SFD Promotion Initiative

Tiruchirappalli
India

Final Report

This SFD Report was created through desk-based

research by Centre for Science and Environment (CSE)
as part of the SFD Promotion Initiative.

Date of production: 26/09/2015

Last update: 19/02/2016
 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by:CSE
India

SFD Report Tiruchirappalli, India, 2016

Produced by:
Suresh Kumar Rohilla, CSE
Bhitush Luthra, CSE
Rahul Sanka Varma, CSE
Shantanu Kumar Padhi, CSE
©Copyright
All SFD Promotion Initiative materials are freely available following the open-source concept for capacity development
and non-profit use, so long as proper acknowledgement of the source is made when used. Users should always give
credit in citations to the original author, source and copyright holder.

This Executive Summary and SFD Report are available from:

www.sfd.susana.org

Last Update: 19/02/2016

 Tiruchirappalli
Executive Summary Produced by:CSE
India

1. The Diagram

2. Diagram information 3. General city information

Desk or field based:
Tiruchirappalli, also known as Trichy, is one of
This is a desk based SFD the largest cities in Tamil Nadu and is known as
an important trade, education and pilgrimage
Produced by: centre. The famous Sri Ranganatha Swamy
temple is located in the city, which attracts lakhs
Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), of tourists every year (TCC, 2015).
New Delhi
The population of city as per the 2011 Census is
Status: 916,857. The density of city is 5,483 persons
per sq.km which is very high when compared to
This is a final SFD
state average of 515 persons per sq.km. Total
Date of production: slum population is 228,518 which is 26% of the
total population (Census of India, 2011).
26/09/2015
Municipal boundary has been chosen for the
current study. It comprises of an area of 159
sq.km (TCC, 2015).

Last Update :19/02/2016 i

 Tiruchirappalli
Executive Summary Produced by:CSE
India

4. Service delivery context Containment: There is sewerage network which

covers 53% of the population. 34% of the city is
In 2008, the Ministry of Urban Development majorly dependent on septic tanks which are
(MoUD) issued the National Urban Sanitation generally not adhering to design prescribed by
Policy (NUSP). The policy aims to: raise Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS). The effluent
awareness, promote behaviour change; achieve from the septic tank flows into open drains.
open defecation free cities; develop citywide Some households are also connected to pits.
sanitation plans; and provide 100% safe
confinement, transport, treatment and disposal Emptying: There are around 30 private emptiers
of human excreta and liquid wastes. The NUSP of varying capacities plying in the city. The
mandates states to develop state urban emptying fee ranges from INR 1000 to 1500 15
sanitation strategies and work with cities to to 22 USD per trip. Apart from private service
develop City Sanitation Plans (CSPs). Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation (TCC)
Furthermore, it explicitly states that cities and operates its own emptier of 4000 litre capacity.
states must issue policies and technical According to city corporation approximately
solutions that address onsite sanitation, 0.756 Million litres of septage is collected per
including the safe confinement of faecal sludge month through 190 trips (TCC, 2015b). There
(USAID, 2010). are no instances of manual emptying reported.
The objectives of NUSP are to be realized Transport: Private emptiers transport septage by
through CSPs and state sanitation strategies. truck mounted vacuum tankers to sewage
As of now there are very few cities which have pumping stations. Septage mixes with sewage
finalized their CSPs, and those plans are also and is conveyed to the Sewage Treatment Plant
not implemented. This remains a major (STP) through pumps.
drawback in implementation of NUSP.
Treatment: There is one STP of 58 MLD
The advisory note on septage management in capacity based on Wastewater Stabilization
urban India, issued by MoUD in 2013, Pond (WSP) technology (TWADB, 2015).
recommends supplementing CSPs with Septage Septage is co-treated with sewage.
Management Sub-Plan (SMP). Still septage
management in India is not prominent due to
lack of knowledge, consideration of septage
management as an interim solution, lack of
sufficient funding and many other socio-political
issues.

There are no specific legal provisions relating to

septage management, but there are a number
of provisions relating to sanitation services and
environmental regulations, which majorly stems
from, The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
and the Water (Prevention and Control of
Pollution) Acts. Municipal acts and regulations
usually refer to management of solid and liquid Figure 1: Private emptier discharging septage in to
wastes but may not provide detailed rules for sewage pumping station (Source: Bhitush/CSE, 2015)
septage management (MoUD, 2013).

Tamil Nadu is the first state to develop operative

guidelines on septage management. In
September 2014 it has passed a Government
Order on “Operative Guidelines for septage
management for local bodies in Tamil Nadu”.
This order is applicable for 12 Corporations, 124
Municipalities, 528 Town Panchayats and 12808
Panchayats in the state.

5. Service outcomes Figure 2: Septic tank connected to community toilet in

Ariamangalam slum (Source: Bhitush/CSE, 2015)
Overview on technologies and methods used
for different sanitation systems through the
sanitation service chain is as follows:

Last Update: 19/02/2016 ii

 Tiruchirappalli
Executive Summary Produced by:CSE
India

End-use/Disposal: There is one STP of 58 MLD lack of clarity in allocation of roles and
capacity based on Wastewater Stabilization responsibilities between state and local
Pond (WSP) technology (TWADB, 2015). agencies, which sometimes leave large gaps in
Private emptiers dispose septage in to four implementation (USAID, 2010).
sewage pumping stations. Septage is co-treated
with sewage (TCC, 2015b). A minimal charge of The following stakeholders are responsible for
INR 30 (0.45 USD) is collected as emptying fees sanitation service delivery in Tiruchirappalli:
from private emptiers. Private emptiers has to
renewal their license by paying INR 2000 (30 Key Stakeholders Institutions / Organizations
USD) every year. The treated waste water is
discharged in to Koriyaar River. Public Institutions Tamil Nadu Water Supply
and Drainage Board (TWAD
According to Census, 59% of city is dependent Board), Tiruchirappalli
on offsite systems and population connected to Municipal Corporation (TCC)
sewer line is 53%. It is assumed that 13% of Tamil Nadu Pollution Control
waste water is lost in transportation, and 40% is Board (TNPCB)
treated and hence shown safe in SFD. User Private Sector Private emptiers
interface directly discharging in open drain or
open ground is around 6% and 17% of Faecal Table 1: Key stakeholders (Source: compiled by CSE,
2015)
Sludge (FS) i.e. effluent from septic tanks also
joins in open drain. Out of 23% of waste water in
open drain around 5% is tapped and treated at TWAD Board is responsible for planning,
STP. designing and construction of sewerage
system.TCC is responsible for operation and
Rest of the 36% of the city is dependent on maintenance of sewerage network. The city
onsite sanitation systems (OSS), out of which corporation licenses private emptiers and allows
34% is dependent on septic tanks and 2% on them to dispose septage in sewage pumping
pits. The public latrines are either connected to stations.
septic tanks and sewers hence are incorporated
partially in onsite systems and rest in offsite Private emptiers and TCC both are responsible
systems. Septic tanks are not contained as they for septage management.
are connected to open drains but pits are
contained as ground water table is more than 10 TNPCB is responsible for monitoring and
mbgl. evaluation of STPs.

There is no clear differentiation between 7. Credibility of data

percentage of effluent and septage generated
from septic tanks, hence it’s assumed to be 50% Two key sources of data are used; Census of
each. Therefore, 17% of FS which is effluent India, 2011 and data from TCC. Most of the data
goes into open drain. Some FS is always left in is then updated by Key Informant Interviews
the tanks and is assumed to be 2%. Whereas (KIIs). Six KIIs have been conducted with
1% of FS from pits is contained in pits, which different stakeholders.
includes infiltration of water as well, and rest 1%
of pits are emptied in pumping station. Overall Data on containment is available in Census.
out of 16% of FS emptied 14% is conveyed Data on emptying and transport is collected by
through pumping stations and is co-treated with KIIs. However most of the data is qualitative.
sewage at STPs. 5% of population practices
open defecation and hence shown unsafe on Some of the issues and challenges are listed
SFD. below:
o Data insufficiency & non availability:
6. Overview of stakeholders • No data available on how many
septic tanks are connected to open
drains and how many are connected
The 74th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1992 to soak pits (for effluent infiltration)
reformed the sector by transferring responsibility • No data available about commercial
for domestic, industrial, and commercial water establishments, institutions etc.
supply and sewerage (WSS) from state o Accuracy: Discrepancy observed
agencies, such as Departments of Public Health between Census data and actual
Engineering and State Water Boards, to Urban ground situation
Local Bodies (ULBs). This transfer has resulted o Data available at different time lines
in a variety of implementation models, as well as

Last Update: 19/02/2016 iii

 Tiruchirappalli
Executive Summary Produced by:CSE
India

o Limited data available on reuse (formal / 9. List of data sources

informal)
Below is the list of data sources used for the
Assumptions followed for preparing SFDs: development of SFD.
o Data provided by Census of India, 2011
is correct o Published reports and books:
o Septic tanks and sewer connections on  Census of India 2011, House listing
ground are as per septic tanks & sewer and Housing data, Government of
connections defined in Census India
o Volume of waste water generated is 80  Service levels in water and
% of water supplied sanitation sector, MoUD, 2012.
o 90% of the people get their tanks o KIIs with representatives from
emptied when full  Government agencies: TCC, TWAD
Board
 Service providers:
8. Process of SFD development Private emptiers
Data is collected through secondary sources,  Residents
and then a visit to the city is done to conduct o Websites/web links:
https://www.trichycorporation.gov.in/
KIIs with relevant stakeholders, to fill in the gaps
in data and to crosscheck the data collected.

To start with, a relationship between sanitation

technologies defined in Census of India and that
defined in the project is established.

The data was fed into the calculation tool to

calculate the excreta flow in terms of percentage
of population.

Overall 60% of excreta is safely managed in the

city and rest 40%, which also includes 5% of city
defecating in open, is shown unsafe in SFD.

Limitations of SFD:
It’s dependent on secondary data and true
picture of the city may differ.

The data available is at different timelines, for

example data on containment is from census
Tiruchirappalli, India, 2015
2011, and data on emptying and transportation
is collected through KIIs conducted in 2015.
Produced by:
Excreta is safely managed or not is dependent
Suresh Kumar Rohilla, CSE
on the containment of the system, and not on
Bhitush Luthra, CSE
whether the waste is safely handled or not.
Rahul Sanka Varma, CSE
Shantanu Kumar Padhi, CSE

© Copyright
All SFD Promotion Initiative materials are freely
available following the open-source concept for
capacity development and non-profit use, so long
as proper acknowledgement of the source is
made when used. Users should always give
credit in citations to the original author, source
and copyright holder.

This Executive Summary and SFD Report are

available from:
www.sfd.susana.org

Last Update: 19/02/2016 iv

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

Table of content
Executive summary…………………………………………………………………………………….i
Table of contents……………………………………………………………………………….….….v
List of tables…………………………………………………………………………………………...vi
List of figures……………………………………………………………………………………........vii
Abbreviations…………………………………………………………………………………..…….viii
1 City context .................................................................................................................... 1
2 Service delivery context description/analysis .................................................................. 3
2.1 Policy, legislation and regulation ............................................................................. 3
2.1.1 Policies, legislations and regulations at national level....................................... 3
2.1.2 Policies, legislations and regulations at state level and ULB level .................... 4
2.1.3 Institutional roles .............................................................................................. 4
2.1.4 Service provision .............................................................................................. 6
2.1.5 Service standards ............................................................................................ 6
3 Service outcomes ........................................................................................................... 8
3.1 Overview ................................................................................................................. 8
3.1.1 Sanitation facilities ........................................................................................... 9
3.1.2 Containment..................................................................................................... 9
3.1.3 Emptying .........................................................................................................10
3.1.4 Transportation .................................................................................................10
3.1.5 Treatment and Disposal ..................................................................................11
3.2 SFD matrix .............................................................................................................11
3.2.1 SFD matrix explanation ...................................................................................11
3.2.2 Risk of groundwater contamination .................................................................13
4 Stakeholder Engagement ..............................................................................................15
4.1 Key Informant Interviews ........................................................................................15
5 Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................16
6 References ....................................................................................................................17
7 Appendix .......................................................................................................................18
7.1 Stakeholder identification (Tab 2: Stakeholder Tracking Tool) ................................18
7.2 Tracking of Engagement (Tab 3: Stakeholder Tracking Tool) .................................19
7.3 SFD matrix .............................................................................................................20
7.4 Map showing areas covered by sewerage network ................................................21

Last Update: 19/02/2016 v

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

List of tables
Table 1: Decadal population growth rate of Tiruchirappalli ..................................................................... 1
Table 2: Institutional roles and responsibilities ........................................................................................ 5
Table 3: Sanitation technologies and contribution of excreta in terms of percentage of population ....... 8
Table 4: Description of variables used in SFD ...................................................................................... 12
Table 5: Percentage of the population using each system technology and method ............................. 14

Last Update: 19/02/2016 vi

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

List of figures
Figure 1: Tiruchirappalli city ward map .................................................................................. 2
Figure 2: Septic tank connected to community toilet in Ariamangalam slum ......................... 9
Figure 3: Vacuum tankers used for emptying onsite sanitation systems ...............................10
Figure 4: Septic tank connected to community toilet in Ariamangalam slum ........................10
Figure 5: Waste Stabilisation Pond at Panjapur ...................................................................11
Figure 6: Map showing areas covered by sewerage network................................................21

Last Update: 19/02/2016 vii

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

Abbreviations

BIS Bureau of Indian Standard

CPHEEO Central Public Health & Environmental Engineering Organization

CSE Centre for Science and Environment

CGWB Central Ground Water Board

CPCB Central Pollution Control Board

CMA Commissionerate of Municipal Administration

FS Faecal Sludge

GoTN Government of Tamil Nadu

KII Key Informant Interview

MLD Million Litres per Day

MOUD Ministry of Urban Development

NIUA National Institute of Urban Affairs

OSS Onsite Sanitation System

SLB Service Level Benchmarks

STP Sewage Treatment Plant

SWM Solid Waste Management

TCC Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation

TNPCB Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board

TWADB Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board

USAID United States Agency for International Department

WSS Water Supply and Sewerage

WW Waste Water

Last Update: 19/02/2016 viii

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

1 City context
Tiruchirappalli, also known as Trichy, is one of the largest cities of Tamil Nadu, located along
the Cauvery river delta, spread across 167.23 sq.km. It is centre for trade, education,
pilgrimage and is the administrative headquarters of Tiruchirappalli district. The presence of
a large number of energy equipment manufacturing units in and around the city has earned it
the title of "Energy equipment and fabrication capital of India". The famous Sri Ranganatha
Swamy temple is located in the city, which attracts lakhs of tourists every year. The city has a
population of 916,857 with density of 5,483 per sq.km, which is very high when compared to
state average of 515 persons per sq.km (TCC, 2015). There are 211 approved and 75
unapproved slums with population of 228,518 which is 26% of the total population. The
daily floating population of the city was estimated at around 250,000 (TCC, 2015a). Table 1
describes the population growth rate.

Table 1: Decadal population growth rate of Tiruchirappalli

Year Population Decadal growth rate in %

1951 323693 -
1961 374284 15.63
1971 478363 27.81
1981 578767 20.99
1991 669452 15.67
2001 746062 11.45
2011 847387 13.58

(Source: Census of India, 2011)

City lies on the plains between the Shevaroy Hills to the north and the Palni Hills to the south
and south-west. The topography of Trichy is almost flat, with an average elevation of 88
meters. The city is located within the geographic coordinates of 10.8050° N and 78.6856° E.
It experiences a tropical savanna climate with no major change in temperature between
summer and winter. The annual mean temperature is 28.9 °C and the monthly average
temperature ranges from 25 °C and 32 °C. As the city is located on the Deccan Plateau, the
days are extremely warm and dry; evenings are cooler because of cold winds that blow from
the southeast. The warmest months are from April to June; from June to September, the city
experiences a moderate climate tempered by heavy rain and thundershowers. The average
annual rainfall is 841.9 mm and because of the northeast monsoon winds, rainfall is heaviest
during the months October to December (TCC, 2015).

River Cauvery is the major source of water for the city, and municipal water supply is 128
MLD (TWADB, 2015). The treated waste water is disposed in Koriyaar River. Community
latrines are unusable due to the damaged septic tanks and broken drainage pipes, leaving
people with no choice but to defecate in open. The nearby drains or open spaces are used

Last Update: 19/02/2016 1

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

by children whereas women wait for the nightfall. The urinals/ toilets are very difficult to
maintain in areas like bus stand due to huge floating population.

Figure 1: Ward map of Tiruchirappalli

Last Update: 19/02/2016 2

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

2 Service delivery context description/analysis

2.1 Policy, legislation and regulation

2.1.1 Policies, legislations and regulations at national level

In 2008, the Ministry of Urban Development (MoUD) issued the National Urban Sanitation
Policy (NUSP). The policy aims to: raise awareness, promote behaviour change; achieve
open defecation free cities; develop citywide sanitation plans; and provide 100% safe
confinement, transport, treatment and disposal of human excreta and liquid wastes. The
NUSP mandates states to develop state urban sanitation strategies and work with cities to
develop City Sanitation Plans (CSPs). NUSP specifically highlights the importance of safe
and hygienic facilities with proper disposal and treatment of sludge from on-site installations
(septic tanks, pit latrines, etc.) and proper operation and maintenance (O&M) of all sanitary
facilities. Furthermore, it explicitly states that cities and states must issue policies and
technical solutions that address onsite sanitation, including the safe confinement of faecal
sludge (FS) (USAID, 2010). The objectives of NUSP are to be realized through CSPs and
state sanitation strategies. As of now there are very few cities, which have finalized their
CSPs, and those plans are also not implemented. This remains a major drawback in
implementation of NUSP.

The advisory note on septage management in urban India, issued by MoUD in 2013,
recommends supplementing CSPs with Septage Management Sub-Plan (SMP) as a part of
the CSP, being prepared and implemented by cities. Septage here broadly refers to not only
FS removed from septic tanks but also that removed from pit latrines and similar on-site
toilets. This advisory provides references to Central Public Health & Environmental
Engineering Organisation (CPHEEO) guidelines, Bureau of Indian Standard (BIS) standards,
and other resources that users of this advisory may refer for details while preparing their
SMP (MoUD, 2013). It clearly discusses on techno- managerial and socio- economic aspects
of septage management in India and provides guidelines for Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) to
plan and implement SMP.

There are no specific legal provisions relating to septage management, but there are a
number of provisions relating to sanitation services and environmental regulations, which
majorly stems from, The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the Water (Prevention and
Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. It also applies to households and cities with regard to
disposing wastes into the environment. ULBs/ utilities also have to comply with discharge
norms for effluent released from sewage treatment plants and to pay water cess under the
Water Cess Act, 1977. The ULB is responsible for ensuring the safe handling and disposal of
septage generated within its boundaries, for complying with the Water Act for meeting all
state permit requirements and regulations (CSE, 2010). Municipal acts and regulations
usually refer to management of solid and liquid wastes but may not provide detailed rules for
septage management (MoUD, 2013).

The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act is enacted
in 2013. This act prohibits employment of manual scavengers, installation of insanitary
latrines. It has laid strong emphasis on rehabilitation of manual scavengers. This act has
become instrumental in eradicating manual scavenging from India.

Last Update: 19/02/2016 3

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

2.1.2 Policies, legislations and regulations at state level and ULB level
According to Constitution of India, water and sanitation is a state subject. Statutory powers
are conferred to the state for making laws on water and sanitation.

There is state urban sanitation policy for Tamil Nadu, drafted in 2012 .The overall goal of this
policy is to transform Tamil Nadu into “community driven, totally sanitized, healthy and
liveable towns and cities”. This policy is yet to be endorsed by the government. There are no
specific laws and regulations on septage management at state level. But municipal laws
have some provisions for septage management and are listed below:

a. The Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920

This is an Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to district municipalities. As per this
act, cesspools within the municipality are under the control of the municipal council. A septic
tank or cesspool has to be constructed in the premises if there is no sewerage or the
premises is more than hundred feet away from sewerage.

b. Tamil Nadu Town Panchayats, Third Grade Municipalities, Municipalities and Municipal
Corporations (Public Disclosure) Rules, 2009.
The Rules are applicable to all Town Panchayats, Third Grade Municipalities, Municipalities
and Municipal Corporations in the State. These rules recognize septic tank desludging as
one of the services to be provided by ULB’s. The rule directs the ULB’s to maintain record of
number of the septic tanks if there is no underground drainage.

c. Operative Guidelines for Septage Management for Urban Local Bodies in Tamil Nadu
(Government Order (G.O). (Ms) No.106, dated 1/09/2014)
The guideline applies to all the urban and rural local bodies of Taminadu. These guidelines
seek to empower the local bodies with knowledge, procedures and facilities. It covers key
elements of septage management: Design, construction and desludging of septic tanks;
Transportation, treatment and disposal of septage; Tariff setting for desludging services;
Information, education and communication; record keeping and reporting.

2.1.3 Institutional roles

The MoUD is the nodal Ministry for policy formulation and guidance for the urban water
supply and sewerage sector. The Ministry’s responsibilities include broad policy formulation,
institutional and legal frameworks, setting standards and norms, monitoring, promotion of
new strategies, coordination and support to state programmes through institutional expertise
and finance. The Ministry is also responsible for managing international sources of finance.
The Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organisation (CPHEEO), created
in 1953, is the technical wing of the MoUD, which advises the Ministry in all technical matters
and collaborates with the State Agencies about water supply and sanitation activities.
CPHEEO plays a critical role in externally funded and special programmes. CPHEEO also
plays a central role in setting design standards and norms for urban water supply and
sanitation (Planning Commission, 2002).

Last Update: 19/02/2016 4

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

The 74th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1992 reformed the sector by transferring
responsibility for domestic, industrial, and commercial water supply and sewerage (WSS)
from state agencies, such as Departments of Public Health Engineering and State Water
Boards, to Urban Local Bodies (ULBs). This transfer has resulted in a variety of
implementation models, as well as lack of clarity in allocation of roles and responsibilities
between state and local agencies, which sometimes leave large gaps in implementation
(USAID, 2010).

Management and delivery of urban basic services in Tamil Nadu is governed by various
institutions. The following are the institutions responsible for policy making, service provision
and regulation of urban services.

1. Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department (MAWSD)

2. Commissionerate of Municipal Administration (CMA)
3. Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board (TWADB)
4. Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB)
5. Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation (TCC)
The following table provides roles and responsibilities of various institutions:
Table 2: Institutional roles and responsibilities

Institution Roles and responsibilities

Municipal Administration and Water The Municipal Administration and Water Supply
Supply Department (MAWSD) Department is committed to implement progressive
schemes for the creation of urban infrastructure,
improved civic governance, delivery of civic services
and making the cities and towns in the State safe,
clean and liveable.

Commissionerate of Municipal The Commissionerate of Municipal Administration is

Administration (CMA) the nodal department responsible for coordinating and
supervising the functions of all Municipalities and
Municipal Corporations in the State except the
Corporation of Chennai.

Tamil Nadu Water Supply and It is responsible for the implementation of providing
Drainage Board (TWADB) Water Supply and Sewerage facilities to the public of
the entire state of Tamil Nadu except Chennai
Metropolitan area.

Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board Advises state on pollution related standards and
(TNPCB) policies. Monitoring of treatment plants. Key regulator
for pollution related issues.

Tiruchirappalli City Municipal

Overall management of the civic services in the city.
Corporation (TCC)
Operation and maintenance (O&M) of urban
infrastructure. Development control. Regulation of
septage management.

Last Update: 19/02/2016 5

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

A host of institutions are involved in management of sanitation activities with varying roles.
While most of the state level institutions are responsible for policy setting, oversight and
monitoring, TCC is responsible for actual implementation. The Municipal Acts place most of
the responsibilities in the area of sanitation to TCC. Three departments in TCC i.e., Town
planning, Public Health Engineering and Sanitation are vested with powers of implementation
of sanitation related schemes/projects.

2.1.4 Service provision

Institutional arrangements for water supply and sanitation in Indian cities vary greatly.
Typically, a state-level agency is in charge of planning and investment, while the local
government (Urban Local Bodies) is in charge of operation and maintenance (NIUA, 2005).
Some of the larger cities have developed municipal water and sanitation utilities that are
legally and financially separated from the local government. However, these utilities remain
weak in terms of financial capacity. In spite of decentralization, ULBs remain dependent on
capital subsidies from state governments. Tariffs are also set by state governments, which
often subsidise operating costs (Planning Commission, 2002a).

Furthermore, when no separate utility exists, there is no separation of accounts for different
activities within a municipality. Some states and cities have non-typical institutional
arrangements. For example, in Rajasthan the sector is more centralized and the state
government is also in charge of operation and maintenance, while in Mumbai the sector is
more decentralized and local government is also in charge of planning and investment
(NIUA, 2005).

In Tiruchirappalli, TWAD Board is responsible for planning, designing and construction of

sewerage network. TCC is responsible for the operation and maintenance of sewerage
network and treatment plant. Public health and sanitation are delivered by TCC through the
engineering (sewerage), health and sanitation department of TCC. TCC and private emptiers
both are responsible for providing emptying services. TCC regulates private emptiers by
licensing.

2.1.5 Service standards

1. Service Level Benchmarks (SLB), 2008: Issued by the Ministry of Urban Development in
2008, It seeks to (i) identify a minimum set of standard performance parameters for the
water and sanitation sector that are commonly understood and used by all stakeholders
across the country; (ii) define a common minimum framework for monitoring and
reporting on these indicators and (iii) set out guidelines on how to operationalize this
framework in a phased manner.SLB refers to improving service through better provision
and delivery. It evaluates the performance of ULBs in providing urban services.

2. General Standards for Discharge of Environmental Pollutants Part-A: Effluents-The

Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 (Schedule VI): Issued by Central Pollution Control
Board (CPCB), a statutory organisation constituted in September, 1974 under the Water
(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.

Last Update: 19/02/2016 6

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

3. Manual on Sewerage & Sewage Treatment, Second Edition, 2013: This manual has been
developed by Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organization
(CPHEEO).It provides detailed design and guidelines for various technologies of
wastewater management.

4. Code of Practice for Installation of Septic Tanks, 1985: Issued by Bureau of Indian
standards. It is a national standards setting body of India. The code specifies standards
and design consideration for installation of septic tanks.

Last Update: 19/02/2016 7

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

3 Service outcomes
Service outcome analysis is based on secondary sources. Two key sources of data are
used; Census of India, 2011 and data from TMC. The data is crosschecked and updated by
key informant interviews (KIIs). Data on containment is available in Census. Data on
emptying and transportation is collected by KIIs. However most of the data is qualitative.

3.1 Overview
This section presents the range of sanitation technologies/infrastructure, methods and
services designed to support the management of FS and wastewater (WW) through
sanitation service chain in Tiruchirappalli. The details on quantitative estimations are
presented in table below and following sections:

Table 3: Sanitation technologies and contribution of excreta in terms of percentage of population

Sanitation technologies and systems as defined by: SFD Percentage

S. Reference of
No.
Census of India SFD Promotion Initiative Variable population

Piped sewer system User interface discharges directly to T1A1C2

1 45.1
centralized separate sewer

Septic tank Septic tank connected to open drain or T1A2C6

2 27.5
storm sewer

3 Other systems User interface discharges directly to T1A1C8

1.2
open ground

Pit latrine with slab Lined pit with semi-permeable walls and T1A5C10
4 open bottom, no outlet or overflow, 2.1
significant risk

Pit latrine without Unlined pit no outlet or overflow, T1A6C10

5 0.3
slab significant risk

Night soil disposed User interface discharges directly to T1A1C6

6 4.8
into open drain open drain or storm drain

Service latrine User interface discharges directly to T1A1C9

7 0.3
‘don’t know where’

Public latrine Public toilet connected to centralized T1A1C2

8 8.5
separate sewer

Public latrine Septic tank connected to open drain or T1A2C6

9 5.5
storm sewer

Open defecation Open Defecation T1B11C7

10 4.8
TO C9

Last Update: 19/02/2016 8

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

3.1.1 Sanitation facilities

This section presents on existing sanitation facilities apart from household toilets.

Public and community toilets: In Tiruchirappalli, there are 306 public toilets and 78 integrated
sanitary facilities (ISF). ISF includes bathroom facilities along with separate toilet seats for
men and women. There are 384 facilities in total, out of which 233 are connected to
sewerage network whereas 151 are connected to septic tanks (TCC, 2015a).

Institutional and Commercial areas: There are 33 public health centers, 2 bus stands, 101
marriage halls, 3 shopping complexes, 11 daily markets. Public toilets are available in
markets and bus stands (TCC, 2015a).

School sanitation: There are 42 elementary, 24 middle, 6 high schools and 2 higher
secondary schools. There is no data on private schools (TCC, 2015a).

Due to lack of data on excreta generated from institutions, industrial areas, restaurants and
hotels. These establishments have not been taken into consideration for production of SFD.
The excreta from public toilets and residential areas are considered for this study.

3.1.2 Containment
The sewerage network caters to around 53% of the population. 45% are connected through
individual toilet to sewerage network whereas 8.5% are connected through public toilets. Out
of 65 wards, 25 are fully covered, 25 partially covered and 15 are uncovered by sewerage
network (TCC, 2015). The rest of the city is majorly dependent on septic tanks. It was
observed during the visit to the city that, size, location, and design of on-site systems are
majorly dependent on the space available, the practice followed in the area and discretion of
local masons. The septic tanks constructed are generally not adhering to design prescribed
by Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS). The effluent from the septic tank flows into open drains.
Some households are also connected to pits.

Figure 2: Septic tank connected to community toilet in Ariamangalam slum (Source:

Bhitush/CSE, 2015)

Last Update: 19/02/2016 9

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

3.1.3 Emptying
There are around 30 private emptiers of varying capacities plying in the city. The emptying
fees ranges from INR 1000 to 1500 (15 to 22 USD) per trip. Apart from private service,
Tiruchirappalli city Municipal Corporation (TCC) operates an emptier of 4000 litres capacity.
According to city corporation approximately 0.756 million litres of septage is collected per
month through 190 trips (TCC, 2015b). There are no instances of manual emptying reported.

Figure 3: Vacuum tankers used for emptying onsite sanitation systems (Source: Bhitush, Rahul/CSE,
2015)

3.1.4 Transportation
The total length of main sewer is 352.4 km (refer appendix 7.4 for sewerage map). The
sewage is conveyed to the only STP located at Panjapur. There are 30 open drains spread
across the city, 20 of them feed into STP and 10 others feed untreated waste water to river
directly. Total length of drains is 801.14 km (TCC, 2015). The emptiers transport septage by
truck mounted vacuum tankers to 4 major sewage pumping stations. Septage mixes with
sewage and is conveyed to the Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) through pumps (TCC,
2015b).

Figure 4: Septic tank connected to community toilet in Ariamangalam slum (Source:

Bhitush/CSE, 2015)

Last Update: 19/02/2016 10

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

3.1.5 Treatment and Disposal

There is one STP of 58 MLD capacity based on Wastewater Stabilization Pond (WSP)
technology (TWADB, 2015). Private emptiers dispose septage in to four sewage pumping
stations. Septage is co-treated with sewage (TCC, 2015b). A minimal charge of INR 30 (0.45
USD) is collected as emptying fees from private emptiers. Private emptiers have to renew
their license by paying INR 2000 (30 USD) every year. The treated waste water is
discharged in to Koriyaar River.

Figure 5: Waste Stabilisation Pond at Panjapur (Source: Bhitush/CSE, 2015)

3.2 SFD matrix

The final SFD for Trichy is presented in appendix 7.3.

3.2.1 SFD matrix explanation

According to Census of India, 2011, 59% of city is dependent on offsite systems and
population connected to sewer line is 53%. It is assumed that 13% of waste water is lost in
transportation, and 40% is treated and hence shown safe in SFD. User interface directly
discharging in open drain or open ground is around 6% and 17% of Faecal Sludge (FS) i.e.
effluent from septic tanks also joins in open drain. Out of 23% of waste water in open drain
around 5% is tapped and treated at STP.

Whereas 36% of the city is dependent on onsite sanitation systems (OSS), out of which 34%
is dependent on septic tanks and 2% on pits. The public latrines are partially connected to
septic tanks and rest connected to centralized sewer network. Septic tanks are not contained
as they are connected to open drains but pits are contained as ground water table is more
than 10 mbgl.

Last Update: 19/02/2016 11

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

It is difficult to determine the percentage of effluent and septage generated from tanks, hence
to reduce the maximum error; it’s assumed to be 50% each. Therefore, 17% of FS which is
effluent goes into open drain. Some FS is always left in the tanks and is assumed to be 2%.
Whereas 1% of FS is contained in pits, which includes infiltration of water as well, and rest
1% of pits are emptied in pumping station. Overall out of 16% of FS emptied, 14% is
conveyed through pumping stations and is co-treated with sewage at STPs. 5% of population
practices open defecation and hence shown unsafe on SFD.

Table 4: Description of variables used in SFD

Variable Description

W2 WW contained centralized (offsite)

W15 WW not contained (offsite)

W11 WW not delivered to treatment

W11a WW not delivered to centralized treatment plant

W11c WW not contained not delivered to treatment plant

W4a WW delivered to centralized treatment plant

W4c WW not contained delivered to treatment plant

W12a WW not treated at centralized treatment plant

W5a WW treated

F10 FS not contained (onsite)

F2 FS contained (onsite)

F3 FS emptied

F3a FS contained- emptied

F3b FS not contained- emptied

F4 FS delivered to Treatment Plant

F8 FS contained- not emptied

F15 FS not contained- not emptied

F11 FS not delivered to treatment

F5 FS treated

OD9 Open Defecation

Last Update: 19/02/2016 12

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

Assuming Census figures are correct; W2 was estimated to be around 53%, which includes
WW from public toilets connected to separate sewers. It is assumed that 13% of wastewater
is lost in transmission hence W11a=13%. Around 40% of WW reaches STP through
centralized separate sewer hence W4a is estimated to be 40%. W15, WW not contained, is
rounded off as 6%, as it includes WW discharged in open drains i.e. 4.8%, WW discharged
on open ground (defined as other systems in Census) i.e. 1.2% and WW from service
latrines i.e. 0.3%. 17% of FS, which is effluent from septic tanks, is discharged into open
drains. WW tapped from open drain and delivered to treatment plant is estimated to be 5%,
therefore W4c=5%. Rest of the WW which is not contained and not delivered to treatment
plant comes out to be 18%, hence W11c=18%. Total WW not delivered to treatment plant,
i.e.W11 comes out to be 31% (W11=W11a+W11c). Around 45% of WW is being treated at
STP, therefore W5a =45%.

F10 is estimated to be around 34%, which constitutes population dependent on septic tanks
and F2 is estimated to be around 2% which constitutes of 2.1% population dependent on
lined pits with semi-permeable walls & open bottom and 0.3% dependent on unlined pits.
Since there is no clear demarcation in quantity of solid FS generated and effluent/infiltration
generated from an onsite system, it is assumed to be 50% each. It is also assumed that 90%
of population (dependent on onsite systems) gets their system emptied when full. Therefore
out of 34% septic tank dependent population, FS of 15% population gets emptied, therefore
F3b=15%. Similarly for lined pits and unlined pits FS emptied taken together (i.e. F3a),
comes out to be 1% approximately, making total FS emptied (i.e. F3) equal to 16%. Whereas
FS contained but not emptied, i.e. F8 comes out to be 1%. Most of the emptied FS is
disposed in sewage pumping stations, from where it gets diluted with sewage and then
pumped to co-treat at STP, therefore F5, FS treated, is assumed to be around 14%. FS
emptied and discharged untreated in environment is approximated around 2%, therefore F11
comes out to be 2%. Since there’s some sludge always left in the tanks and pits, F15 is
estimated to be 2%. 5% of population practice open defecation and hence OD9 is computed
to be 5%.

It can be concluded that excreta of only 60% population is managed safely in Tiruchirappalli
and 40% of excreta is discharged in environment untreated.

The table 3 summarizes the percentage of the population using each sanitation technology
and method along the service chain.

3.2.2 Risk of groundwater contamination

Groundwater generally occurs under semi-confined conditions in the fissured and fractured
zones at deeper levels. Major soil type encountered in city is alluvial soil. It is observed that
in general the ground water is suitable for drinking and domestic uses in respect of all the
constituents except fluoride of higher concentration at Siruganallur (1.85 mg/L) and at few
places are having higher concentration of NO3 than BIS permissible limit (TCC,2015a).

Last Update: 19/02/2016 13

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

Table 5: Percentage of the population using each system technology and method

System Containment Emptying Transport Treatment End-use/

type disposal

Offsite T1A1C2 (Reference Not Applicable. WW of 40%of the All the WW Treated WW
L1): 53% of the population served by delivered at is disposed in
population is centralised sewers, treatment plant river and used
connected to reaches treatment gets treated for irrigation
centralised sewer, facilities, hence W4a is hence W5a is occasionally.
hence W2 is 53%. 40%. It is estimated 45%. It also
that rest of the 13% includes 5% of
T1A1C6 (Reference would be lost in WW which is
L4): 4.8 % of the transportation, hence tapped from
population is W11a=13%. open drains.
discharging their
excreta directly to WW not contained,
open drain. delivered to centralised
treatment plant, i.e.
T1A1C8 & T1A1C9 W4c is estimated to
(Reference L5): 1.2 % be5%.
of the population is
discharging their WW not contained not
excreta directly to delivered to centralised
open ground and treatment plants, i.e.
0.3% discharging- W11c, is 18% which
don’t know where. includes effluent from
OSS.
Total WW not
contained (offsite), Total WW not delivered
i.e.W15, adds up to to treatment plant, i.e.
6%. W11, is 31%.

Onsite 36% of population is It is assumed that FS is pumped to FS co-treated Treated FS is

dependent on onsite 90% of population treatment plant via with sewage, disposed with
sanitation systems, gets their onsite sewage pumping therefore FS WW
hence F10, FS not system emptied. stations therefore FS treated, i.e. F5,
contained is 34% and delivered to treatment is 14%.
F2, FS contained is Since there is no plant, i.e.F4 is
2% clear approximated to be
differentiation 14%. FS not delivered ,
T1A2C6 (Reference between % of i.e. F11 is assumed to
L8): 34% of septage and be 2%.
population is effluent, it is
dependent on septic assumed to be
tanks connected to 50% each. FS not
open drain contained-
emptied, i.e. F3b
T1A5C10 (Reference comes out to be
L11):2.1% of 15% and FS
population is contained-
dependent on lined pit emptied, i.e. F3a
with semi permeable is 1%. FS
walls and open contained- not
bottom emptied, i.e. F8,
becomes 1 % and
T1A6C10 (Reference FS not contained-
L11):0.3% of not emptied, i.e.
population is F15 becomes
dependent on unlined 2%.
pit

Open 5% of population practice open defecation and hence OD9 is computed to be 5%.
Defecation

Last Update: 19/02/2016 14

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

4 Stakeholder Engagement
4.1 Key Informant Interviews
The relevant departments were contacted through e-mail, letter, call and fax prior to visit to
the city. The purpose of the SFD study and depth of data required was conveyed through
introductory letter to respective departments. Overall, 6 KIIs were conducted with different
stakeholders like government functionaries, private emptiers, (see appendix 7.2). The GoTN
operates through its MAWSD. MAWSD is supported by CMA.

Limited documents were available on web hence the visit to city also helped in collecting
data, including unpublished reports. The KIIs and data collected helped in understanding the
existing situation and upcoming development plans in the sanitation sector. Due to limitation
of desk-based study all the key stakeholders engaged in sanitation services could not be
interviewed in person.

Last Update: 19/02/2016 15

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

5 Acknowledgements
This report was compiled as part of the SFD promotion initiative project funded by the Bill
and Melinda Gates foundation (BMGF). We would like to take this opportunity to thank Ms.
M. Vijayalakshmi, Commissioner, TCC, Mr. S. Nagesh, City Engineer, TCC, Mr J.
Arivazhagan, Executive Engineer, TWADB for their support during our visit to Tiruchirappalli.
A special thanks to Dr. Suresh Kumar Rohilla, Programme Director, CSE for his supervision
and guidance at every step of the assessment and report writing.

Last Update: 19/02/2016 16

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

6 References
BIS.1986.Code of Practice for Installation of Septic Tanks – Part 1 Design criteria and
construction: Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS).

Census of India. 2011. Houselisting and housing data: Households by availability of type of
latrine facility. [Online]. [Accessed 29 May 2015]. Available from:
http://www.censusindia.gov.in/DigitalLibrary/TablesSeries2001.aspx

CSE. 2011. Policy Paper on Septage Management in India .New Delhi: Centre for Science
and Environment (CSE).

CPCB.1986.The Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986.Schedule 6: Central Pollution Control

Board (CPCB), Government of India.

CPHEEO. 2013. Manual on Sewerage & Sewage Treatment. Second Edition: Central Public
Health and Environmental Engineering Organization.

GoTN.1920. The Tamil Nadu District Municipalities Act, 1920: Government of Tamil Nadu
(GoTN).

GoTN.2009. Tamil Nadu Town Panchayats, Third Grade Municipalities, Municipalities and
Municipal Corporations (Public Disclosure) Rules, 2009: Government of Tamil Nadu (GoTN).
GoTN. 2014. Operative Guidelines for Septage Management for Urban Local Bodies in Tamil
Nadu: Government of Tamil Nadu (GoTN).

MoUD. 2013. Advisory Note: Septage Management in Urban India. New Delhi: Ministry of
Urban Development, Government of India.

NIUA. 2005. Status of Water Supply, Sanitation and Solid Waste Management. New Delhi:
National Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA).
Planning Commission. 2002. India Assessment 2002 – Water supply and Sanitation:
Government of India.

Planning Commission. 2002a. Tenth Five Year Plan- 2002 to 2007.Vol 2: Government of
India.
TCC.2015. Details of Under Ground Drainage System: Tiruchirappalli City Municipal
Corporation (TCC).

TCC. 2015a. Interview with Chief Engineer at Tiruchirappalli City Municipal Corporation. May
2015.

TCC. 2015b. Interview with Junior Engineer (Solid waste) at Tiruchirappalli City Municipal
Corporation. May 2015.

TWADB. 2015. Interview with Executive Engineer at Tamil Nadu Water Supply and
Drainage Board. May 2015.

USAID. 2010. A Rapid Assessment of Septage Management in Asia: Policies and Practices
in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Vietnam. Bangkok:
United States Agency for International Development (USAID)

Last Update: 19/02/2016 17

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

7 Appendix
7.1 Stakeholder identification (Tab 2: Stakeholder Tracking Tool)
Table 6: Stakeholder identification

No. Stakeholder group In Tiruchirappalli context

1 City council / Municipal authority / Utility Tiruchirappalli City Municipal

Corporation

2 Ministry in charge of urban sanitation and Municipal Administration and

sewerage Water Supply Department, GoTN

3 Ministry in charge of urban solid waste Municipal Administration and

Water Supply Department, GoTN

4 Ministries in charge of urban planning finance and Municipal Administration and

economic development. Water Supply Department, GoTN

Ministries in charge of environmental protection/ Department of Environment,

GoTN

Ministries in charge of health Health and Family Welfare

Department , GoTN

5 Service provider for construction of onsite Local masons

sanitation technologies

6 Service provider for emptying and transport of Private Emptiers and

faecal sludge Tiruchirappalli City Municipal
Corporation

7 Service provider for operation and maintenance of Tiruchirappalli City Municipal

treatment infrastructure Corporation

8 Market participants practising end-use of faecal Farmers

sludge end products

9 Service provider for disposal of faecal sludge Tiruchirappalli City Municipal

(sanitary landfill management) Corporation

10 External agencies associated with FSM services: Gramalaya

e.g. NGOs, academic institutions, donors,

Last Update: 19/02/2016 18

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

7.2 Tracking of Engagement (Tab 3: Stakeholder Tracking Tool)

Table 7: Tracking of stakeholder engagement

Name of the Name of the Designation Date of Purpose of

organisation contact person Engagement engagement

Tamil Nadu Mr J. Executive 11.05.2015 KII

Water Supply Arivazhagan Engineer
and Sewerage
Board

Tiruchirappalli Ms M Commissioner 11.05.2015 Introducing SFD

City Municipal Vijayalakshmi
Corporation

Tiruchirappalli Mr S Nagesh City Engineer 12.05.2015 KII

City Municipal
Corporation

Tiruchirappalli Mr K.Bala Junior 12.05.2015 KII

City Municipal subramanian Engineer
Corporation

Tiruchirappalli Mr T. Ravindran Junior 12.05.2015 KII

City Municipal Engineer
Corporation (Solid waste)

Tiruchirappalli Mr Edison Sewage 12.05.2015 KII

City Municipal Pumping
Corporation Station
Operator

Sri Amman Mr M. Ratnam Vacuum tanker 13.05.2015 KII

Septic tank driver
Cleaning

Last Update: 19/02/2016 19

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

7.3 SFD matrix

Last Update: 19/02/2016 20

 Tiruchirappalli
SFD Report Produced by: CSE
India

7.4 Map showing areas covered by sewerage network

Figure 6: Map showing areas covered by sewerage network

Last Update: 19/02/2016 21