Case Studies Analyzing Enforcement of a Construction Waste Management Plan

Introduction

As technology progresses and building construction and land development increase, it becomes imperative that the decisions made about building construction and design result in reducing the impact the built environment has on our natural environment.  The amount of waste generated from construction and demolition alone is staggering, in 1998 the total annual construction and demolition waste generation in the United States was 136 million tons (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1998).  The United States Green Building Council (USGBC) created LEED, or Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, to promote environmentally sensitive construction.  LEED is a national standard for rating sustainable construction projects that offers certification for the completed building.  The diversion of construction waste from landfills is identified as a practice worth promoting.  This paper sets out to identify and evaluate the various responsibilities for enforcing this LEED construction waste management credit.

The Problem and its Setting

The purpose of the study is to identify and evaluate the processes involved in enforcement of a Construction Waste Management Plan (CWMP) on LEED registered projects.

Research Objectives

Review of Related Literature

Since the 1970s, state and federal environmental legislation has increased at a rapid rate.  Americans are becoming more and more aware of the consequences their current lifestyles have on the environment.  This is most evident in materials waste.  In the construction industry, many contractors are changing their waste disposal practices of the past and disposing of construction waste materials properly (Wright, 2003).

The LEED rating system is a consensus-based national standard for developing high-performance, sustainable buildings.  Within this system, contractors may receive one or two points for implementation of construction waste management on a project.  These points count toward the total necessary to rate a building as LEED Certified, Gold, Silver, or Platinum.  The intent of this credit is to divert construction, demolition, and land clearing debris from landfill disposal and redirect recyclable materials back to the manufacturing process.  The following are requirements for receiving one LEED construction waste management point for a project:            

Recycle and/or salvage at least 50% (by weight) of construction, demolition, and land clearing waste.  Provide a copy of the Waste Management Plan for the project highlighting recycling and salvage requirements.  Provide calculations on end-of-project recycling rates, salvage rates, and landfill rates demonstrating that 50% of construction wastes were recycled or salvaged.

To receive a second credit for construction waste management, there must be an additional 25% of the construction, demolition, and land clearing debris recycled and/ or salvaged (LEED Reference Guide, 2001).

In order to successfully attain this LEED credit, it is necessary to enact a plan before construction begins.  LEED offers no standard for such a plan, but many organizations have been created to help implement a reuse/recycling plan for construction sites.  The State of Washington is at the forefront of this movement, sponsoring many programs to aid construction managers in implementing successful plans for construction waste management.  King County, Washington, encourages construction site recycling through its Construction Works Program.  The Department of General Administration in Washington provides a free guide to Construction Waste Management.  This guide offers a checklist of materials that can be reused and/ or recycled, as well as outlining issues that should be dealt with before, during, and after construction in order for the waste management plan to take place in a smooth, effective manner.  Different regions require different methodologies for reducing waste, and therefore, each job site poses a unique solution to the waste reduction and recycling issue (Regal Effort, 2004). 

King County, Washington’s Solid Waste Division, the control case for this study, provides extensive information concerning waste management and construction recycling on their website.  The number one key to a successful construction recycling program is to outline all the requirements from the project’s inception so that all parties involved understand what is expected in addition there is a necessity to specify waste management goals and policies in subcontracts.  While these plans do not need to be overly complicated, successful ones should contain information concerning recycling and reuse target goals, analysis of project waste, disposal methods, material handling procedures, and instructions for construction crew.  The size of the project will usually dictate the type of waste management plan necessary for a successful recycling/reuse program (King County Solid Waste Division, 2005).

The King County Solid Waste Division website provides a sample CWMP for constructors to use.  The sample document suggests that constructors develop a plan by outlining performance requirements in recycling/reuse and diversion goals, as well as itemizing materials to be salvaged, reused, and recycled.  The sample plan calls for meetings to be scheduled and conducted at the project site prior to construction activities.  Attendees of these meetings should be the owner, architect, contractor’s superintendent, major subcontractors, municipality representatives (as appropriate to geographic area), and other concerned parties.

Method

Three case studies were conducted on construction projects in various stages of completion that sought the LEED construction waste management credit in the State of Texas.  The case studies focused on processes of enforcement in the preconstruction and construction phases.

Methods of Data Collection

Data was obtained from site visits and personal interviews with construction personnel on site, as well as any key office personnel.  The information collected in these case studies was used to identify and compare similarities and differences between these three cases and with King County Washington’s Solid Waste Division’s CWMP. 

Data was obtained from on-site observations, as well as periodic interviews with the project manager, construction superintendents, and subcontractors.  Semi-structured questioning was used in interviews.  Data included, but was not be limited to, the following:

Results

Case Study One

Case Study one was located in Dallas, Texas.  This project involved two phases: deconstruction of parts of the existing structure and construction of new facilities within the existing structure.  The project is seeking LEED Gold certification. 

Individuals Responsible for Setup and Enforcement of Waste Management Plan

In this case, the general contractor was not under a low bid contract, so consideration was given to qualifications over cost.  As a result, the general contractor chose to hire a demolition contractor familiar with LEED requirements for attaining construction waste management credits.  This demolition contractor became the Construction Waste Manager (CWM) for the entire duration of both phases of work.  The CWM’s responsibilities were as follows:

The General Contractor’s Superintendent on site was responsible for initial layout of waste piles and everyday enforcement of the construction waste plan.  Because this project was a complex of existing structures, large piles of various waste materials were made in the shelter of the empty buildings.  This eliminated the need for dumpsters assigned to specific materials, and this process also made it easy to see if materials were being dumped improperly.  The Superintendent was also responsible for marking the piles with proper signage.  These signs were not, bilingual, even though the majority of laborers onsite were of Hispanic origin.  The Superintendent received reports from the CWM when debris was removed from the site.  These reports contained breakdowns of the amount of waste being recycled, as well as information regarding where the materials were being recycled. 

Laborers from each trade were asked to walk through the jobsite and pick up any waste material belonging to their trade.  This material was then taken back to the dump piles and disposed of properly.  The Intern on site was in charge of monitoring the waste piles.  If the intern noticed improper waste disposal, he would contact the Superintendent, who would then consult the responsible subcontractor.  The Project Manager was responsible for submitting all required LEED paperwork.  He gathered reports and receipts from the Superintendent and CWM. 

Process for Setting up Construction Waste Management Plan

This project marked the first time this general contractor had dealt with LEED certification.  As a result, the lack of experience made it difficult for the Project Manager and Superintendent to put together an in-depth CWMP.  The general contractor was not under a low bid contract, so consideration was given to qualifications over cost.  As a result, the general contractor chose to hire a demolition contractor to implement and enforce the CWMP.

Enforcement Process

Day-to-day enforcement duties were divided up among site personnel according to each person’s responsibility under the waste management plan.  Weekly meetings were held to discuss with subcontractors the importance of proper waste disposal.  Once the materials piles reached a certain size, they were removed to specific recycling locations outlined in the CWMP.  The CWM had an extensive list of contacts to use for recycling and reuse of the waste materials, so finding recyclers was not difficult.  Materials were weighed before removal from site.  The process of weighing materials on-site helped ensure accurate records for LEED documentation, and provided the project manager with cost estimates for recycled materials.

When materials were dumped into piles improperly, workers not complying with the policy were required to remove the materials and dispose of them correctly.  This situation only occurred a few times.  Most workers understood the necessity of properly disposing of materials, and they were reluctant to dig around in garbage piles.  Signs were placed near piles to aide workers in proper disposal, usually with spray paint.  For trash that would not be recycled, small, wheeled dumpsters were used.  Signs on these dumpsters were made of paper and fixed to the dumpsters with tape.  Signs were in English only (Figure 1). 

The Project Manager expressed concerns about previous jobs where low bid contracts were used.  In these, unorganized subcontractors lead to mounting paperwork catastrophes, as well as ineffective enforcement.  Having a CWM on site, which had connections with recycling companies, is both timesaving and cost effective.  Because the Superintendent on site had no construction waste management experience, he would not have known where to send the materials had it not been for the CWM, who knew where to send everything from ceiling tiles to drywall.  The subcontractors, Superintendent, or Project Manager, reported no other problems.  Due to the hiring of a CWM, the project was able to run smoothly and efficiently.

Evaluation

This project was small; larger projects tend to have many more management personnel onsite.  This project only employed one Superintendent who was on site constantly, one Project Manager who visited the site weekly, a CWM, laborers, and a college intern.  This, along with the actual creation of the CWM position, simplified the chain of command significantly.

Contradictory to the suggestions of the King County Solid Waste Division CWMP, an official waste management plan was never created.  The General Contractor for this project had never dealt with LEED, and as a result, had no prior experience in creating such a plan.  The hiring of the CWM was instrumental in the success of their recycling effort.  Another suggestion made by the King County Solid Waste Division not enacted on this project was to enter the waste management requirements, goals, and procedures into the subcontractor’s contracts.  Even though there were minimal problems in achieving the desired amount of waste diversion, creating a contract in which waste management expectations are set out is a step that prevents future problems from occurring, as well as defining the responsibilities of each subcontractor.

Meetings were held, however, prior to construction activities to discuss waste management procedures.  The Superintendent for this project conducted these meetings and made decisions about waste management requirements for each trade.  Each trade was told how to properly dispose of materials and informed of consequences for not abiding by these policies.  The CWM took charge of all other meeting objectives.  The CWM reported all waste-related information to the Superintendent, who kept a running spreadsheet of waste totals.  This spreadsheet is similar to the Waste Management Progress Report offered by King County Solid Waste Division.

Case Study Two

The second case study was conducted in Richardson, Texas.  The project is seeking LEED Gold certification.  The waste management plan designed for this project intends to divert at least 50% of waste from landfills; thus, earning one construction waste management credit from the LEED rating system. 

Individuals Responsible for Setup and Enforcement of Waste Management Plan

The Project Manager was responsible for setting forth the CWMP.  This plan was a comprehensive written analysis of how construction waste would be dealt with throughout the duration of this project.  A team consisting of two field coordination and scheduling members implemented this plan.  These members coordinated waste receptacle layout on the jobsite, as well as coordination of waste disposal with recycling companies.  Subcontractor Superintendents were responsible for directing their personnel in regards to the locations of receptacles and the procedures for dumping and separation of debris.  Superintendents were responsible for managing the daily review of the open-top recycling receptacles to ensure that materials were discarded according to the CWMP.  During peak periods of construction, a laborer was used to monitor the flow of materials entering the recycling receptacles.  The Project Engineer was responsible for the waste management reporting plan.  This plan was reviewed during each pay application with the Owner and the LEED Consultant. 

Process for Setting up Construction Waste Management Plan

The Project Manager for this project was a LEED Accredited Professional.  As a result, he had experience in dealing with waste management plans from previous projects.  The waste management plan was similar to plans he had previously written, although not identical, because each project brings its own unique challenges that must be addressed individually. 

Enforcement Process

Each person had a specific role to play in regards to enforcing the plan, detailed above.  Having proper signage that stayed on a dumpster was imperative for the success of the waste management plan.  Metal signs, were found to work the best, as opposed to stickers or magnetic signs.  These bilingual metal signs (Figure 1) were easily relocated and durable. 

Coordination of the LEED waste management plan was discussed during weekly meetings.  Photo documentation of improper materials disposal was shown to subcontractors.  Once this was visually pointed out to them, they were given 3 days to comply or they would be back-charged for having the dumpster emptied and the debris properly separated by the general contractor’s personnel.  This happened only once, after which the subcontractors understood the consequences for noncompliance.  Other methods of dealing with workers who did not adhere to the waste management plan included emailing reports to superiors and verbal warnings in meetings.  No incentives were offered to subcontractors for adhering to the waste management policy because the procedures for waste management were written into their contracts. 

The problems encountered while enforcing this plan were mainly lack of experience of subcontractors regarding recycling.  This lack of experience created confusion about subcontractor expectations during the first weeks of the project.  In order to minimize this problem, the general contractor held preconstruction meetings with the staff on site prior to actual subcontractor mobilization.  Another problem involved debris separation.  Because the building was a 3-story structure, it was difficult to separate the debris properly and funnel it down the trash chute, although careful planning of receptacle location helped reduce some of these problems.

Evaluation

This project was one part of a very large endeavor, and the waste management plan used was similar in detail to King County Solid Waste Division’s Sample Waste Management Plan.  The contractor for this project had previously completed many LEED projects where a CWMP had to be implemented, so past experience played a key role in developing a successful plan.

Unlike the first case study, Case Study 2 did not subcontract a CWM to facilitate all recycling and waste-related procedures on the jobsite.  Case Study 2 implemented its waste management procedures into its contract documents with the subcontractors.  As suggested by King County Solid Waste Division, Case Study 2 entered detailed specifications relating to the subcontractor’s responsibilities with proper waste disposal into its contracts.  This prevented any confusion from arising about subcontractors’ responsibilities as it pertained to waste management. 

Case Study Three

Case Study 3 took place in Fort Worth, Texas.  The project team is currently seeking LEED Certified status.  Goals were set to divert 75% of waste from the landfill.  Currently, 86% of construction waste has been diverted from landfills.

Individuals Responsible for Setup and Enforcement of Waste Management Plan

The CWMP for this project was developed by taking an existing plan from a previous LEED project and modifying it to fit the specific conditions of this project.  Superintendents for this company were responsible for enforcing proper waste disposal in each receptacle.  Prior to construction, Superintendents strategically placed waste receptacles in areas where workers could police the process of proper waste disposal according to the CWMP.  A waste management firm was hired to haul all waste from site.  This firm was charged with weighing materials, obtaining receipts from recycling facilities, and sorting co-mingled debris receptacles.

Process for Setting up Construction Waste Management Plan

This plan was set up by a Project Manager, who was also a LEED Accredited Professional.  The plan was similar to King County’s Sample Plan in the following ways:

Enforcement Process

One of the initial steps in ensuring proper waste disposal for this project was set forth in the subcontracts.  As in Case Study 2 clauses were written into each contract detailing the requirements subcontractors must follow to comply with the CWMP.

This plan utilized color-coded waste receptacles to aid construction workers with waste disposal.  A waste management firm was selected to haul all waste receptacles to proper recycling facilities.  This firm was in charge of obtaining weights and receipts for materials recycled.  Materials such as scrap steel, rebar, drywall, and wood were taken directly to recycling facilities by this firm.  Materials were weighed at a sorting facility for documentation.  These weights were then entered into a database by the Superintendent and used for tracking waste recycling.

On a weekly basis, the Project Manager and Superintendent conducted mandatory meetings with subcontractors present.  During these meetings, the importance of the CWMP was emphasized to each foreman for all trades, and any non-compliance issues were addressed.  Superintendents and Assistant Superintendents monitored daily waste disposal activities.  Notes were made when trades did not follow proper procedure.  These subcontractors were then confronted at the next weekly meeting.  Subcontractors were reluctant to be acknowledged for not adhering to waste management procedures in front of 30 to 40 other subcontractors, so this was generally all that was needed in order to ensure quality waste disposal procedures. 

Evaluation

The utilization of color-coded waste receptacles was unique.  Like Case Study 2, the Project Manager had previous experience in dealing with CWMPs.  Also, similar to Case Study 1, this contractor chose to hire an outside waste management firm to help in the disposal of waste.  This differs from Case Study 2 in that those two studies hired materials-specific waste companies to haul each load to a recycling facility, rather than put one company or person in charge of all disposal. 

Discussion

This study began with one basic idea: identify and evaluate the processes involved in developing and enforcing a construction waste management plan (CWMP), and compare those processes to a proven plan to determine what enforcement methods are most effective.  The results of this study indicate specific elements that increase the effectiveness of enforcing a CWMP.

Contracts

Explicitly setting forth subcontractor responsibilities, as well as detailing waste recycling goals for the project, in subcontracts will decrease the likelihood of future misunderstandings concerning subcontractor involvement in the CWMP.  It is the responsibility of the general contractor to set forth an effective CWMP.  This implies that the general contractor should be knowledgeable about effective waste management and recycling procedures.  It is possible that subcontractors may only be knowledgeable of waste management and recycling procedures if they have prior experience from previous projects.  Therefore, introducing a clause into the contract stating the significance of the waste management goals, as well as the role the subcontractor is expected to play in achieving these goals, will deter future dilemmas.

Progress Meetings

In this study, the projects that ran most efficiently were those whose Project Managers and Superintendents kept everyone on the jobsite informed of waste management expectations and progress.  In many cases, this began before construction was underway.  Subcontractors were asked to come to the jobsite and view waste receptacle locations, go over rules regarding proper waste disposal, and ask any questions about waste management policy.  Weekly meetings are a normal part of construction, and all reported cases included waste management progress and updates as part of the agenda.  During these meetings, subcontractors were reprimanded if found to be incompliant with the CWMP.  Reprimands consisted of verbal warnings, written documentation to supervisors, back charged fees to the guilty party for the added cost of proper disposal, and/or having the guilty party remove and relocate improperly disposed material.

Proper Signage

Cases where signs were visible on waste receptacles in both English and Spanish had fewer incidents of misplaced waste than those cases where signage was in English only.  This is primarily due to the fact that an overwhelming majority of laborers on a construction site in Texas speak English as a second language.  The use of durable sign material, such as metal, also seemed to be more adequate than merely spray painting the name of a material to be discarded in that area, as was performed in Case Study 1.  Case Study 3 used color-coded dumpsters, which helped identify the correct dumpster. 

Construction Waste Manager

Case Study 1 implemented the use of a specific individual to administer to all waste related issues on the jobsite.  While this is unorthodox to some contractors who do not wish to add the cost of this position to the project budget, the CWM can be very beneficial to contractors who lack any knowledge or experience in dealing with construction waste management, or LEED documentation.  Larger, more experienced companies usually have LEED Accredited Professionals within their ranks, acting as Project Managers or Associate Project Managers, and these individuals have the knowledge to perform the same type of duties that the CWM provides.

Construction Waste Management Plan

Proper documentation is required for all projects seeking LEED certification.  Construction Waste Management credits are a small part of this documentation.  The documentation requires a comprehensive waste management plan.  Once companies create one successful waste management plan, the practice is usually to safeguard it for future use, modifying it for each project’s special requirements and needs.  It would be ludicrous to think that one could construct a building smoothly, and with cost efficiency, without having a set of plans to follow.  The same can be implied for achieving construction waste management goals.

This paper identified different approaches to enforcing a Construction Waste Management Plan.  The components that need to be in place for enforcing a successful waste management plan are; specific contract specifications setting out the responsibilities of various parties with regard to the Construction Waste Management Plan, weekly meetings, bilingual signage, and experienced personnel in charge of waste management procedures.

References

King County Solid Waste Division. Design specifics & waste management plans. Retrieved April 9, 2005 from http://www.metrokc.gov/dnrp/swd/construction-recycling/specs-plans.asp

Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design. (2001). Construction waste management. reference package version 2.0, 179-183.

Regal Effort:  Washington’s King County helps contractors establish recycling methods. (2004). Copy Editor, 6, 34.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1998). Characterization of building-related construction and demolition debris in the United States (Office of Solid Waste Rep. No. EPA530-R-98-010). Prairie Village, KS: Franklin Associates.  Retrieved February 20, 2004, from http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/sqg/c&d-rpt.pdf

Wright, G. (2003, November 1). Disposal discipline; Contractors are upgrading their waste management programs to meet impending regulations and the demands of the green building movement.  Building Design and Construction, 44.