Guide to Better Practice at Resource Recovery Centres
Published by Sustainability Victoria, revised 2019, developed with input from the Environment Protection Authority Victoria, WorkSafe Victoria and a project advisory group of industry, local and state government representatives. Rawtec contributed to this work.
Summary published
Victoria’s waste system moved 12.8 million tonnes of material in 2016–17 and is expected to reach 21 million tonnes a year by 2045. This is the guide written for the facilities that have to absorb that.
It does something unusual for a government guide: it refuses to set standards by facility size. “Each facility is unique and has different needs and circumstances, so it is unrealistic to specify better practice standards by facility size.” Instead it gives you five performance areas and a self-assessment against each.
It also chose its own title carefully. Not best practice but better practice, because “best practice implies that no further improvements or innovation are possible”.
Material in Victoria’s waste system, 2016–17
Projected annual generation by 2045
Facility categories, by annual throughput
Pages, 43 tables, 40 figures
How the guide is built
Five performance areas, used twice
Risk management, meeting stakeholder needs, smart materials management, financial sustainability and futureproofing. The same five structure both the site development assessment and the site operations assessment, so a facility is measured on the same terms whether it is being designed or being run.
Three categories by throughput
Category 1 is 0 to 1,000 tonnes a year, Category 2 is 1,001 to 30,000, and Category 3 is more than 30,000. Larger facilities are stated to achieve greater economies of scale — but the guide still declines to set different standards for them.
Traffic design is the dominant safety theme
One-way flow with minimal intersections, separated access for cars, trucks and pedestrians, minimised reversing, and maximised line of sight for supervision. Nearly every case study in the companion series independently arrived at the same conclusion.
Use the topography instead of building it
“Use natural site features to take advantage of elevation for site supervision and to minimise the works required.” The split-level principle, stated as a cost control rather than an aesthetic.
The hard numbers are few and firm
A perimeter mesh fence at least two metres high. Fall protection at two metres or more. Putrescible waste stored ideally no more than 24 hours. E-waste on an impermeable, bunded surface under cover per AS/NZS 5377:2013. Roads wide enough for two of the largest expected vehicles.
Put the recyclables before the mixed waste
Recyclable drop-offs should be located ahead of the mixed waste point so they are not affected by queuing. A layout decision that costs nothing at design stage and cannot be fixed later.
Holiday towns are a different problem
Seasonal locations generate 30 to 40% of total annual waste volume over the holiday period. Regional and remote sites are told to limit accepted materials to those with viable end markets, because transport distance to metropolitan markets governs everything.
What it tells you to do
Planning requirements, approval authorities and permits first. The designer also carries an OHS Act duty that a building or structure be “safe and without risks to the health of people working there”.
Gatehouse with load inspection, recording and CCTV; elevated mirrors or platforms for viewing loads; weighbridges with data capture, two for large facilities so incoming and outgoing are separate.
Consistent signage across facilities, visually distinct coloured containers, illuminated signage for after hours, multi-language and low-literacy support, and an educational component.
Especially at regional and remote sites. Accepting a stream with no buyer creates a stockpile, not a diversion.
Siting on established or rehabilitated waste management land is preferred, with an environment improvement plan where there are neighbours, and a post-closure rehabilitation and future use plan from the start.
Space for future streams and growth, and explicit planning for technology and legislative change. The guide treats futureproofing as one of its five assessment areas, not an afterthought.
The guide is Victoria-specific and keyed to Victorian legislation, the EPA, WorkSafe and Sustainability Victoria programs. It deliberately does not specify gate fee amounts, noise limits or buffer distances, referring those to the relevant regulations and planning schemes. Sustainability Victoria “gives no warranty regarding its accuracy, completeness, currency or suitability for any particular purpose”.
The five facility case studies
Published alongside the guide, each showing part of it in practice.
The full guide runs to more than 111 pages with 43 tables, including the self-assessment tables, container comparison tables and worked layout examples for small and large sites.
Planning a facility upgrade?
Most facility projects start with someone who already knows the site needs to change and needs the evidence to get it funded. If that is you, we would like to hear from you.