), shall, upon conviction,
be punished with a fine of not less than Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00)
but not more than Two hundred thousand pesos (P200,000.00) or
imprisonment of not less than thirty (30) days but not more than three(3)
years, or both;
• Any person who violates Sec. 48, pars. (14), (15) and (16) shall, upon
conviction, be punished with a fine not less than One hundred thousand
pesos (P100,000.00) but not more than One million pesos (P1,000,000.00),
or imprisonment not less than one (1) year but not more than six (6) years,
or both.

If the offense is committed by a corporation, partnership, or other juridical entity

duly organized in accordance with law, the chief executive officer, president, general
manager, managing partner or such other officer-in-charge shall be liable for the
commission of the offense penalized under this Act.

Chapter 7: Miscellaneous Provisions

Section 51. Mandatory Public Hearings. – Mandatory public hearings for the
national framework and local government solid waste management plans shall be
undertaken by the Commission and the respective Boards in accordance with the process
to be formulated in the implementing rules and regulations.

Section 55. Public Education and Information - The Commission shall, in

coordination with DECS, TESDA, CHED, DILG and PIA, conduct a continuing education

19 | P a g e
and information campaign on solid waste management. Such education and information
program shall:

• Aim to develop public awareness of the ill-effects of and the

communitybased solutions to the solid waste problem;
• Concentrate on activities which are feasible and which will have the greatest
impact on the solid waste problem of the country, like resource conservation
and recovery, recycling, segregation at source, re-use, reduction and
composting of solid waste; and
• Encourage the general public, accredited NGOs and people's organizations
to publicly endorse and patronize environmentally acceptable products and
packaging materials.

Section 57. Business and Industry Role. - The Commission shall encourage
commercial and industrial establishments, through appropriate incentives other than tax
incentives, to initiate, participate and invest in integrated ecological solid waste
management projects, to manufacture environment-friendly products, to introduce,
develop and adopt innovative processes that shall recycle and re-use materials, conserve
raw materials and energy, reduce waste, and prevent pollution, and to undertake
community activities to promote and propagate effective solid waste management
practices.

SUGGESTION

Human activities contribute significantly in waste management. Recognizing the

effects of improper management, garbage crisis can be prevented by practicing waste
characterization and segregation at source, proper collection and transfer, recycling, and
composting as mandated by the law.

However national policies will only be effective if they are accompanied by strong
political commitment at the local government level in establishing supportive institutional
framework as well as ensuring political will to implement innovative, strategic programs
by allocating financial and organizational resources. Further, community participation is
20 | P a g e
necessary to implement successful SWM program and that can be achieved when
implemented programs provide economic incentives coupled with a strict enforcement
scheme. In addition, active participation and partnership among different sectors of the
society such as the businesses, non-governmental organizations, and barangay councils
must be established to ensure a sustainability of the program. The international partners
can play a vital role, especially at the initial stage by providing technical know-how and
capacity building opportunities, facilitate research and good practices and provide
development assistance to advance city waste management system.

Solid Waste Generation, Sources and Composition

Table 1. Waste Generation of the Philippines 2012-2016

Waste Generation. The Philippines’ waste generation continues to rise with the
increase in population, improvement of living standards, rapid economic growth, and
industrialization especially in the urban areas. The NSWMC calculated that from
37,427.46 tons per day in 2012, the country’s waste generation steadily increased to
40,087.45 tons in 2016 with an estimated average per capita waste generation of 0.40
kilograms per day for both urban and rural. The National Capital Region (NCR), as
expected, generated the biggest volume of wastes for the past five years due to its
population size, bigger number of establishments and modernized lifestyle. With an
estimated population of 12 million people, Metropolitan Manila generated 9,212.92 tons

21 | P a g e
per day of wastes in 2016. It is followed by Region 4A with waste generation of 4,440.15
tons per day (11.08%) and Region 3 with 3,890.12 tons per day (9.70 %) (NSWC).

The World Bank (2012), on the other hand, estimates that solid waste being
produced by Philippine cities will go up by 165 percent to 77,776 tons per day from 29,315
tons as a consequence of a projected 47.3-percent hike in urban population by 2025 and
a projected doubling of municipal solid waste (MSW) generation per capita at 0.9 kilogram
per day by 2025 from the current 0.5 kilogram, presenting a direct correlation between
the per capita level of income in cities and the amount of waste per capita that is
generated. This also indicates that the Philippines is at the low end of waste generation
in the region and among countries in its income bracket.

Waste Sources. Solid wastes are

generated from residential, commercial,
industrial and institutional sources.
Residential wastes accounts for more than
half (57%) of the total solid wastes (e.g.
kitchen scraps, yard waste, paper and
cardboards, glass bottles, etc.) Wastes from
commercial sources, which include
commercial establishments and
Figure 2. Solid Waste Sources (2013)
public/private markets, accounts for 27
percent. Wastes from institutional sources such as government offices, educational and
medical institutions accounts for about 12 percent while the remaining 4 percent is waste
coming from the industrial or manufacturing sector (NSWMC).

TYPES OF WASTE ACCORING TO CLASSSIFICATION

1. Residual waste is non-hazardous industrial waste. It includes waste material

(solid, liquid or gas) produced by industrial, mining and agricultural operations.
It excludes certain coal mining wastes and wastes from normal farming
activities.
2. Recycle waste is a waste that converted in a new material or object that can
be use.

22 | P a g e
 3. Biodegradable waste includes any organic matter in waste which can be
broken down into carbon dioxide, water, methane or simple organic molecules
by micro-organisms and other living things by composting, aerobic digestion,
anaerobic digestion or similar processes. In waste management, it also
includes some inorganic materials which can be decomposed by bacteria. Such
materials include gypsum and its products such as plasterboard and other
simple organic sulfate which can decompose to yield hydrogen sulphide in
anaerobic land-fill conditions
4. Hazardous waste is waste that has substantial or potential threats to public
health or the environment. Hazardous wastes may be found in different
physical states such as gaseous, liquids, or solids. A hazardous waste is a
special type of waste because it cannot be disposed of by common means like
other by-products of our everyday lives. Depending on the physical state of the
waste, treatment and solidification processes might be required
5. Toxic waste is any unwanted material in all forms that can cause harm (e.g.
by being inhaled, swallowed, or absorbed through the skin). Many of today's
household products such as televisions, computers and phones contain toxic
chemicals that can pollute the air and contaminate soil and water. Disposing of
such waste is a major public health issue

Waste Composition. The country’s

solid wastes typically contain more organic
components than other materials.
According to NSWMC, disposed waste is
dominated by biodegradable waste with 52
percent, followed by recyclable waste which
accounts for 28 percent and residuals at 18
percent. Biodegradable wastes come
mostly from food waste and yard waste
Figure 3. Solid Waste Composition (2015)
while recyclable wastes include plastic

23 | P a g e
packaging wastes, metals, glass, textile, leather and rubber. The significant shares of
biodegradables and recyclables indicate that composting and recycling have great
potential in reducing solid wastes.

The 3R’s of RA 9003

Figure 4. The 3R's of RA 9003

1. Reduce

The first and most effective component of the waste hierarchy is reducing the
waste created. Consumers are encouraged to reduce their waste by purchasing in bulk,
buying items with less packaging and switching to reusable instead of single-use items.
Businesses can adopt manufacturing methods that require fewer resources and generate
less waste. In addition to benefiting the environment, these efforts often offer consumers
and businesses the financial incentive of lower expenses in purchases.

2. Reuse

Despite efforts to reduce the amount of waste generated, consumers and

businesses still create substantial waste.Much of this waste can immediately be reused
to minimize the strain on the environment and municipal waste management. For
example, consumers can refill a purchased bottle of water with water from home to
minimize the number of plastic bottles being discarded. Consumers have a financial
incentive here as well, as municipal water is far cheaper than bottled water.

3. Recycle

24 | P a g e
 When waste is eventually discarded, segregating items for recycling from other
waste is important. Recyclables include glass, newspaper, aluminum, cardboard and a
surprising array of other materials. Lead, for example, has one of the highest recycling
rates because of laws requiring the recycling of lead-acid batteries.

Waste that cannot be reused or recycled in some form eventually finds its way to
disposal. This disposal includes landfills, but an increasing number of municipalities have
elected to divert waste into resource recovery. These recovery methods use the waste to
generate electricity or produce raw materials for industry. However, resource recovery is
not without its own undesirable effects, such as pollution from incinerators. Some waste,
however, is not suitable for resource recovery methods.

PROHIBITED ACTS
Table 2. Prohibited Acts

Violation Fines/Penalties
P 300 – P1,000
➢ Littering, throwing and dumping of waste ma
Or
tters in public places and water bodies
Community service between 1 – 15 days

P 300 – P1,000
➢ Open burning of solid waste
Or
Imprisonment of 1 – 15 days
P 1,000 – P 3,000
➢ Collection and transport of non-segregated o
Or
r unsorted waste
Imprisonment of 15 days to 6 months
➢ Squatting in open dumpsite and landfills
➢ Open dumping, burying of biodegradable &
non-biodegradable materials in flood prone a
reas
➢ Unauthorized removal of recyclable material
s for collection by authorized persons
P500,000.00
➢ Operation of open dumpsites
Or
➢ Manufacture, distribution or use of non-envir
Imprisonment of 1 to 3 years
onmentally acceptable packaging materials
➢ Importation of consumer products packaged
in non-environmentally acceptable materials
P 10,000 – P 200,000
➢ Importation of toxic wastes misrepresented
Or
as “recyclable” or “with recyclable content”
Imprisonment of 30 days to 3 years

25 | P a g e
➢ Transport and dumping in bulk of collected d
omestic, industrial, commercial and institutio
nal wastes in areas other than centers or fac
ilities prescribed by law
P100,000 – P 1M
➢ Construction, expansion or operation of was
Or
te management facilities without an Environ
Imprisonment of 1 to 6 years
mental Compliance Certificate
➢ Construction of any establishment within 20
0 meters from open or controlled dump sites
and sanitary landfills
➢ Construction or operation of landfills or any w
aste disposal facility within or near an aquife
r, groundwater reservoir or watershed

WASTE SEGREGATION

Waste sorting is the process by which waste is separated into different

elements. Waste sorting can occur manually at the household and collected
through curbside collection schemes, or automatically separated in materials recovery
facilities or mechanical biological treatment systems. Hand sorting was the first method
used in the history of waste sorting. Segregation of our waste is essential as the amount
of waste being generated today caused immense problem. There are certain items are
not Bio Degradable but can be reused or recycled in fact it is believed that a larger portion
of the waste can be recycled, a part of can be converted to compost, and only a smaller
portion of it is real waste that has no use and has to be discarded.

Waste Can be segregated as

1. Bio Degradable Waste:

Bio Degradable waste includes organic waste, e.g. kitchen waste, vegetables,
fruits, flowers, leaves from the garden and paper.

2. Non Bio Degradable Waste:

Non-Biodegradables can be further segregated into:

A – Recyclable Waste- Plastics, Paper, Glass, Metal Etc.

26 | P a g e
 B- Toxic Waste: -Old Medicine, paints, Chemicals, bulbs, Spray Cans, fertilizer and
pesticide containers, batteries, shoe polish.

C- Soiled: – Hospital waste such as cloth soiled with blood and other body fluids.
Toxic & soiled waste must be disposed of with utmost care.

Importance of Waste Segregation

The Importance of Waste segregation in the business world cannot be

understated. Waste Segregation is the first step in a compliant waste management plan
that will help the environment and save the business money. This plan encourages
employees to recycle on a regular basis and to reuse matter whenever possible. It really
does matter which bin you put the garbage into and also helps keep the cost of green
waste disposal down for all businesses.

ZERO WASTE MANAGEMENT

Zero Waste is a whole system approach to resource management centered on

reducing, reusing, and recycling. To make recycling work for everyone, we need to buy
products made from the materials we recycle. This reduces the need to utilize non-
renewable resources by reusing materials that have already been consumed. Producing
recycled materials uses less energy and saves more trees than producing "virgin"
materials.

The goal of Zero Waste is to:

• Maximize recycling
• Minimize waste
• Reduce consumption
• Ensure products are made to be reused, repaired, or recycled
• Purchase sustainable products

Zero Waste systems reduce greenhouse gases by:

• Saving energy -- especially by reducing energy consumption associated

with extracting, processing, and transporting raw materials and waste

27 | P a g e
 • Reducing and eventually eliminating the need for landfills and incinerators

Zero waste programs include all of the following strategies:

Figure 5. Zero Waste Strategies

• Reducing consumption and discards

• Reusing discards
• The principle of producer accountability (including extended producer
responsibility strategies)
• Comprehensive recycling
• Comprehensive composting or bio-digestion of organic materials
• Citizen participation and worker rights
• A ban on waste incineration and illegal dumping
• the systematic reduction of landfilling over time
• Effective policies, regulations, incentives, and financing structures to
support these systems.

Effective zero waste programs also include many different kinds of people. From
waste worker cooperatives to local neighborhood groups to universities and governments,
people around the world are working together to develop zero waste programs, adopt
resolutions, and create innovative plans to reduce waste and injustice. These leaders are
modeling efficiency and sustainability by creating well-paying jobs and livelihoods in the

28 | P a g e
reuse and recycling industries, reducing consumption, and requiring that products be
made in ways that are safe for people and the planet. They are proving that our air, soil,
and water do not have to be polluted, and that our natural resources don’t have to be
trashed

Steps in Zero Waste

Figure 6. Waste Hierarchy

• AVOIDING waste clearly is the optimum strategy for reducing environmental

impact and costs. We seek to avoid shrink (the loss of product due to error, theft,
or product damage) in our stores with methods such as improved ordering. To
avoid waste, we apply creativity and innovation to figure out new ways to keep
products from becoming waste
• REDUCING waste means thinking creatively about ways to minimize the waste we
produce. For example, Delhaize Belgium is working on a pilot program to provide
select dry foods, fresh foods that are about to reach their sell-by dates, and frozen
bread daily to groups that will distribute them to the needy on the same day.

29 | P a g e
 • REUSING items that would otherwise become waste requires stringent attention
to food safety, as well as the foresight to envision other uses for items that have
typically been thrown away. For example, Delhaize Belgium reuses plastic crates
in its distribution centers, rather than using disposable containers.
• RECYCLING is well established across the Group. Our operating companies have
run recycling programs for years. Beyond cardboard recycling, we also recycle
plastic, paper, wood, metal and other materials where possible
• LANDFILLS are only used when all other possibilities have been exhausted.
Garbage is buried at these waste disposal sites. However, landfills produce
hazardous emissions and contribute to climate change.

Zero Waste Management Model City

City of Alaminos

As is typical for a fast-growing city, non-biodegradable packaging and products

have become a part of everyday life in Alaminos. In recent years, non-recyclable products
have spread, their problematic effects compounded by a large tourist population that
brings in and disposes plastic packaging. Until recently, waste was managed almost
wholly by municipal governments that typically hauled all waste to a central dumpsite.

In 2000, the Philippines passed a waste management law, known as Republic Act
9003. According to the law, the publicly elected councils of all the 39 villages in Alaminos
City must implement a comprehensive solid waste management plan. The law also
mandates that each village construct a recycling center, separate garbage, create a
village composting system, and collect different types of waste separately. Furthermore,
the law outlaws open burning and uncontrolled dumpsites.

Regardless, waste management programs at the village level in Alaminos – as in

most of the country – were still non-existent by 2009. Attempting to make its villages
conform, the city of Alaminos first tried encouraging, and later mandating, that they take
more responsibility for waste management. Neither approach worked. Alaminos still
maintained a central dumpsite, and waste was collected by the city only in 14 of the 39
villages. The remaining villages had to deal with their own waste, which led to widespread

30 | P a g e
open burning and dumping. Households did not practice separating their refuse into
organics, recycling, and trash. The city still rarely used the recycling center that it had
built in 2004.

It became clear that the city needed to redouble its efforts and to spark community
involvement and excitement in order to achieve success.

The Birth of a Zero Waste City

In August 2009, the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) proposed a
partnership with the city government. The following month, the Zero Waste Alaminos
project was born. GAIA provided one staff member for the project team, zero waste
trainings, and support to village leaders as they drafted their own waste management
plans. GAIA also provided financial support for printing educational materials, buying
shredders for organics and plastics, awarding mini-grants for villages to build eco-sheds
and purchase vehicles, and more. For its part, the city provided two full-time employees,
transportation for the team, logistical support for all activities and trainings, technical
assistance, and support in strategic planning for the villages.

After two years, ten villages had achieved full compliance with the 2000 waste
management law. Five were very close. Many others were well on their way. The zero
waste team had launched rapid-fire initiatives to create these results, including:
conducting a comprehensive survey to assess the existing waste management practices
throughout Alamitos, traveling to all 39 villages where they interviewed village chiefs, and
holding workshops for village representatives and city officials to begin conversations
about waste separation and collection, composting, relevant law, and the components of
the Zero Waste Alaminos project.

After the workshops, the team held 14 months of technical consultations and
assemblies in the villages themselves. They resulted in a complete waste management
plan, including a calendar of activities, investment plans for infrastructure, a budget with
funding, and clarity about who was responsible for what. The plans were presented in
assemblies for residents to comment on and approve before being implemented as the

31 | P a g e
blueprint for each village’s waste management program. Once the villages had formulated
their own waste management programs, they took ownership of the project.

The project team held separate sessions to consult with a range of stakeholders –
from city workers to junk store representatives to health and tourism officials – to expand
participation in implementing the law. As a result, resorts and inns established composting
facilities and improved waste separation, tourists were informed about the strict no-
littering and waste separation policies, hospitals and clinics started to separate their
waste, and schools and universities improved their recycling and composting practices.

Toward Zero Waste: Results

The project grew by leaps and bounds over two years. While in 2009 almost no
villages had begun implementation of the law, in 2011, 25 had local ordinances on waste
management that specifically banned open burning and dumping and mandated
household waste separation and composting. Ten villages passed every facet of the final
evaluation with flying colors, while nine of those that did not pass were at least halfway to
achieving their waste management goals.

A follow-up survey showed a high percentage of residents were separating out

their waste (88% of those surveyed) and composting (53%). Fifteen villages are now
consistently implementing pure composting. Worm composting has also increased, and
the city has provided villages and schools with worms and organic fertilizer. Seventeen
villages have started comprehensive collection systems. Thirty-two villages have built
eco-sheds which provide temporary storage for residual, hazardous, and small amounts
of recyclable waste, which are then collected by the city and brought to the city recycling
facility.

Open dumping and burning decreased significantly: In 2009, almost every field had
a pile burning; by 2011 there were almost none.

The survey also showed city government fully committed to the zero waste vision.
The city has begun providing employees who were highly respected by village leaders to
serve full-time as members of the project. In 2010, the city council passed into law the
first zero waste city ordinance in the country, a local version of the national waste

32 | P a g e
management law that includes a stronger provision against incineration and specifies how
Alaminos will implement collection and conduct public education, among other things.
This historic legislation upholds garbage separation, sets a target for waste diversion, and
prohibits incineration.

Recently, Alaminos announced a “No-segregation, no-collection” policy. Residents

will receive a warning if theirwaste is not separated. After a couple of warnings, their
garbage will no longer be picked up. The city has already seen a noticeable reduction in
the volume of overall waste. The city has considered – but not yet passed – a ban on
plastic bags. Much more needs to done to implement waste management programs in
the villages – two years is not long enough to reverse decades of old habits. Still, the
dramatic changes underway show what is possible when communities and local
government unite their commitment and their energies.

Zero Waste Management Model Schools

Sindalan Elementary School

Through Project W.O.W. (Warriors of Waste), the school focuses on segregating

wastes and facilitating the construction of the school’s Materials Recovery Facility.
Students act as “warriors” by monitoring the segregation of wastes per classroom, and
overseeing composting and recycling.

St. Scholastica’s Academy (Pampanga)

Strict segregation is practiced in St. Scholastica’s Academy, where Sister Delia

Singian has helped in linking the Benedictine school’s mission to the city’s efforts in
pursuing Zero Waste. Trash bins for different kinds of waste are seen around campus. In
the cafeteria, there are no plastic straws and disposable utensils; students also separate
their food wastes. The school’s Materials Recovery Facility is well maintained.

33 | P a g e
DUMPSITE AND LANDFILL

Dumpsite

Dumpsite is a site used to dispose of solid wastes without environmental controls.

People used dumps which are excavated pieces of land or pits where waste materials
are stored. Most households, especially those in rural areas, have dumps while urban
communities have a common dump for their residents.

Dumps are not regulated by the government and they lack processing control.
They can be found anywhere and may or not be covered with soil. They are also not
monitored and the chances of the liquids produced by solid waste in contaminating the
water supply is great.

Dumps can be subdivided into three different areas:

Internal Mass- he largest area, where degradation of putrescible waste takes place
in absence of oxygen (anaerobic degradation with the formation of biogas),

Superficial Layer - that acts as an interface between the solid mass and the air;

Leachate - the liquid produced by rain water percolating in the waste and the
humidity content of the waste.

Waste dumps are created by successively filling layers of a suited height

(maximum 2.5 m) starting from a bottom layer that has been suitably waterproofed with
natural materials (clay or a mixture of sand and bentonite) or artificial materials
(geomembrane made of PE and PVC). Once the layer of waste has been laid down, it is
compacted with mechanical equipment (bulldozers or compactors) to decrease the
volume these occupy, up to a density of about 800 kg of waste per cubic metre. Every
day, the waste is covered with inert material such as soil or gravel, and when the dump
is fully filled, it is entirely covered with vegetative land, and usually it is converted into a
green area. An important element of the dump, are the drainage system and the system
for the collection of biogas and the leachate, to avoid contamination of the area.

34 | P a g e
 Open Dump

It is a site on which any solid waste is placed, discharged, deposited, injected,

dumped, or spilled so as to present a threat of a release of harmful substances into the
environment or present a hazard to human health. It is a disposal site that is operating in
nonconformance with applicable standards, relevant permit conditions, rules, or this
chapter.

Open dumps can attract pests such as flies and rats and emit bad odors which are
hazardous to man. Because of this, dumps are considered illegal and have since been
replaced with landfills. Communal dumps have been converted to landfills which are
regulated by the government.

Control Dump

In controlled, waste is deposited in layers on the ground, in a suited and monitored

manner, so as to minimize the negative effects on the environment and on human beings.
Thus pollution of surface and underground water is prevented and controlled, as also
emissions of unpleasant or toxic substances, and all efforts are made to reduce the
aesthetical impact.

Figure 7. Daily Generation of Controlled and Uncontrolled Dumping

35 | P a g e
 Based on available information and extrapolations, it is inferred that Metro Manila
generates approximately 6,700 tons of waste per day, of which 720 tons per day (TPD)
is diverted and recycled, and a further 400 TPD is self-disposed through individual
dumping and burning. Approximately 5,600 TPD enters the municipal collection and
disposal system, of which about 4,100 tons is placed in the active dumpsites, and 1,500
tons is dumped in an uncontrolled manner.

As of last year (2017), a total of 231 dumps in the country has been closed in line
with the implementation of Republic Act (RA) 9003.

Landfill

It is carefully designed structure built into or on top of the ground in which trash is
isolated from the surrounding environment (groundwater, air, rain). This isolation is
accomplished with a bottom liner and daily covering of soil.

Landfill is location where disposable materials are sent, which are then buried
underground. During this process, precautions are taken to prevent the waste from
reaching and potentially contaminating any groundwater.

Sanitary landfill shall refer to a waste disposal site designed, constructed, operated
and maintained in a manner that exerts engineering control over significant potential
environmental impacts arising from the development and operation of the facility.

Modern sanitary landfills are designed to protect the environment by containing

and isolating waste. Current landfills require extensive planning, engineering, monitoring
and supervision both by law and public demand. Some of the features that the engineers
examine are depth of natural clay liner, depth of bedrock, level of groundwater, aquifer
system if any, and watershed.

36 | P a g e
 Leachate

Leachate is the liquid that results from rain and dew,

and natural moisture percolating through waste. The liquids
migrating through the waste dissolve salts, pick up organic
constituents and leach heavy metals. The organic strength of
landfill leachate can be greater than 20 to 100 times the
strength of raw sewage, making this "landfill liquor" a potentially potent polluter of soil and
groundwater. This is why the issue of leachate is important in discussions on landfills. In
open dumps, the material that leached would be absorbed into the ground and potentially
move into groundwater, surface water, or aquifer systems. In new landfills and future
landfills, it is required that collection systems be designed into the landfill to pump and
collect the leachate for treatment.

37 | P a g e
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN DUMPSITE AND LANDFILL

Table 3. Differences between Dumpsite and Landfill

38 | P a g e
 NUMBER OF DUMPSITE IN METRO MANILA AND NEARBY PROVINCES

1. Payatas, Quezon City - Opened in 1973, nearing closure. Located near La Mesa
Reservoir. Currently exclusive for Quezon City waste. Comprises inactive cell (16-
hectares), and southerly active cell (6-hectares). Surrounded by residential
development. Catastrophic failure of eastern slope of inactive cell in 2000, killing
200 people. Operational improvements achieved in recent past, although acute
slope instability, and leachate and gas contamination requires urgent mitigation.
2. Rodriguez, Montalban - Major 14-hectare facility, located in a remote upland
extremity of the Marikina Valley. Accepts waste from many Metro Manila cities and
municipalities. Constructed in 2001, opened in 2002. Built over an easterly-
trending steep-sided valley, which drains into the Lukutan Munti River. Dumpsite
stability is a major concern, requiring urgent evaluation and necessary mitigation.
3. Bagumbong Municipal, Caloocan - A small 2.5-hectare facility, which has
accepted Caloocan waste for many years. Located on agricultural land. Comprises
of a thin waste layer, only 2-3 meters thickness. Currently accepts around 35 tons
per day of waste. Scheduled for closure in late 2003. A material recovery facility is
being developed at the site. Reportedly, it processes 7 tons of recyclables daily.
4. Lingunan, Valenzuela - A large, 13-hectare facility, adjacent to the flood-prone
convergence area of three waterways, which floods frequently. Exclusively for
Valenzuela waste. Consists of an exposed waste layer, up to 4 meters thickness,
spread over a large area. Land privately owned, and surrounded by industrial and
residential development.
5. Catmon, Malabon - Opened in 1986, reportedly filling over an area of fishponds.
Area subject to flooding, being within the Tenejeros River delta. Waste piles are
irregular in shape. Cumulative area estimated at 5-hectares. Surrounded by high-
density residential and industrial development. Exclusively for Malabon waste.
Estimated daily waste import is 190 tons.
6. Tanza, Navotas - Recently opened 11-hectare dumpsite adjacent to the Obando
River. Constructed over a former fishpond and immediately surrounded by
fishponds. Privately owned and operated. Receives up to 800 tons per day of

39 | P a g e
 waste from the City of Manila and Navotas. Waste is imported by barge from the
Pier 18 transfer station. Leachate impacts are an acute concern
7. Dona Petra, Marikina - A 2-hectare facility, adjacent to the Marikina River.
Exclusively for Marikina waste. Opened in 1994. Reported to previously be a
flooded quarry. Comprises a single waste pile, of height up to 10 meters from the
existing surface level. A southerly expansion area is currently being developed.
Surrounded by residential development to the north and east, and agricultural
areas to the west and south. Site includes a waste segregation and recycling
system, including a conveyor. The site is in the process of being closed.
8. Lupang Arenda, Taytay - Large, illicit dumpsite located on the north shore of
Laguna De Bay. Aerial extent unknown, reportedly between 40 and 80 hectares.
Waste dumped in a layer up to 3 meters thickness, apparently to raise the surface
above the lake flood elevation. Resettlement housing constructed directly on the
waste materials. Reported to house up to 25,000 families. Dumped waste poses
acute public health and environmental threats to these communities and environs.
9. Pulang Lupa, Las Piñas - A 3-hectare site, bounded to the east, north and west
by the Ilog Bayan Creek. Exclusively for Las Pinas waste. Principally surrounded
by residential development. Commenced operations in early 2002. Reportedly
imports 200 tons per day. Single waste pile assumed to be approximately 4 meters
thick. Site is privately owned. Site photographs prohibited.
10. C4, Navotas - A small-scale, 1-hectare dumpsite, immediately adjacent to Manila
Bay. Waste placed up to 2 meters thickness. Opened in 1996, and closed in late
2002. Apparently designed for the temporary storage of Navotas waste, the
majority of which has since been removed.
11. Bagumbong Private, Caloocan - An illicit, private dumpsite, apparently utilized
since the early 1990s. Located immediately adjacent to the Sapang Saging Creek.
Consists of irregular waste piles with a cumulative area of approximately 4
hectares. Evidence of spontaneous combustion in the waste, and fires observed
within surface areas of the waste. Surface currently being developed for low-
income housing. Dumped waste poses acute public health and environmental
threats to these communities and environs.

40 | P a g e
12. Pier 18, City of Manila - A 10-hectare temporary dumpsite. Located on Manila
North Harbor Center reclaimed land, immediately adjacent to Manila Bay.
Operated since 1999 as an emergency waste storage facility for City of Manila
waste. In-place waste volume reported as up to 0.75 million cubic meters. Adjacent
transfer station receives and processes the entire City of Manila and Navotas
waste streams for disposal at Rodriguez and Tanza. The site also includes the
Tanza barge loading facility. The site is utilized intermittently for the stockpiling of
solid waste.
13. Palanyag, Paranaque - A small-scale, government-operated inactive dumpsite,
less than 1-hectare in size. Surrounded by high-density residential developments.
Operated between 1991 and 2002. Waste materials are progressively being
removed for re-disposal.
14. Carmona, Cavite - A 65-hectare regional disposal facility. Operational between
1992-98. Reportedly includes engineered environmental protection systems.
Developed in four phases. Abandoned in 1998, due primarily to local public
opposition.
15. San Mateo, Rizal - A 50-hectare regional disposal facility. Operational in
conjunction with Carmona between 1991-2000. Reportedly accepted 17.5 million
cubic meters of waste. Also abandoned due to local public opposition. Controlled
closure of the facility is currently being assessed.

41 | P a g e
 ACTIVE DUMPSITE IN METRO MANILA
1. OCA MALAPITAN NORTH
CALOOCAN DUMPSITE

2. LAS PIÑAS DUMPSITE

42 | P a g e
3. DIMSON VILLAGE DUMPSITE
(MALABON)

4. SMOKEY MOUNTAIN
(TONDO MANILA)

NO. OF LANDFILL IN METRO MANILA AND NEARBY PROVINCES

LANDFILL IN METRO MANILA AND NEARBY

43 | P a g e
1. Navotas Sanitary Landfill

2. San Mateo Sanitary Landfill

(Pintong Bukawe, San Mateo,
Rizal)

3. Rodriguez Sanitary Landfill/Rizal

Provincial Sanitary Landfill

4. Wacuman Inc. Sanitary Landfill

(Sitio Tiakad, Brgy. San Mateo
Norzagaray, Bulacan)

44 | P a g e
 5. Abucay Sanitary Landfill

6. Hermosa Sanitary Landfill Facility

7. Morong Engineered Sanitary

Landfill (Gulod Bayabas Morong,
Rizal)

MANILA, Philippines — Metro Manila is generating too much trash, the

Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) revealed in its report attached to the
2016 Commission on Audit (COA) report released on Wednesday, June 21.

According to the report, the waste generated by the National Capital Region
increased by about 450,000 cubic meters, equivalent to some 75,000 truckloads of trash.
The MMDA had to haul 10.72 million cubic meters of trash in 2016 compared to just 10.27
million cubic meters in 2015.

At the rate the metropolis is generating trash, the 3 landfills it is using would be
rendered unusable by 2037 at the latest, the MMDA report said.

45 | P a g e
 These disposal facilities will be unusable by the following years:

• Quezon City Sanitary Land Fill - 2021

• Navotas Sanitary Land Fill - 2026
• Rizal Provincial Sanitary Landfill – 2037

NAVOTAS SANITARY LANDFILL

The 40 hectare sanitary landfill facility is the first engineered landfill in Metro
Manila. Accomodating 1,500 TPD of municipal solid wastes from various cities of the
NCR, the Navotas Sanitary Landfill adheres to strict standards and specifications of RA
9003.

The Navotas Controlled Disposal Facility located in Barangay Tanza, Navotas City,
is also one of the remarkable projects of PhilEco as it is the first of its kind Facility operated
in the country. The ten-hectare Facility started its operations in September 2002 but was
stopped ind March 2006, in compliance to Republic Act 9003 or the Philippine Ecological
Solid Waste Management Act of 2000. The Closure Program implemented by PhilEco for
the NCDF was adopted by the National Solid Waste and Management Commission
(NSWMC) in implementing the closure of all open dumpsites and controlled disposal
facilities in country.

46 | P a g e
 Mayor John Rey Tiangco noted the need for additional trucks for efficient garbage
collection of the City Environment and Natural Resources Office.

The City Government of Navotas has purchased two additional dump trucks. Both
trucks can accommodate 8.8 cubic meters of trash.

The city now has 13 dump trucks that collect residual wastes from 18 barangays.

Tiangco said from January to June 2018, CENRO collected 147,224.61 cubic
meters of garbage, of which 97,940.80 cubic meters were transported to the Navotas
sanitary landfill. Others were recycled or made into compost.

Navotas is the only city in Metro Manila that has its own landfill. Last 2017, the
local government earned around P30 million in tipping fees for its garbage collection.

INTERNATIONAL LANDFILL
Summary: A waste disposal (landfill) site provides a safe place for unavoidable
waste to be buried.
Waste materials: Only dispose of waste materials that cannot be reused or
recycled.
Benefits: Safe waste disposal helps keep the air, water and land free of
pollution, and helps prevent the spread of disease. Everyone should have their waste
disposed of in a safe and well-managed waste disposal site, regardless of the size of
their community.

47 | P a g e
 Steps on how to prepare an International Landfill

1. Details of Operator

Name and Address of Operator and Site. Included should be contact names in
respect of person with managerial responsibility for site operations, including the site
manager, site engineer. Relevant telephone numbers should also be given.

2. Site Description

A description of the site should be provided which covers the following:

• boundaries and topography

• geological and hydrological characteristics of the area
• local meteorology
3. Types of Waste Accepted

A detailed description of the procedures for acceptance and the types of waste
that can be accepted on the site should be given. This should clearly state whether
household, commercial and industrial wastes are to be accepted. Hazardous wastes and
other difficult wastes should be listed separately and a clear indication given, where
appropriate, of the maximum permissible concentration or loading thresholds for
particular substances. Consideration should be given to the procedures to be employed
for the acceptance of other difficult wastes such as tyres, empty drums, sewage sludge,
asbestos and so on.

4. Quantity of Wastes Accepted

Details should be given on the annual quantity of waste taken into the site. This
should be sub-divided into major types (examples would be household waste, commercial
waste, industrial waste – specified by type, source etc).

5. Site Capacity

An estimate should be provided of the original site capacity and remaining

capacity. The latter should be derived from the annual survey.

6. Engineering Details

48 | P a g e
 Details of all significant site engineering works should be included. Where
applicable the information should cover:

• site preparation and provision of services

• containment details
• leachate drainage, collection and treatment
• landfill gas abatement methods (e.g. passive trenches, active extraction)
collection and flaring
• monitoring points for landfill gas, leachate, surface water, groundwater etc.
• fencing, gates and other security
• site access roads and secondary site roads
• offices, fuel stores etc
• current landscaping and tree planting
• wheel cleaning infrastructure, site weighbridge etc
• surface water control measures, ditches, road drains, wheelwash water, etc
7. Operational Matters

These should include:

• description of the operations

• phasing of filling
• water, leachate and gas control measures
• measures for the control of environmental nuisances
• site opening and operating times
• access control and waste acceptance procedures
• equipment to be utilised
• waste placement procedures
• cover requirements
• site personnel, including qualifications, duties and responsibilities
• monitoring and maintenance procedures
• operational and safety rules (including safety statement) and emergency
procedures
• litter abatement methods and procedures

49 | P a g e
• noise and dust abatement
• wheel cleaning procedures
• measures to deal with vermin and other pests
• assessment of settlement in filled areas
• assessment of compacted waste density
8. Closure and Aftercare

Closure and aftercare procedures should include:

• final capacity and expected operational period of the facility

• final contours and topography of the site
• the restoration plan
• phases for closure and restoration of completed areas
• aftercare monitoring and other control measures
• maintenance programme for aftercare phase.

Site records should include:

• copies of all site appraisal and investigation

• documents, borehole logs etc;
• information and plans on the landfill design
• and the design of other structures on the site;
• copies of site rules for staff, visitors, contractors etc;
• waste acceptance procedures;
• documentation of inspection records, training and notification procedures;
• a detailed scheme for restoration and aftercare;
• site surveys and void space calculations;
• locations of all landfill gas, ground and surface water and leachate monitoring
points, along with sampling protocols;
• environmental monitoring programmes;
• results and interpretation of the results of all environment monitoring;
• names, positions and qualifications of all staff involved in site design,
management, engineering and environmental monitoring;
• records kept of quantity, nature and origin of the waste accepted into the facility;

50 | P a g e
 • site inspection records;
• in the case of a hazardous or difficult waste, details of the types and quantities
accepted along with a site plan indicating their location;
• details of complaints and remedial actions;
• procedures and records as required regarding safety and health, accidents and
fires;
• a copy of the site’s planning permission (where required), environmental impact
statement and Ministerial Certificate (if issued);
• a copy of the application for a waste licence (when required), including
information
• submitted in support of the application;
• a copy of the waste license (when issued) and any amendments; and
• copies of all other official documents relating to the landfill including consents
and other certificates.

If possible, it is better to place the waste on a level surface. If the site is on a slope
then it is better to deposit the waste and push it up-slope (not down-slope). Deposit the
waste each day in as small an area as possible so it is easier to contain and cover.
Locating a landfill The site for a landfill should meet the following requirements:

1. Size: The required size of a landfill site is determined by how much waste will
require disposal over at least the next 5 years. To calculate this, multiply the
daily waste generation (in litres) by 365 days, multiply that by five (or more)
years, and then divide by two (because the waste will be compacted and will
shrink as it dries out). Finally, divide that answer by 1000 to convert from litres
into cubic metres.
Example: A community marketplace disposes of approximately 400 litres of
waste each day. Therefore the amount disposed of in 5 years = (400 litres x
365 days per year x 5 years x 0.5 (compaction rate)) / 1000 litres per metre3 =
365 metre3, so a landfill must be designed with at least this much capacity.
2. Distance: A landfill must be far enough from wells and streams to protect water
supplies from contamination, far enough from dwellings to prevent causing a

51 | P a g e
 nuisance, and close enough to the source of the waste to avoid excessive
transport. If you are making a landfill site for one house or compound, it should
be at least 30 metres, preferably downhill, from wells and streams. A
community landfill should be at least 200 metres, preferably downhill, from
wells and streams and at least 200 metres from the nearest dwelling.
3. Geography: A landfill should not be located on valuable land such as crop land.
It should not be located on creviced rock because of the danger of groundwater
contamination, or on marshy or wet ground because of the probable production
of foul odours. Try to locate the landfill downwind from dwellings. It should be
near a road for easy access.
4. Groundwater: The bottom of the landfill must be at least 1 metre above the
highest groundwater levels. Information on groundwater levels may be
available from residents, water well owners, or water well drillers. If not, a test
hole 1 metre deeper than the bottom of the proposed landfill must be dug during
the wettest season. If no groundwater is observed in the hole, the site is
suitable. 5. Cover soil: The landfill must be located on or near ground which is
easily excavated in order to provide adequate cover material. Loamy soils,
sandy loams, and permeable clay mixtures are good. Heavy, nonpermeable
clays are hard to work and crack when dry surfaces are exposed. When a
suitable site has been located, draw a map like Figure 1 showing the site in
relation to dwellings, water wells, streams, roads, and so on, and indicating
ground slope and prevailing wind direction.

Figure 8. Site map

52 | P a g e
 Example of International Landfill

CALIFORNIA, USA

The Prima Deshecha Landfill (Prima) is owned by the County of Orange, Calif.,
and operated by the County’s OC Waste & Recycling Department. It has been
transformed from a Class III Municipal Solid Waste Landfill into a modern, multi-use
resource recovery campus to provide waste management services to the cities of south
Orange County. Landfill management is founded in environmental stewardship,
contemporary operational techniques, regulatory compliance and being a good neighbor.
Prima includes: n Household hazardous waste collection center n Materials Recovery
Facility (MRF) n Renewable energy power plant n Habitat restoration area n Arterial
highway.

Opened in 1976, Prima is located in the city of San Juan Capistrano in south
Orange County, California. It is one of three landfills owned by the County of Orange and
operated by the County’s OC Waste & Recycling department. The County is home to 3.1
million residents and serves as the administrator for 34 cities to implement the
Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan through source reduction, recycling and
disposal. The Prima campus is approximately 1,530 acres, including 699 permitted for
disposal. The rest of the acreage is used for materials recovery, landfill gas to renewable
electricity conversion, habitat conservation and preservation, recreational trails, and a
recently completed arterial highway to improve south Orange County mobility.

53 | P a g e
 Landfill Disposal

Prima operates six days a week, accepting approximately 1,700 tons of material
per day for disposal and recycling through its onsite Materials Recovery Facility. The
landfill has a total capacity of 172.9 million cubic yards with a remaining capacity of 136.2
million cubic yards as of December 31, 2017. Prima receives non-hazardous municipal
solid waste, treated wood waste, and is the only landfill in Orange County permitted to
receive biosolids. Environmental protection for the receipt of these materials is managed
through an engineered geomembrane liner equipped with gravity fed leachate collection
and recovery system.

It is classified as International Landfill by evaluating its:

1. Site Overview
2. Siting, Design and Construction
3. Equipment/Systems and Technologies
4. Environmental Controls and Monitoring
5. Regulatory Compliance
6. Planning and Operations
7. Employee and Customer Safety
8. Public Acceptance, Appearance and Aesthetics

DO WE HAVE PROPER LANDFILLS WITHIN METRO MANILA AND

NEARBY PROVINCES?
The Philippines is the third largest ocean polluter worldwide, according to the 2015
report on plastic pollution by the Ocean Conservancy Charity and the McKinsey Centre
for Business and Environment. We produce about two million tons of plastic waste and
around 800,000 tons of this ends up in the ocean every year.

According to government data, the Philippines generates an estimated 43,684 tons

of garbage daily. And as the economy and population grow, garbage piles up, makes their
way to the sea and either end up clogging coastlines or get eventually sucked up by ocean
currents to form these massive garbage patches. This is due to the lack of proper disposal
54 | P a g e
facilities provided by the authorities (over-filled, inadequate landfills) combined with plain
indiscipline on the part of the public. Most of the waste generated by the Philippines
consists of single-use plastics – a product of our “sachet” or “tingi” culture. This garbage
problem the country is having a hard time to deal with also causes health problems and
environmental problems such as flooding and increase in the populations of rodents and
other pests.

Typical Sanitary Landfill System

A proper CFDF must be provided with all the necessary facilities for the system to
function effectively. The supporting and ancillary facilities must be integrated with the core
facilities to complete the Sanitary Landfill System.

A typical sanitary landfill system must be provided with all the necessary facilities.
Generally, the sanitary landfill system comprise of the core facilities, such as the waste
retaining facility, leachate collection piping facility, gas vents, access roads, drainage
system, fencing etc.; and the supporting facilities, such as the leachate treatment facility,
administrative facility, machineries etc.

The supporting facilities must be able to function independently as individual

standalone facilities.

However, their functions are generally interdependent and should be operated as

integrated facilities;

mutually support each other's functions. The design of the individual facilities
differs from site to site,

depending on the size, the requirements and the design service lifespan. All the
facilities must be designed to operate and to be used throughout the designed target
lifespan of the landfill. Some facilities must also be able to function beyond the target
lifespan, i.e. to function even after the closure of the site. Such facilities include the gas
venting systems, the leachate collection and treatment facilities etc.

55 | P a g e
 According to the DENR Administrative Order No. 2001 - 34 December 20, 2001 or
the Implementing Rules and Regulations of Republic Act 9003, Rule XIV, Section 1
(Minimum Considerations for Siting and Designing Sanitary Landfills):

“The site shall be large enough to accommodate the community’s waste for a
period of five (5) years or more during which people must internalize the value of
environmentally sound and sustainable waste disposal.”

Three Landfills that Currently Absorb Metro Manila’s Waste

There are three landfills that currently absorb Metro Manila’s waste, they are:
the 40-hectare landfill in Navotas, the 19-hectare landfill in San Mateo, and the recently
expanded 70-hectare landfill in Rodriguez, Rizal.

1.) Navotas Sanitary Landfill

Figure 9. Navotas Sanitary Landfill

The 40-hectare sanitary landfill facility is the first engineered sanitary landfill in
Metro Manila. Accommodating 1,500 tpd of municipal solid wastes from various cities of
the National Capital Region, the Navotas Sanitary Landfill (NSL) adheres to strict
standards and specifications of RA 9003. Similar to other popular bay area landfill of San
Francisco, Tokyo, Hongkong and Singapore, landing craft transport barges are used to
transport waste from the transport station to the sanitary landfill.

According to a report by Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) in

2016, the NSL will be unusable by 2026.

56 | P a g e
 2.) San Mateo Sanitary Landfill
This 19-hectare sanitary landfill in San Mateo, Rizal uses state-of-the-art
technology and accommodates and processes garbage coming from Metro Manila. It is
operated by San Mateo Landfill and Development Corp. (SMLDC). The P300-million
sanitary landfill was launched in 2011 and was dubbed as the “hi-tech recycle bin of
residual waste.”

The landfill has a refuse derived fuel facility (RDF), which converts waste into fuel
for cement production. It also has leachate holding ponds, a water-treatment facility that
produces clean water to grow fish and plants, a material recovery facility that recycles
garbage, a 1,000-square-meter greenhouse plantation, a bike trail, and gazebos that can
be used as viewing decks.

Figure 10. San Mateo Sanitary Landfill

3.) Rodriguez Sanitary Landfill/Rizal Provincial Sanitary Landfill

The 69-hectare Rodriguez sanitary landfill in the province of Rizal takes in up to
6,000 tons, or 5.4 million kilograms, of garbage from the metropolis every day.

The landfill in Rodriguez and Navotas replaced the dump in Payatas, Quezon City,
which was closed in September 2017. It will be unusable by 2037, according to the MMDA
report in 2016.

57 | P a g e
 Landfills in Nearby Provinces

1. Abucay Sanitary Landfill

On 2011, the town of Abucay built the first sanitary landfill in Bataan. The 10-
hectare landfill located in Sitio Macao, Barangay Capitangan was patterned after the
engineered sanitary landfill in San Fernando, La Union. Then Mayor Ana Santiago said
that they were able to lessen their expenses because there was no need for liners like
the low-cost liner facility in the La Union landfill.

The municipal government had initially funded the construction of the sanitary
landfill for P3 million good for one cell. The cell has the capacity to hold 5,600 cubic meters
of garbage that will undergo filtering and another 1,680 cubic meters of garbage water
extraction. The first cell can accommodate garbage for three to four years, after which
another one will be built.

“The ‘juice’ extraction from the filtered wastes will serve as irrigation water for
plants that will be grown,” Municipal Administrator Fortunato Dulay said. The facility also
has a Material Recovery Facility where the composting is done.

2. Hermosa Sanitary Landfill Facility

This sanitary landfill facility in Hermosa, Bataan addresses the waste problem not
only in the town but also in neighboring areas. It saves other neighboring towns from
paying exorbitant garbage disposal fees in distant dumping sites in Tarlac. It is touted to
be the Philippines’ first odorless landfill facility.

Only starting in 2017, the LGUs admired the Econest Sanitary Landfill (operated
by Econest Waste Management Corporation) for its organized garbage cells, materials
recovery facility, upcycling plant, vegetable garden and carpentry workshop. The 7-
hectare facility employs about 40 workers from Hermosa who are scavengers-turned-
environmental guardians. Aside from being an ecological center, Econest is building a
shelter for abused women and children where mothers can work and provide for their
children.

“At Econest, we teach LGUs the importance of waste segregation. We turn away
trucks of mixed waste as we encourage local chief executives to enforce segregation.

58 | P a g e
Our vision is to make landfills obsolete in the future,” EWMC President Atty. Beulah Coeli
Fiel said.

“Here, the spirit of entrepreneurship is alive. Some of the wastes we collect are
turned into house equipment. Fertilizers produced in waste composting are used to enrich
the vegetable garden where we harvest eggplant, chili, and tomato among others,” Fiel
said.

Visitors from other provinces sought to duplicate Econest’s production of eco-

bricks made from bottles stuffed with plastic sachet, wrapper and other single-use
plastics. Workers here are using eco-bricks, instead of hollow blocks, to build riprap for
the garbage cells.

LIFESPAN OF DUMPSITE AND LANDFILL

The Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 or Republic Act 9003
significantly addresses the escalating problem of solid waste in the country. The
provisions covered by the law incorporate the fundamental system of solid waste
management and techniques to handle the functional elements of ESWM, i.e. generation,
collection, storage, processing, transfer and transport and final disposal.

While resource recovery principles take an effective stance throughout the waste
management cycle, the increase in solid waste generation as a result of population
growth, economic activity and product demand would eventually require to a much greater
extent technologically advanced intermediate processing, treatment and disposal
facilities.

As various waste diversion schemes like composting, recycling and re-use are
mandated and currently initiated as a tool for resource recovery, final disposal sites
should form part of the overall ecological solid waste management planning with
considerations to residues from various intermediate waste treatment and processes.

59 | P a g e
 Different Classifications of Disposal Facilities

Source: Technical Guidebook on Solid Waste Disposal Design and Operation

The disposal facilities are classified according to the development activities and
operational mechanisms undertaken.

Open dumpsites are generally sited in vacant lots, usually adjacent to residential
areas where there are low-lying marshy lands, often done as a way of reclaiming the area
for future development. In terms of safety, the deposited area may have such uncontrolled
settlement due to the on-going decomposition of wastes.

Controlled Dump is a first step in the progression from open dumping. As

stipulated in Section 37, RA 9003, Controlled Dump Facilities shall only be allowed to
operate for a period of five (5) years, inclusive of the 3-year conversion period.

In doing so, there is no significant investment required in the capital cost or

equipment purchases, but rather its enhancement will concentrate primarily on
improvements to operational and management issues. The wastes undergo compaction,
soil cover is applied, fires not permitted and buffer zones provided, among others.

Categorized Final Disposal Facility (Landfill) is a disposal site designed,

constructed, operated and maintained in a manner that exerts engineering control over
significant potential environmental impacts arising from the development and operation
of the facility.

The basic operational controls include the following: leachate collection and
treatment systems, landfill gas management, waste compaction, application of soil cover,
all-weather primary and access roads, trained labor force, and a ban on waste pickers,
among others. Site design is based on Hydrogeological considerations while site
preparation includes the provision on surface run-off control and containing earth
movements.

60 | P a g e
 According to the final report of Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project on
Solid Waste Disposal, open dumpsites are to be prohibited after January 2004, and the
operation of controlled dumpsites prohibited after January 2006, after which time SLFs
will be required.

Source: ADB TA 3848-PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project

(Waste Disposal Report No.4)

Target Lifespan/Target Year

Source: Technical Guidebook on Solid Waste Disposal Design and Operation

As part of the minimum considerations for sanitary landfill operations specified by

Rule XIV, Section 1, the site should be large enough to accommodate the community’s
waste for a period of five (5) years or more.

Take note that the target however would depend on the effective disposal capacity
of the deposition area within the landfill.

Historical Perspective

The ongoing waste disposal crisis in Metro Manila represents the cumulative
effects of a series of events that have transpired over the past decade. These are
summarized on Figure 1 overleaf and as follows;

61 | P a g e
 The Rise (Early 1991-Mid 1992):

Early 1991 marked an important transition in Metro Manila waste disposal. Prior to
this, the metropolis had operated numerous dumpsites, including the internationally
infamous Smokey Mountain dumpsite in the City of Manila. During 1991 however, the
World Bank financed, 73-hectare San Mateo regional sanitary landfill facility (SLF)
opened in Rizal. This was shortly followed in early 1992 with the opening of the 65-hectare
Carmona regional SLF in Cavite, which also coincided with the official closure of Smokey
Mountain. Reportedly, both facilities were initially designed and constructed to
international standards, and both included engineered environmental protection systems.
They were destined to provide environmentally appropriate disposal capacity for the
majority of the Metro Manila waste stream in the medium-term and represented a major
accomplishment for the government. Several large dumpsites also operated during the
early 1990s, including the Payatas (Quezon City) and Catmon (Malabon) dumpsites.

The Decline (Mid 1992-Late 1997):

Although San Mateo and Carmona continued to operate throughout the 1990s,
their operations were progressively impacting local communities. Design, construction
and operation standards at both facilities declined with each operational phase, raising
concerns regarding environmental risks. Hundreds of trucks thundered through
communities nightly and the presence of informal recycling communities brought social
impacts. Public opposition mounted. Numerous dumpsites also operated through this
period. These included the ever-growing Payatas and Catmon dumpsites, plus the
opening of the Dona Petra dumpsite in Marikina and the small C4 dumpsite in Navotas.
During the mid 1990s, dumping activities also reportedly commenced at the notorious
Lupang Arenda dumpsite on the north shore of Laguna De Bay. Alternative technologies
were also being evaluated. These included mass-burn thermal treatment and waste-to-
energy initiatives, including proposals for large 2,000 tonnes-per-day incinerators.

Prelude to Crisis (Late 1997-Late 1999):

During early 1998, heightened public opposition forced the suspension of

operations at Carmona. This placed increasing pressure on San Mateo and the major

62 | P a g e
dumpsites to accommodate the additional waste. The impending crisis also precipitated
the opening of the major Lingunan dumpsite in Valenzuela, and also the stockpiling of
waste on Pier 18 in Manila. During 1998, waste disposal options were further constrained
by the enactment of the Clean Air Act 7, which effectively stalled the ongoing mass burn
thermal treatment initiatives. Technical regulations 8 were also adopted in 1998, in order
to provide for the regulation of controlled dumpsites and SLFs. Two major donor-funded
studies were also completed during this period 9 , one of which evaluated toxic and
hazardous waste, and another which developed a metro-wide masterplan for solid waste.
The recommendations of these studies were not implemented, even though one of them
warned of an impending disposal crisis.

The Crisis (Late 1999-Early 2001):

The waste disposal crisis was a sudden phenomenon, marked by the forced
suspension of operations of the San Mateo SLF in late 1999 due to immense public
opposition. Within several weeks, it brought about a near-catastrophic collapse of the
municipal waste system and severe public health risks. Metro Manila was out of options
for disposal, and waste went largely uncollected. Dumping at the existing dumpsites was
accelerated, and small-scale, private dumpsites were developed.

The Aftermath (Early 2001-Present):

Since early 2001, additional controlled dumpsites have been developed in an

attempt to mitigate the crisis. These include the Rodriguez disposal facility in Montalban,
which continues to accommodate waste from many Metro Manila cities and
municipalities, and the Tanza facility in Navotas, which accepts waste from the City of
Manila and Navotas. Although outside Metro Manila, a regional SLF has also been
developed within the Clark Special Economic Zone in Central Luzon, the first SLF to be
fully approved and operational since Carmona and San Mateo a decade ago. Other
positive developments have included the enactment of RA 9003, which provides
provisions and guidelines for controlled dumpsites and SLFs.

63 | P a g e
 Source: ADB TA 3848-PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project

According to Philippine Daily Inquirer, the Philippines generates more solid waste
as population increases, living standards are enhanced, and urban and rural areas are
being developed. According to a report by the Senate Economic Planning Office (SEPO),
the country’s waste generation steadily increased from 37,427.46 tons per day in 2012 to
40,087.45 tons in 2016. Meanwhile, solid wastes produced by Philippine cities are
expected to increase by 165 percent to 77,776 tons by 2025.

64 | P a g e
 Residential areas produce the most amounts of solid wastes at 57 percent, while
wastes from commercial establishments, institutional sources, and industrial or
manufacturing sector accounted for 27 percent, 12 percent, and 4 percent of the total
waste generated, respectively.

The DENR’s National Solid Waste Management Commission disclosed that a total
of 384 open dumps still operate nationwide except in Metro Manila.

The Payatas open dumpsite was converted to a “controlled disposal facility” in

2004 and then closed in 2010. The Payatas “sanitary landfill,” which started operations in
2011 and was closed in December 2017 as it is already reached its carrying capacity limit.

According to the report, the waste generated by the National Capital Region
increased by about 450,000 cubic meters, equivalent to some 75,000 truckloads of trash.
The MMDA had to haul 10.72 million cubic meters of trash in 2016 compared to just 10.27
million cubic meters in 2015.

At the rate the metropolis is generating trash, the 3 landfills it is using would be
rendered unusable by 2037 at the latest, the MMDA report said.

These disposal facilities will be unusable by the following years:

• Quezon City Sanitary Land Fill - 2021

• Navotas Sanitary Land Fill - 2026
• Rizal Provincial Sanitary Landfill - 2037

Open dumping remains the general practice of waste disposal in the country as
controlled dumpsites and sanitary landfills (SLFs) are very limited (NSWC). Controlled
dump sites are disposal sites at which solid waste is deposited in accordance with the
minimum prescribed standards of site operation. RA 9003 requires LGUs to close their
existing open dumpsites by year 2006 and to establish controlled disposal facilities or
SLFs. As of 2016, there are still 403 open dumpsites and 108 controlled dumpsites in
operation. The number of SLFs is also insufficient to service all LGUs. While SLFs
increase from 48 in 2010 to 118 in 2016, LGUs with access to SLFs remain below 15

65 | P a g e
percent. It is interesting to note that the DENR is now pushing for the establishment of
cluster sanitary landfills or common sanitary landfills in the country to address waste
disposal problems. Through cluster sanitary landfills, local government units (LGUs) may
share funds in establishing sanitary landfills and consolidate efforts on solid waste
management efforts. Through cost-sharing, LGUs can save financial resources and
services. Section 13 of the Philippine Constitution provides that LGUs may group
themselves, consolidate or coordinate their efforts, services, and resources for purposes
commonly beneficial to them in accordance with law.

Safe Closure and Rehabilitation of the former San Mateo SLF

• Start of Operations on February 16, 1991 by MMA (MMDA)

• Old San Mateo Sanitary Landfill was situated at Barangay Pintong Bocaue,
San Mateo, Rizal
• The site is less than 50 kilometers away from Quezon City, Metro Manila
and accessible through Marcos Highway via Boso-Boso in Antipolo City,
Rizal
• Total land area is 73 hectares
• Total landfill area utilized 46.43 hectares (Interim Area, Expansion Area,
Phase 1 to 6)
• Servicing Metro Manila areas
• Closure of Sanitary Landfill on December 31, 2000

66 | P a g e
PAYATAS

Payatas is located in the northeast portion of

Quezon City. It is bounded by the La Mesa Reservoir,
Bagong Silangan, Commonwealth and Batasan Hills.
Payatas has been known as the solid waste dumpsite
in Quezon City. Before, it is a garbage disposal site
open to all; but due to the 2000 Payatas tragedy, it is
now catering only to its mother city’s use.

The Payatas dumpsite is divided into two sites

– the old and the new. The 11-hectare “old site” started
operating in 1973 but was closed due to the ten-year
old trash slide incident. Currently, it is the 9.7-hectare
“new site” which serves as the active disposal facility
of the City.
Figure 11. Location Map of Payatas

Payatas residents had been a victim of a

disastrous incident that had killed 300 people. It was in
July 10, 2000, when the wastes that were stacked up to
50 feet high came crashing down on the houses and
shanties of residents, mostly scavengers, situated near
the actual garbage mountains. To make the situation
worse, the methane gas emanating from the huge pile
caused instantaneous combustion and fire, inflicting
burns and inhalation problems. The dumpsite was
momentarily closed, but was soon reopened due to the
lack of alternatives for a waste disposal area in the
National Capital Region. It was then limited to the use of
Quezon City.

Figure 12. Payatas New Site Profile

67 | P a g e
 To further ensure that the so-called Payatas tragedy be avoided, the City
Government created the Payatas Operations Group in November 2000 through an
Administrative Order to manage, operate, and secure the entire dumpsite.

Just in time, the Republic Act 9003, or the Ecological Solid Waste Management
Act of 2000, was passed a year after. However, it was only in 2004 when the City complied
with the RA 9003 requirements to convert the open dumpsite into a controlled disposal
facility.

In May 2006, in compliance with the

Authority to Close issued by the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, the initial
conversion efforts were inputted in the
components of the final closure plan of the
dumpsite.
Figure 13. PayatasTimeline
These occurrences in Payatas paved the
way for the Quezon City Government to embark on the Payatas Landfill Transformation
Program.

The Payatas Landfill Transformation Program: A Component of the City’s

Comprehensive Development Plan

The Quezon City Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) recognizes the
compelling need to prioritize, among others, the conversion of the Payatas dumpsite into
a more environmentally sustainable disposal site due to its possible negative impacts to
its residents and the adjacent La Mesa Dam, to wit:

“Being an unsanitary open dump, the Payatas dumpsite is a

critically confronting issues as it poses danger not only to the residents
in the vicinity but to the immediate-lying La Mesa Dam which is the
depository of domestic water for Metro Manila. If only for public health
considerations alone, there is compelling reason to convert the present
dumpsite into other environment friendly solid waste disposal system

68 | P a g e
 that can address both the garbage and environment problems as well
as the socio-economic needs of the residents in the area.”

Figure 14. Distance between Payatas Dumpsite to Balara Filtration Plant

This and the City’s determination to avoid the recurrence of the 2000 Payatas
Tragedy, the Quezon City Government identified, in its Comprehensive Development
Plan, the Payatas Dumpsite Improvement Program as one of the development strategies
under the Environmental Management Sector, specifically for addressing the issues of
the City’s solid waste management.

Methane Recovery in Payatas: The Biogas Emission Reduction Project

Under the Payatas Landfill Transformation Program, there are several projects
identified and were already being implemented, at present. These include the Methane
Recovery Project, or technically known as the Biogas Emission Reduction Project.

The Biogas Emission Reduction Project of Quezon City is the first registered Clean
Development Mechanism (CDM) initiative under the Kyoto Protocol of the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change in solid waste management, not only in the

69 | P a g e
Philippines but in Southeast Asia as well. Basically, it involves the extraction, collection,
flaring and conversion to energy of biogas from the dumpsite.

The Quezon City Biogas Emission Reduction Project, as abovementioned, is an

initiative supported by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),
which encourages the industrialized countries to stabilize their greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions. This encouragement effort of the UNFCCC has translated into a more
concrete commitment called the Kyoto Protocol.

According to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, The

Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement that sets binding targets for 37 industrialized
countries and the European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
These amount to an average of five percent against 1990 levels over the five-year period
2008-2012.

The Project is located in Area 2, Barangay Payatas, Quezon City (see Figure 21).
The 22-hectare disposal facility was the disposal site for Metro Manila’s municipal solid
waste (MSW) from 1973 until July 10th 2000, when, after a period of heavy rain, a trash
slide occurred in the Payatas open dump, which was consequently closed. Figure 21
indicates the portion of the landfill affected by trash slide and the layout of the proposed
biogas collection system and energy recovery plant.

However, due to lack of alternative disposal sites, it was reopened in November

2000 pursuant to an Executive Order signed by President Joseph Estrada instructing the
conversion of this open dump to a controlled dump and making it an exclusive dumpsite
of Quezon City. In response to this, the Quezon City government created the Payatas
Operations Group (POG) on 12 November 2000 specifically to manage, operate and

70 | P a g e
secure the dumpsite. From then up to present, the Facility has received an average of 2.4

Figure 15. Payatas landfill plant (in red it is pointed out the area interested by the 2000 trashslide) –the location and
the layout of the proposed LFG recovery and treatment plant are showed

million cubic meters of MSW per year. It is scheduled for closure at the end of 2007.

Conversion of Landfill from an Open Dumpsite to Controlled Dumpsite

The conversion of the landfill from an open dump to a controlled dumpsite (see
Figure 4) was made through the implementation of the following technical operations in
order to protect the environment and to ensure the safety of the dumpsite and the
communities surrounding the site:

• slope reprofiling - dumpsite slopes were re-profiled from a 50°-70° steep to a

more stable 23°- 25° steep range through side cutting and benching;
• soil capping - re-profiled slope is covered with 0,60 m soil (before soil
compacting);
• greening of slopes - mongo beans were used to enrich and condition the soil
before grass and shrub were planted on the reprofiled slopes;
• perimeter fence - a perimeter fence was installed for the security of the facility.

71 | P a g e
 Figure 16. Payatas disposal site before (up) and after (below) the conversion to a controlled dumpsite

The landfill management operations don’t include the use of HDPE bottom liner on
the natural terrain. The regular dumpsite operations consist of the following phases: waste
truck inspection at the site entry; garbage is tipped at designated dumping area; residual
waste is pushed and leveled at the final dumping area: no landfill compactors are used,
and so a compaction degree of about 55% is foreseeable. A leachate drainage system
has been implemented on both mounds, through the collection pipes connected to the
pump station.

How Does It Work?

The biogas plant captures, collects, processes, and flares landfill gas (LFG),
converting it into clean electric power. The power generated is enough to sustain the
electricity demand of the facility and the surrounding streetlights, also allowing to meet
the basic power needs of the nearby residential area. The current capacity of the plant is
of 1.5 megawatts and the project is able to generate a monthly average of 40,000 kilowatt-
hour (KWh).

72 | P a g e
 The project area has a total of 66 wells each with its own monitoring equipment
that measures the amount of gas ready for harvest within its area. These are spaced at
approximately forty meters apart in both the old and new mounds. Each well is connected
to one of four controlling substations. Each substation conveys biogas from each well into
main lines up to the extraction plant. Before the biogas is received by the electricity
generator, the biogas collected passes through a heat exchanger and condensate trap to
remove remaining moisture. The extractor fan allows flow of biogas to the high
temperature flare and the electricity generator. Biogas is then combined with oxygen and
burned by the electric generator to produce power. The remaining amount of biogas that
is not consumed in the production of power is flared and released into the air as carbon
dioxide instead of methane.

73 | P a g e
Figure 18. Process Flow Diagram (1/2)

Figure 17. Process Flow Diagram (2/2)

74 | P a g e
 The Agreement

On February 14, 2007, the Quezon City Government signed a 10-year period
Memorandum of Agreement with an Italian company along with its Philippine counterpart,
which is the Pangea Green Energy, Inc.

Generally, the MOA provides for the full autonomy of Pangea in carrying out its
functions to achieve the following Project objectives:

• Address the environment, health and safety concerns of the local government
of Quezon City for its constituents, particularly those residing in the immediate
surroundings of the Facility.
• Promote the application of appropriate technology and know-how for the
extraction, collection and processing of biogas from solid urban wastes.
• Demonstrate its environmental, social and economic benefits.

In order to facilitate the project, the MOA clearly determine the roles of the Quezon
City Government and the Pangea, as follows:

LOCAL GOVERNMENT OF QUEZON CITY

• Control and jurisdiction over the project site

• Management of Quezon City Controlled Disposal Facility through the
Payatas Operations Group
• Governing body with authority over the operation of the Quezon City
Controlled Disposal Facility through their agreement with IPM
Environmental Services Inc.

PANGEA GREEN ENERGY

• Project Development
➢ Feasibility Study
➢ Local Authorization
➢ Registration as a CMD Project
• Implementation
➢ Design and Construction

75 | P a g e
 ➢ Testing and Commissioning
➢ Operation and Maintenance
• Financing
➢ 100 percent of the Project Cost

Operational Structure

As the representative of the Quezon City Government, the Payatas Operations

Group acts as the overall regulatory body that oversees the operations of partner private
entities, such as the IPM Environmental Services for site rehabilitation and development;
Pangea Green Energy, Inc. for the Biogas Emission Reduction Project; Holcim
Philippines, Inc. for the Used Tire Retrieval Project and Co-Processing of Residual
Plastics; DOST-ITDI for the pilot testing of the Plastic Densifier Technology; and the
Recycler’s Association for the recovery of the recyclable materials.

Payatas
Operations
Group

IPM
RECYCLER'S
Environmental PANGEA HOLCIM DOST-ITDI
ASSOCIATION
Services

Recycling Group Junkshops Waste Pickers

Figure 19. Organizational Structure

Contract for The Supply of Electricity (CSE) Between Meralco And Pangea
Green Energy Philippines Inc.

On May 31, 2012, MERALCO signed a CSE with PGEP, a biomass power plant
located in Payatas, Quezon City using methane gas extracted from the Payatas Landfill
as its fuel. Its plant has a total nominal generating capacity of 1,236 kW. The CSE has a
term of two (2) years from the delivery period commencement date

Pangea’s power plant is embedded to the distribution system of Meralco. The

electricity generated will be delivered directly through Meralco’s Diliman substation.

76 | P a g e
 PROJECT BENEFITS

➢ Elimination or reduction of explosion and fire hazards, reduction of odor and

ground water pollution, reduction of damage to existing vegetation, improvement
of stability of dumpsite through removal of voids and perched leachate
➢ Generation of employment and additional financial resources for Quezon City,
Philippines
➢ Capacity building of local stakeholders through education and training
➢ Supply of green energy that electrifies the plant, street lights, and perimeter lights
of the dumpsite
➢ Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions (estimated emission reduction of over
100,000 CO2 tons per year)

MILESTONES

➢ The total average of CO2e reduction per annum is of 116,339 metric tonnes.
➢ The project was reported to have mitigated 795,054.44 tCO2e from March 2008 to
January 2018. Since the project started exporting electricity in 2013, the total
exported electricity reached 26,327.98 megawatt-hours (MWh).
➢ The project has power generation capacities of 2.5 MW and is expected to
contribute reduction of about 1M tons of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission, or
equivalent to 430,000 barrels of crude oil consumption, for the years 2014-2020.
➢ The electricity powers street lights in Payatas and a workshop open to residents
at the weekend.
➢ The amount of greenhouse gases that are now being saved at Payatas is the
equivalent to taking 18,000 cars off Manila's roads, according to Jennifer Fernan
Campos, Pangea President. She also said that the project had a host of other
environmental benefits, including less direct air pollution for people living close by.
The extracted methane gas could also no longer contaminate the water system.

PAYATAS ALLIANCE RECYCLING EXCHANGE MULTIPURPOSE

COOPERATIVE

One way of making their contribution recognized by society is to promote their role
and support to the waste sector. The World Bank, through the Japan Social Development

77 | P a g e
Fund (JSDF), is helping them organize themselves to improve their livelihoods and social
inclusion through income generating opportunities and integration into the evolving solid
waste management sector.

A long-standing player is the Payatas Alliance Recycling Exchange (PARE)

Multipurpose Cooperative, composed of informal waste recyclers who earn their living by
segregating and recycling wastes so that only residuals enter the Payatas Sanitary
Landfill in Quezon City.

PARE is assisted by the JSDF project with the help of the Solid Waste
Management Association of the Philippines, by strengthening the capacity of their
cooperative members to set up their own microenterprises. PARE took center stage
during the April 25, 2014, Earth Day Jam celebration in Manila to demonstrate how to do
waste segregation at home. The event also gave them the opportunity to talk about waste
management in front of thousands of music- and nature lovers who came to enjoy live
music and listen to talks on the environment while pledging their support to Mother Earth.

3,000 scavengers are working at the waste facility all belong to the Payatas
Alliance Recycling Exchange. Days are divided into two shifts and revenue evenly shared.
Child labour is banned and each truck-load is checked at the entrance to exclude jumpers,
youths riding the vehicles in order to scavenge as much as they can before reaching the
dump.

PAYATAS DUMPSITE CLOSURE 2017

QUEZON City, and possibly other parts of Metro Manila, might soon be
“constipated” with garbage due to the closure of the Payatas Sanitary Landfill (SLF). In
addition to "constipation," thousands of people who rely on the landfill like scavengers
and junkshops will lose their livelihood. The waste facility is a major source of livelihood
of more than 5,000 individuals, including approximately 2,000 engaged in waste picking
and around 3,000 in the underground economy. Waste pickers recover around 7 percent
recyclables from incoming waste.

Citing numerous environmental violations and susceptibility to trash slide, the

Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) rejected the request of the

78 | P a g e
Quezon City government to allow the SLF to reopen until December this year. The
Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) and the Mines and Geosciences Bureau
(MGB) conducted a joint inspection of the facility and came up with adverse findings. The
two agencies concluded that the landfill operator, IPM Environmental Services Inc.,
violated existing environmental laws and their respective IRRs.

Violations include the presence of foul odor even with the use of deodorizer and
the leachate from the landfill which is still flowing towards the creek without undergoing
treatment. The MGB said that the landfill was "highly susceptible to trash slide" based on
its geomorphological and environmental assessments. It added that the "undercutting of
garbage toe increases the risk of trash slide along the slope of the garbage dump west of
Gawad Kalinga Village.

The Payatas SLF used to be a huge open dumpsite. A landslide in July 10, 2000,
killed 218 people living on the dumpsite and caused several missing persons. This
incident fast-tracked the passage of RA 9003, the Ecological Solid Waste Management
Act of 2000. Payatas dumpsite was converted to a “controlled disposal facility” in 2004
and then closed in 2010. The Payatas “sanitary landfill,” started operations in 2011.

Where will the Quezon City dispose their trash?

It is being disposed to the SLF’s in Vitas in Tondo, Manila, and to Rodriguez in

Rizal province for now but this is only a band-aid solution to the decade-old garbage
problem. It’s just a matter of time before these facilities will be full as well.

The long term solution to the garbage problem is proper waste management,
particularly 3Rs (reuse, reduce and recycle) and the composting of biodegradable waste.
A quick fix, albeit an expensive one, will be waste-to-energy (WTE) facilities which are
allowed by law to operate. The National Solid Waste Management Commission already
came up with guidelines on the operation of WTE facilities. Environmentalists of course
are not in favor of such facilities.

Now that it’s closed, the Payatas SLF is not totally useless. Gas collection pipes
can be drilled to recover the methane coming from biodegradable waste. There is enough
biogas to run a small power plant. The closure of Payatas SLF is a reminder to other

79 | P a g e
Local Government Units that sanitary landfills are not the permanent solution to their
garbage disposal problems. Kalangitan SLF in Capas, Tarlac will also reach its end-of-
life. So better be prepared now or be "constipated" later.

2000 PAYATAS TRAGEDY COURT RULE

After nearly 20 years, a local court held the Quezon City local government liable
for the Payatas tragedy, which claimed the lives of more than 300 urban poor.

In a 133-page decision dated October 30, 2019, Quezon City Regional Trial Court
(QC-RTC) Branch 97 Acting Presiding Judge Marilou Runes-Tamang found the Quezon
City government liable for gross negligence.

Originally, the petitioners were asking for actual and compensatory damages worth
P500,000; moral damages, P500, 000; and exemplary damages not less than P2-million
for each death.

The order ruled that “the improper and irresponsible dumping of waste thereby
creating a mountain-like pile of garbage… is the proximate cause of the violent death of
the victims and loss of personal and real properties.”

It also added that “[t]he mountain-like trash in itself is a testament of the city
government’s gross negligence in the management and operation of the dumpsite.” The
court also dismissed the case against private contractors.

The court ordered that the Quezon City government pay plaintiffs, who are the
legal heirs of the 56 victims, the following damages:

• 50,000 in temperate damages per deceased victim

• P50,000 in moral damages per deceased victim
• P10,000 in exemplary or corrective damages per victim

It also ordered the Quezon City government to pay the plaintiffs P100,000 in
attorney’s fees.

80 | P a g e
 Private firms, MMDA cleared

The court, however, dismissed the case against Tofemi Realty Corporation and
Meteor Company Inc., Ren Transport and the Metropolitan Manila Development
Authority.

It cleared Tofemi and Meteor because their role was limited to owning the lot and
renting it to the Quezon City government for dumpsite and Ren Transport—one of the
many garbage haulers to the dumpsite—because it did not have “exclusive and
uninterrupted use of the properties.”

MMDA was cleared because there is no evidence that it had the authority to
control, supervise and manage the dumpsite.

The disaster prompted the city government to shut down the dump. But it was
reopened a few weeks later after then Mayor Ismael Mathay Jr. said it needed to reopen
to prevent an epidemic of illness due to uncollected garbage.

The Public Interest Law Center (PILC) considers this a landmark legal case in torts
and disaster liabilities, particularly with the court’s determination of proximate cause for
the tragedy.

“The decision, if read meticulously and with laws such as the Ecological Solid
Waste Management Act deeply associated with this tragedy, helps shape a template for
local governments in averting and managing disasters,” the PILC said in a statement.

The PILC represents families of the victims in the case.

81 | P a g e
 REFERENCES

Tuamamo-Guittap, Corsame, Ramos (n.d.) Methane Recovery Facility in Payatas: A

Partnership between the Quezon City Government and Pangea Green Energy,
Inc. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/33152323/Methane_Recovery_Facility_in_Payatas_A
_Partnership_between_the_Quezon_City_Government_and_Pangea_Green_En
ergy_Inc

C40.org (September 17, 2018). Clean Energy in Quezon City: A Wasteland turned into a
Waste-to-Energy Model. Retrieved from https://www.c40.org/case_studies/clean-
energy-in-quezon-city-a-wasteland-turned-into-a-waste-to-energy-model

Malakunas, K., France-Presse, A. (March 17, 2013). In Payatas, turning trash into clean
energy windfall. Retrieved from https://www.rappler.com/science-nature/24924-
payatas-alternative-energy-trash

Morales, N.J. (November 2, 2012). ERC approves SMC, Meralco supply contracts.
Retrieved from https://www.philstar.com/business/2012/11/02/862428/erc-
approves-smc-meralco-supply-contracts

Securities and Exchange Commission (August 14, 2019). SEC Form 17-Q/ Retrieved
from https://www.pds.com.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Disclosure-No.-2244-
2019-Quarterly-Report-for-Period-Ended-June-30-2019-SEC-FORM-17-Q.pdf

Barles, S. (October 16, 2014). History of Waste Management and the Social and Cultural
Representations of Waste. Retrieved from
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-09180-8_7

TheConstructor.org (n.d.). Methods of Solid Waste Disposal and Management. Retrieved

from https://theconstructor.org/environmental-engg/methods-of-solid-waste-
disposal/4721/

Sara Mae D. Mawis, 2019 (May 18); Solid Waste Mismanagement in the Philippines,
Retrieved from: https://business.inquirer.net/270819/solid-waste-
mismanagement-in-the-philippines

82 | P a g e
Pathricia Ann V. Roxas, 2017 (August); Environmentalists hail closure of Payatas
dumpsite, Retrieved from: https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/920737/environmentalists-
hail-closure-of-payatas-dumpsite

Rox Peña, 2017 (August); Payatas landfill is permanently closed, Retrieved from
https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/160425

Rappler Ph, 2017 (October); Metro Manila landfills full, unusable in 20 years – MMDA,
Retrieved from: https://www.rappler.com/nation/173624-metro-landfills-full-20-
years-mmda-report

Asian Development Bank (ADB) TA 3848-PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management
Project, September 2003, Retrieved from: http://nswmc.emb.gov.ph/wp-
content/uploads/2016/08/Report-4-Waste-Disposal.pdf

National Solid Waste Management Commission (NSWMC) and Japan International

Cooperation Agency (JICA), 2010; Technical Guidebook on Solid Waste Disposal
Design and Operation, Retrieved from: https://nswmc.emb.gov.ph/wp-
content/uploads/2017/09/Guidebook-SLF-Plan-Design-Proof.pdf

Aoki, C. and Memon, M.A. (eds.) (2006), Wastewater Reuse,

Cointreau, S. (2006), Occupational and Environmental Health Issues of Solid Waste

Management:

Memon, M.A., Imura, H. and Shirakawa, H. (2006), Reforms for Managing Urban
Environmental Infrastructure and Services I, The Journal of Environment and
Development, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 138-157

Memon, M. A. (2004), Public Participation in Solid Waste Management: Learning from

the International Experiences. Emerging Issues in Solid Waste Management
:Sharing Practices and Developing Actions, 29-30 April 2004

NewsFlash (2000). METRO MANILA WATER SUPPLY SAFE. Retrieved from

http://www.newsflash.org/2000/12/si/si000700.htm

83 | P a g e
Peña, R. (August 24, 2017). Peña: Payatas landfill is permanently closed. Retrieved from
https://www.sunstar.com.ph/article/160425

Villaluz, M. (September 23, 2014). Nothing left to waste in the Philippines. Retrieved from
http://blogs.worldbank.org/eastasiapacific/nothing-left-waste-philippines

Gilles van Kote (January 29, 2013). Manila's waste scavengers are integrated into the
recycling chain. Retrieved from
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/29/manila-philippines-recycling-
payatas

Cuazon, C. (January 16, 2020). Court rules Quezon City gov’t liable of 2000 tragic
landslide in Payatas dumpsite. Retrieved from http://dzrhnews.com.ph/court-rules-
quezon-city-govt-liable-of-2000-tragic-landslide-in-payatas-dumpsite/

Olea, R. (January 16, 2020). QC local government liable for Payatas tragedy, court rules.
Retrieved from https://www.bulatlat.com/2020/01/16/qc-local-government-liable-
for-payatas-tragedy-court-rules/

Cabico, G.K. (January 16, 2020). After nearly 20 years, court finds Quezon City liable for
Payatas tragedy. Retrieved from
https://www.philstar.com/nation/2020/01/16/1985298/after-nearly-20-years-court-
finds-quezon-city-liable-payatas-tragedy

Tupas, T. (January 16, 2020). Kin of Payatas tragedy victims lose bid to each claim P3M
in damages. Retrieved from https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1214071/kin-of-payatas-
tragedy-victims-lose-bid-to-each-claim-p3m-in-damages#ixzz6BqyurySh

LandBank (September 7, 2019). LANDBANK wins Karlsruhe Award for Payatas and
Rodriguez Landfills Waste-to-Energy Projects. Retrieved from
https://www.landbank.com/news/landbank-wins-karlsruhe-award-for-payatas-
and-rodriguez-landfills-waste-to-energy-projects

84 | P a g e