Waste management?

Contents??

Aims?

Learning outcomes?

1. Waste management??

1.1 Introduction??

1.2 Legal responsibilities??

1.3 Waste management policy? 1.4 A case study??

1.5 Cost implications??

1.6 Conclusion??

Aims??

This article aims to:??

? Describe waste management as an aspect of premises support services.??

? Raise awareness of the competencies needed to deal with this issue, and the? legal responsibilities involved.??

Learning outcomes??

After reading this article you should:??

? Be aware of the importance of preparing an organisation-specific policy on? waste management as part of an overall environmental policy.??

? Realise that the main added value of waste management may be in an indirect? form.?

??

1 Waste management??

1.1 Introduction??

Managing waste efficiently has two obvious drivers:??

? Legislation??

? Waste management policy.??

It is frequently the latter which is most evident, with increasingly environmentally? aware workforces pressuring management to implement effective waste procedures,? particularly involving recycling. From an organisation’s viewpoint, such enthusiasm? should be converted into action – failure to do so will affect staff morale, whilst? positive action may well improve productivity. Remember, FM is about improving? the organisation’s overall performance.??

The recycling industry is in its infancy and is currently going through short cycles of? undercapacity and overcapacity. Collecting plastic only to find that no recycling? contractor will take it can be demoralising and cost-inefficient. The whole waste? management process needs to be planned centrally, ie by the FM function.??

A duty of care has existed in the UK since 1 April 1992, and a breach of such duty? renders directors/senior officers of the organisation criminally liable, and employers? responsible for the acts and commissions of their employees.??

1.2 Legal responsibilities??

The duty of care is set out in s.34 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. It? applies to importers, producers, carriers of controlled waste, persons who keep, treat? or dispose of controlled waste (waste managers), and waste brokers. The Act does not? define ‘broker’, but a Code of Practice issued by the then Department of the? Environment (DoE) to provide guidance on the discharge of the duty describes a? broker as:??

‘A person who arranges the transfer of waste which he does not himself hold to? such an extent that he controls what happens to it.’??

Under the terms of the Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) Regulations 1991,? waste producers, as persons subject to the duty, are required to keep a copy of the? written description and the transfer note for two years from the date of the transfer? and to make these records available to a waste regulation authority on request.??

In spite of the apparently onerous aspects of the duty, it should be realised that s.34? does not impose an absolute duty; a waste producer, for example, is only expected to? take measures that are reasonable in the circumstances and are applicable to him in? his capacity. The extent of any individual producer’s duty will depend upon the? nature of the waste, dangers that are reasonably associated with it, how it is dealt with? and what the individual might reasonably be expected to know or foresee.??

Any breach of the duty is a criminal offence, irrespective of whether or not there has? been any other breach of the law or any consequent harm or pollution. Very? importantly, given the fact that the maximum fine for a statutory breach is ￡5000 in? the Magistrates’ Court and unlimited in the Crown Court, employers are responsible? for the acts and commissions of their employees acting within the course of their? duties. Additionally, under s.157 of the 1990 Act, a director or other senior officer of? a company can be held criminally liable for breaches of the duty committed by his? company, where the offence was committed with his consent or connivance or was? attributable to neglect on his part.?

Certain difficult or potentially dangerous wastes are classified as ‘special wastes’? under the Control of Pollution (Special Waste) Regulations 1980. These regulations? contain strict requirements as to the documentation and consignment of such wastes.? These requirements are additional to, rather than in place of, the duty of care, which? applies as much to special waste as to all other controlled wastes.??

Three separate questions must be addressed by an owner/facilities manager at the? outset:??

1 Is it waste???

Section 75 of the EPA lists a number of materials which the term ‘waste’ includes.? The list includes residual:??

? Paper and paper-based products??

? Toxic effluents??

? Discarded equipment??

? Discarded furniture??

? Reprographic consumables (toner cartridges, etc)??

? Cans??

? Bottles??

? Food??

? Etc.??

The DoE updated guidance in 1994, defining waste in the Waste Management? Licensing Regulations 1994. In principle, a material is designated as waste by? reference to a comprehensive list of materials and to the fact that the current holder is? discarding or intending to discard or is required to discard the material.??

The guidance gives some indication as to the meaning of discarding for these? purposes. In general, the updated definition of waste is likely to reduce the range of? objects that may be so designated, and this will remove a substantial number of? transfers from the requirements of the duty of care.??

The Deregulation and Contracting Out Bill includes an amendment to the duty of care? provisions. Although the wording in the amendment is not entirely clear, it is thought? that it covers those circumstances in which a single, large quantity of waste is? removed by multiple trips and where a series of transfers, between the same parties,? of waste of the same description occurs. Under both sets of circumstances the transfer? will be deemed to occur when the first of the transfers takes place and thus a transfer? note will only be required then.??

Additionally, the courts have consistently ruled that waste is to be judged from the? point of view of the person wishing to dispose of it. Therefore, material for which the? producer has no further use may well be waste even though it has great value to? someone else.??

2 Is it controlled waste???

Controlled waste is also defined in s.75 of the EPA, and encompasses household? waste, industrial waste and commercial waste.?

3 Who has produced the waste???

The key distinction here concerns whether the owner/facilities manager, or a? contractor (eg providing cleaning services or operating catering facilities in a? building), or some other third party (eg a lessee or licensee of a shop in the shopping? mall), is the producer.??

No doubt the owner’s or management company’s office within the site will produce? some commercial waste, in which case the duty will apply to them as a producer.??

In relation to the production of waste by others within the building, the Department of? the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) regards contractors, lessees and? licensees as waste producers, as it is the works they undertake which give rise to that? waste. Even though third parties on the site may be subject to the duty as waste? producers, the owner or management company should take reasonable steps to ensure? compliance by these third parties. This is particularly important if the owner/facilities? manager makes the arrangements for a carrier to take all the waste from the site. In? this role, the owner/facilities manager may be operating as a waste broker.??

The facilities manager should then ensure that he is as well informed about the nature? of the waste as if he were discharging the responsibilities of a producer. In either role? he is responsible under the duty for ensuring that the controlled waste is properly? described, is transferred to an authorised person and is within the scope of the waste? licence under which disposal or recycling will take place.??

In relation to the waste from the fitting out of shops or offices in building complexes,? owners/facilities managers should be particularly aware of the implications of the? duty of care. The construction industry produces controlled waste and thus? contractors will again be regarded by DEFRA as the waste producers.??

Where the contractor also takes away this construction waste, he will be subject to the? duty as producer and carrier. In these circumstances, the duty would not apply to the? owner/facilities manager of the building complex. Where the building contractor,? however, has entered into an agreement with the facilities manager whereby the? company makes arrangements for the removal of that waste from the site, the? facilities manager would probably be under the duty as a waste broker.??

Typically, a carrier may claim to be registered under the Control of Pollution? (Amendment) Act 1989, so that the owner/facilities manager, as producer or broker,? will need to check out his credentials at the start of any contractual relationship.? Thereafter, fresh checks on the carrier will probably not be needed for repetitive? waste transfers of the same waste to the same destination.??

The owner/facilities manager must ensure that a written description of the waste is? transferred with it and that both parties to the transfer complete, sign and keep a copy? of the transfer note for at least two years. The 1991 Regulations indicate that a? description of the waste, its quantity, the form of packaging, details of the? producer/broker, details of the transferee, and the place and time of transfer should be? contained in a transfer note.?

The contract??

The successful application of the duty of care should be underpinned by a contract? between the parties to any transfer. Thus, the owner/facilities manager may wish to? suspend or cease further consignments to a carrier following a breach by him.? Without adequate terms, this may put the producer/broker in breach of contract;? additionally, in the absence of appropriate contractual terms, he may not have the? power to inspect the records or the vehicles of carriers to ensure his own compliance? with the duty.??

The following list should be helpful for owners/facilities managers of building? complexes in checking that they are discharging their duty of care:??

? Check that the material is controlled waste.??

? Check whether liability arises as producer or broker.??

? As producer, identify and describe the waste produced.??

? Obtain accurate description of waste from contractors, lessees and licensees for? the waste for which the owner/facilities manager may be acting as broker.??

? Identify and separate any special waste.??

? Make provision for the packaging and custody of waste awaiting collection.? ? Arrange for appropriate contractual terms with a carrier.??

? Provide a full description of the waste and fill in transfer note appropriately.??

? Pass the correctly filled-out transfer note over with the waste to the authorised? carrier.??

? Retain a copy of the transfer note for at least two years.??

The terms of the duty of care are extensive and compliance is potentially a demanding? procedure on all parties in the waste stream. In practice, however, the number of? prosecutions brought for breach does not suggest that this piece of environmental? legislation is making the impact that some imagined it would. Even where? prosecutions are brought, the courts appear to take a fairly lenient view, particularly? where any breach has occurred without any other breach of environmental law. Of? course, this is no guarantee that the courts will be similarly disposed in future.??

The facilities manager must ensure that all waste is:??

? Handled in the correct manner by trained staff aware of environmental and? public health risks.??

? Correctly described and documented, with quantities recorded and analysed if? necessary.??

? Secure, contained in appropriate storage containers and presenting no risk to? employees or the environment.?

??

1.3 Waste management policy??

Government policy??

The British Government’s policy in respect of waste management is laid down in? DoE Circular 11/94 (para 9) as follows:??

‘A Subject to the best practical environmental option in each case, waste? management should be based on a hierarchy in which the order of preference? is:?

?(i) reduction – by using technology which requires less material in? products and produces less waste in manufacture, and by producing? longer lasting products with lower pollution potential;?

?(ii) reuse – for example, returnable bottles and reusable transit packaging;? (iii) recover – finding beneficial uses for waste including:??

?(a) recycling it to a usable product;?

?(b) composting it to create products such as soil conditioners and? growing media for plants; and?

?(c) recovering energy from it either by burning it or using landfill gas;? (iv) disposal – by incineration or landfill without energy recovery.?

B Each of these options should be managed and, where necessary, regulated to? prevent pollution of the environment or harm to human health.’

The organisation’s facilities policy to waste??

The facilities policy in respect of waste management must embrace:??

? Compliance with legislation??

? Sympathy towards the objectives??

? Control mechanisms??

? Economics.??

Control mechanisms??

There are a few simple actions the facilities manager can take to ensure that he stays? on the right side of the law and does the right thing by the environment. Briefly these? are as follows:??

? Be aware of the presence of waste materials – incoming and outgoing.? ? Check the need for any licences or registrations of exemptions.? ? Label for identification.??

? Write a description – by name, process or source of production, legal status.??

? Note special considerations – separation, special enclosures/containers,? transfer and disposal requirements.??

? Ensure safety in collection, storage and transfer.??

? Use officially sanctioned carriers/managers.??

? Check their activities and credentials.??

? Document all transfers.??

In terms of social responsibility the facilities manager can do much to encourage an? economically viable approach to environmentally friendly waste disposal:??

? Recycling of waste paper can be encouraged by the installation of a second? waste-paper basket – for recyclable materials only, particularly the high-grade? waste paper.??

? Special collections or depositories for low-grade general waste such as? newspapers and parcel wrappings.??

? Purchase of paper products produced from low-grade waste.??

? Purchase of washable, not disposable, cups, saucers and plates.??

? Cross-charging of waste disposal to departments where such a generic policy? is in place.??

? Proactive stock control procedures checking consumption of paper against? value-engineered and environmentally-friendly targets.??

? Staff awareness programmes and campaign – ‘save-a-tree’ posters and other? accumulation models may well do for the environment what the ‘Save the? Black Babies’ fund-raising campaign of the 1940s did for the world? population.??

1.4 A case study??

The following case study is reproduced from Premises and Facilities Management.????

CASE STUDY: Mobil Oil?

Mobil House in Victoria Street is the headquarters of Mobil Oil Company Limited. The? facilities management team look after the interests of 500 staff and were keen to introduce? environmental initiatives to Mobil House as part of Mobil’s global commitment and? mission statement. Mobil’s Environmental Awareness Programme had been launched in? the States, but national differences needed to be taken into account before launching in the? UK. The publicity material used for the States was unsuitable for the UK, and there were? variations in the type of products used and the recycling facilities available.??

The facilities management team at Mobil was committed to the launch of the? environmental programmes, and had already completed an initial feasibility study? themselves. However, it did highlight a number of major obstacles to the successful? introduction of recycling initiatives, and it decided to seek assistance in broadening its? experience and knowledge of environmental issues.??

The main areas of concern identified were:??

? Lack of storage space.??

? Suitability of containers: recycling schemes must be easy and practical for staff to? use. If staff have to move far to recycle – they won’t bother!??

? Reliability of contractors.??

? Educating staff: many environmental initiatives fail because of poor internal? communication.??

? Lack of resources, expertise and management time. Mobil recognised the need for? outside help, and commissioned Wastebusters Limited, an environmental? consultancy, to conduct a Green Office Audit and help them in the development of? the programme.??

The first step towards the introduction of recycling initiatives was a feasibility study to? ensure that the schemes were practical to implement. Wastebusters developed a system of? auditing office practice to provide a structured approach. This involved:??

? An assessment of the products used.??

? Identifying those that could be recycled.??

? Looking at retrieval systems.??

? Finding suitable contractors.??

The audit findings identified the potential for practical and efficient recycling schemes.? Meetings with the facilities management team helped to gauge awareness levels in the? organisation – an important consideration in planning the launch.??

The facilities team identified potential recycling schemes and investigated how they could? operate. They identified suitable contractors and produced a cost analysis. The audit? included meetings with the departments involved in facilities management, from office? services to catering, which enabled them to contribute their ideas and helped gain their? commitment to the introduction of the programme.??

The audit findings identified potential to introduce a number of recycling schemes in? Mobil House:??

? Paper??

? Cans???

? Vending cups??

? Glass??

? Toner cartridges??

? Batteries??

? Newspapers and magazines.??

The successful introduction of these initiatives would enable Mobil House to recycle 60– 70 percent of its office waste. The audit identified significant potential to reduce waste? disposal costs by recycling. The costs of waste disposal were approximately ￡9000 pa.??

The consultants recommended suitable containers and reliable contractors, and helped? with the development of the launch programme. Mobil in the USA produce their own? waste-paper bins, which are made from recycled plastic, and these are now in use at all? locations participating in the scheme.??

The initiatives were cost-effective, since revenue would be received for white office? paper, and waste disposal costs would be reduced. A percentage of the savings made? would go to an environmental charity as a staff incentive scheme.??

Papercycle collects white office paper, cans, cardboard and newspapers/magazines. The? Save-A-Cup Recycling Company collects vending cups. Glass is retrieved in the? restaurant and taken to a bottle bank at the rear of the building. Toner cartridges are? returned to the supplier for recharging.??

The audit findings highlighted the importance of communicating effectively to staff, to? ensure that all staff were aware of what they could do and the environmental benefits of? doing so. Without the commitment of individuals, the programme would never have been? successful or achieved the cost savings identified.??

Launch programme??

A well-planned launch programme is an effective way of communicating with staff. The? full implications of the programme need to be considered, and appropriate systems? introduced. This involves planning to overcome logistical problems and ensuring good? communication with all parties involved both internally and externally, including:??

? Do the cleaning staff know what is expected of them???

? Is recycling built in to the cleaning contract???

? Are the recycling companies aware of the arrangements and key contacts within? your organisation???

? Have you involved your marketing department???

There was a pre-launch flyer 10 days before the launch.??

On the launch day:??

? Desk drop/information pack.??

? Display in reception of environmental information.??

? Environmental presentations throughout the day.??

? Mobil Environmental Awareness posters throughout the buildings.? (Continued)?

On the Monday morning of the launch day, Mobil House staff were greeted by members? of the facilities team wearing T-shirts and baseball caps, handing out information leaflets? and lapel badges, all featuring the Mobil Environmental Awareness logo.??

Recycling presentations (advertised on the leaflets) were given throughout the day.??

The in-house publications, Mobil News and Mobil World, gave added publicity to the? scheme. This helped motivate other offices to launch their own schemes, based on Mobil? House.??

The facilities management team were totally committed to the programme, and had Board? level backing. The results have been very successful, with the key objectives achieved:??

? Reduced waste disposal costs – ￡30,000 in the first year.??

? Revenue from paper recycling scheme – ￡500 first year.??

? High staff awareness – over 30 tonnes have been collected for recycling.?

The main question to consider is: did the cost saving justify the implementation of the? recycling schemes? Additionally, were there other benefits to the organisation???

To maintain motivation, staff need to know how they are doing. Regular feedback is? vital. This should be in an easily understandable form, not only explaining the? tonnage of recyclables collected, but the environmental benefits. For example,? recycling paper:??

? Saves natural forests: recycling paper will reduce the pressure on natural? habitats resulting from intensive forestry.??

? Saves energy: recycling paper is 50 percent more efficient. Conserving energy? is vital to slowing down the greenhouse effect.??

? Reduces pollution: high quality recycled paper can be made without? rebleaching.??

Incentive schemes are a successful way of keeping ongoing motivation, and they are? self-financing. It is very helpful if a company is seen to give a percentage of the? savings achieved into an incentive scheme. Staff can feel very disillusioned if the? savings made are going straight back to the company coffers!??

Recycling is the start of the Environmental Awareness Programme. The facilities? management team needs to work closely with the purchasing department to develop? the use of recycled papers and general stationery.??

The introduction of recycling initiatives often leads to questions regarding the type of? paper used. The use of recycled paper is a natural progression to collecting paper for? recycling and is important in closing the recycling loop.??

It is important that buyers understand the environmental implications of purchasing? decisions and the benefits of incorporating environmental criteria. It has been found? that training needs to take into account the different levels of commitment and? understanding within the company.??

Training seminars and workshops to explain the principles of life cycle analysis, and? advice on integration into the existing purchasing structure, help to embed ideas in the? management system. This can include case study examples using products with a? high environmental impact or profile, and comparisons of differences in suppliers’? environmental policies.??

The Environmental Management Systems of BS7750 and the Eco-audit Regulation? both have a requirement to set objectives and targets against the environmental? management programme. It is important to be able to measure the success of the? programme and monitor its effectiveness.??

Performance indicators are a valuable tool in assessing the effectiveness of the? programme. These figures can form the basis of staff incentive schemes, and create? awareness of the environmental effects of all office activities. Having established the? main environmental effects of the office, key objectives can be set to minimise each? area of impact.??

One of the key environmental effects of the office is the disposal of waste to landfill? sites. Therefore the policy statement will include a commitment to minimise waste? and increase reuse and recycling to reduce this environmental effective. The reduction? of waste produced has a direct effect on the tonnage sent to landfill.??

Performance indicators need to be identified to monitor the success of achieving the? objective. The change in volume of waste sent to landfill is a clear measure of this.? Measurements are identified which enable base-line figures to be produced. For? example:??

Total Weight Recycled = Recycling percentage Total Waste Produced

‘Contributors’ are other initiatives which indirectly affect the success of this? measurement. For example, if the recycling schemes have not been effectively? communicated to staff, the volume of general waste retrieved for recycling will not? reach its full potential. If suppliers implement retrieval systems for packaging? material, this will directly affect the volume of waste produced.??

1.5 Cost implications??

Because of the immature state of the process industry, referred to above, long-term? economic gains are difficult to evaluate. Recycling low-grade paper may be only? marginally cost justifiable, but in other areas the savings in waste disposal cost (by? offsetting recycling value against disposal) may eventually be more significant – see? the case study.??

On average, 70 percent of office waste is theoretically recyclable. Judging from the? examples of countries such as Germany, where incentives to recycle are more? stringently enforced, the potential for cost saving becomes more significant.??

The option of compacting waste should be investigated as a possible cost-saving? measure, particularly where on-site waste storage space is at a premium.??

Of course, the facilities management team should be examining the inclusion of? recycled products in the procurement plan as a means of reducing the spend budget.??

1.6 Conclusion??

Waste management covers a wide range of issues; some mundane, some highly? specialist and emotive. In the latter category the discovery of asbestos in a building? can cause considerable alarm among the workforce. (In one instance, a union? representative decided that the corrugated sheeting covering a bicycle shed in the car? park posed an imminent threat to health.) A responsible policy to its removal or? incarceration is essential. Similar comments apply to any toxic waste and also to the? whole question of contaminated land itself.??

From the organisation’s point of view it should be clear that a cohesive policy is? essential, not least because of the (rightly) increasing weight of legislation designed? to protect the environment from the careless disposal of waste.??

Facilities management, when well developed, is the most obvious focal point from? which to audit waste management procedures and implement and monitor ever tighter? policies.??

Remember:??

? Waste management should form an integrated part of an overall environmental? policy in an organisation.??

? Waste disposal costs are likely to be reduced by recycling, but the real added? value to an organisation may well be through the effects of staff participation? in the scheme. Most staff react favourably when involved with a socially (ie? environmentally) responsible employer.??

? Performance measures enable recycling and general waste management? programmes to be monitored over time.??

? Global, political pressures are likely to increase the emphasis on waste? management and the impact of environmental issues on business generally, for? the foreseeable future.??

FURTHER READING??

Bernard Williams Associates (2000) Facilities Economics in the European Union,? Building Economics Bureau Ltd: Bromley, Kent, ISBN 0904237230.??

FitzGerald J (1994) ‘Who Cares’, Premises and Facilities Management, April, pp.27– 31.??

Grigg J and Jordan A (1993) Are you Managing Facilities?, Nicholas Brealey? Publishing: London, ISBN 1857880242.??

Millett L (1993) ‘Corporate Commitment’, Premises and Facilities Management,? August, pp.17, 23–24.??

Park A (1998) Facilities Management: An Explanation (2nd edn) Palgrave? Macmillan, ISBN 0333737989.??

Simmons & Simmons, A Guide to the Duty of Care Under Section 34 of the EPA.?

The College of Estate Management 2000 Paper 2875V3-1