Technical Guidelines for Municipal Solid Waste Disposal

June 29, 1998

DENR ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 49-98

 

WHEREAS, the disposal of municipal solid waste in the Philippines is mostly through open dumps that cause environmental damage and adversely impact on public health;

WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources as the primary government agency in charge of environmental and natural resources management and as Chairman of the Presidential Task Force on Waste Management is tasked with providing appropriate guidelines in all aspects of waste management;

WHEREAS, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources as the primary government agency in charge of environmental and natural resources management and as Chairman of the Presidential Task Force on Waste Management is tasked with providing appropriate guidelines in all aspects of waste management; LibLex

WHEREAS, Republic Act 7160, otherwise known as the Philippine Local Government Code devolved the responsibility for the provision of basic services, such as but not limited to general hygiene and sanitation, beautification and solid waste management to local government units (LGUs);

WHEREAS, the DENR recognizes the value of strengthening its coordination and cooperation with the LGUs in the planning and implementation of solid waste management strategies;

WHEREAS, by virtue of Presidential Decree 1152 (the Philippine Environmental Policy), Presidential Decree 984 (the Pollution Control Law) and Administrative Order no. 90, there is a need to improve the present disposal practices of municipal solid waste to make them environmentally-sound;

NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the above premises, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources hereby adopts and promulgates the following Guidelines:

SECTION 1. Title. — These guidelines shall be known as “The Technical Guidelines for Municipal Solid Waste Disposal”.

SECTION 2. Declaration of Policy. — It is hereby declared a policy of the DENR to provide direct technical guidance to the LGUs in order to promote their adoption of environmentally-sound, technically-feasible and economically-sustainable solid waste management options, through standards and guidelines that could be consistently applied to different LGUs throughout the country.

SECTION 3. Scope. — These Guidelines shall cover the development of new municipal solid waste disposal sites in the Philippines including a phased schedule for the conversion and upgrading of existing dumpsites into a more sanitary and environmentally acceptable manner.

SECTION 4. Role of the DENR. — To ensure the effective implementation of these Guidelines, the DENR shall:

4.1 supervise and monitor the gradual phase out of existing open dumps nationwide in coordination with the Department of Health, the Department of Interior and Local Government, various local government units and other relevant entities; and,

4.2 provide technical assistance in the planning and implementation of the upgrading of existing open dumpsites to environmentally-sound landfills with regards to its adherence to the herein prescribed engineering and environmental standards.

SECTION 5. Role of the Local Government Units. — The LGUs shall prepare and implement local action plans and formulate local regulations to facilitate and support the closure and upgrading of existing open dumps.

SECTION 6. Technical Guidelines for Municipal Solid Waste Disposal. — The Guidelines including its definition of terms, technical norms, environmental quality requirements and operational performance standards are set out in ANNEX A and shall form an integral part of this Order.

SECTION 7. Timeframe for Implementation. — All LGUs are required to fulfill the upgrading plan for existing open dumps as prescribed in ANNEX A in accordance with the following schedule:

7.1 All highly urbanized cities are required to convert/upgrade all their open dumps to controlled dumps within three (3) years from the promulgation of this Order or not later than December 2001; from controlled dumps to sanitary landfill level I no later than December 2008; and, from sanitary landfill level I to sanitary landfill level II by December 2009.

7.2 All independent component, component and first class cities and municipalities are required to convert/upgrade all their existing open dumps to controlled dumps within five (5) years from the promulgation of this Order or no later than December 2003; and from controlled dumps to sanitary landfill level I by December 2009;

7.3 All second class cites and municipalities are required to convert/upgrade their existing open dumps into controlled dumps within seven (7) years from the promulgation of this Order or no later than December 2005.

7.4 All remaining classes of cities and municipalities are required to convert their existing open dumps to controlled dumps no later than December 2009.

SECTION 8. Separability Clause. — If any section or provision of these guidelines is held or declared unconstitutional or invalid by a competent court, the other sections or provisions hereof shall continue to be in force as if the sections or provisions so annulled or voided have never been incorporated herein.

SECTION 9. Repealing Clause. — All pertinent guidelines, rules and regulations or portions thereof inconsistent with these Guidelines are hereby revised, amended and/or modified accordingly.

SECTION 10. Amendments. — These Guidelines may be amended/and or modified in whole or parts hereof from time to time by the DENR.

SECTION 11. Effectivity. — These Guidelines shall take effect within thirty (30) days after publication in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation.

(SGD.) VICTOR O. RAMOSSecretary, DENR Chairman, Presidential Task Forceon Waste Management

ANNEX A

TECHNICAL GUIDELINES

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Responsibilities for Management of Municipal Solid Wastes

The Local Government Code (Republic Act 7160 of 1991) places overall responsibility for solid waste management with the Local Government Units (LGUs). The responsibilities extend to the collection, storage and transfer of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) up to, and including, the point of final disposal. Under, inter alia, the Sanitation Code (PD 856 of 1975) and the Pollution Control Act (PD 984 of 1978), LGUs have a duty to deal with all aspects of the management of their solid waste in such a manner that does not cause pollution to the environment.

1.2 Disposal of Municipal Solid Wastes

The most prevalent method of disposal of MSW currently used in the Philippines is open dumping. Open dumps are considered by many to be the only form of disposal that is affordable to LGUs. However, the basis of the analysis, expressed in financial terms only, neglects the direct and indirect costs associated with continuing and increasing environmental degradation which impacts upon public health and the safety of the population as a whole, viz.:

• impacts upon air quality (smoke, dust and persistent foul odors);

• the presence of insects and vermin, potential vectors for the spread of disease;

• contamination of surface water and groundwater; and

• impacts upon the overall quality of the environment.

When the potential and actual impacts of these latter aspects are considered, there appears to be a fundamental need for upgrading the overall standards of final disposal of MSW;

1.3 National Strategy to Improve Solid Waste Management

In recognition of the problems besetting SWM in the Philippines, under Presidential Administrative Order No. 90 (signed October 1993) an Integrated National Solid Waste Management Systems Framework (INSWMSF) was adopted under the auspices of the Presidential Task Force on Waste Management (PTFWM).

One principal objective of the INSWMSF is to secure the disposal of solid waste, at the highest level of protection to public health and safety and to the environment as a whole, commensurate with what is affordable. A medium-term goal of this aspect of the INSWMSF is the phased closure of all open dump sites and their replacement by more environmentally secure methods of waste disposal. The initial target dates were to commence the phased closure of all open dump sites by 1994 and to achieve full closure of all open dump sites throughout the Philippines by 1996, this latter target being associated with a fundamental shift to environmentally acceptable disposal systems.

A review of the INSWMSF has been completed recently in the first half of 1998, resulting in a revised strategy for improving solid waste management in the Philippines over the next ten years. The strategy, and associated Action Plan, has been adopted by the Government of the Philippines. Objective 14 of the Action Plan identifies the progressive upgrading of the existing municipal solid waste treatment and disposal systems as a priority target area.

1.4 The Fundamental Need for Landfill

The principles of Ecological Waste Management (EWM) have been adopted by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and by the PTFWM as the main strategy to address the growing problems of solid waste management. These principles centre on the so-called 3Rs of effective solid waste management:

• reduction of waste (waste minimisation);

• recovery of waste for recycling; and

• re-use of materials, primarily for energy generation.

Notwithstanding the effectiveness of any of these programs, it is impossible, in the near future, to envisage the scenario of zero waste. Waste will continue to be generated and, with increasing economic development and rising standards of living, it is likely that the per capita generation of waste will also grow, a phenomena well documented throughout the industrialized and newly-industrialising nations. With current technology and available resources, programs for waste reduction, waste recovery, recycling and re-use cannot eliminate waste in its entirety; experience in the western world indicates that even with intensive efforts significant quantities of waste still go to landfills.

 

For alternative waste management technologies to succeed they must, ultimately, be sustainable, from environmental, commercial and economic considerations. The requirement for additional processing of waste invariably is associated with increased costs; at present the use of landfills remains, in financial terms, the least cost solution for final disposal of MSW.

With the exception of landfill, all alternative treatment systems deal only with some portion of the waste stream. Alternative waste treatment systems in themselves give rise to residues that require disposal ultimately via landfill (Table 1). Accordingly, in the short to medium term (next 5 to 25 years), more secure methods of landfill remain the only option for replacing open dump sites.

Secure environmentally sound facilities for final disposal of MSW form one element in an integrated system of waste management based on ecological principles. Landfills should not be viewed as being in competition with other waste management technologies; landfills complement alternative waste management technologies and provides a necessary and an essential outlet for the disposal of residues.

1.5 Scope and Use of the Guidelines

The lack of a technical strategy in upgrading the standards of waste disposal systems has been identified as a major constraint to improving solid waste management in the Philippines. Accordingly, these Technical Guidelines have been prepared as part of Action 14.1 of Objective 14 of the revised strategy of the Integrated National Solid Waste Management Systems Framework.

These Technical Guidelines address the technical norms, environmental quality requirements and operational performance standards for upgrading the disposal systems for Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) in the Philippines. In so doing, the Technical Guidelines identify a number of stages for the phased and progressive upgrading of the present system of open dumping to a system of sanitary landfills meeting prescribed national standards on environmental quality.

Each facility, existing or proposed, should be assessed on the basis of site-specific information and in relation to the environmental sensitivity of the site. Accordingly, the Technical Guidelines do not discuss, in detail, the siting, design, engineering, operation and management of waste disposal facilities but serve to identify minimum acceptable standards to safeguard the environment.

Table 1 Comparison of Available Waste Disposal Systems for

 

					Total
			Typical % of	Typical	residue
Item	Waste	waste	residue of	of treated &	General Comments
	Treatment	treated	treated	untreated
	System	(1)	waste	waste
1a	Open Dumping	100%	0%	0%	Unacceptable due to
					potentially high environmental
					social and health costs.
1b	Controlled	100%	0%	0%	Intermediate stage in
	Dumping				upgrading from open dumping
					to engineered or sanitary
					landfill. For environmentally
					sensitive settings this may not
					be an acceptable stage.
1c	Engineered	100%	0%	0%	Unavoidable need All other
	Landfill				systems have residual wastes
					that need to be disposed of in
					landfills. Least cost solution.
1d	Sanitary Landfill	100%	0%	0%	Unavoidable need All other
					systems have residual wastes
					that need to be disposed of in
					landfills. Most
					environmentally secure
					method of waste disposal.
2a	Waste picking	0.5%	0%	99.5%	Limited to recyclable
	(informal)				materials.
2b	Recycling	5-15%	10%	86.5-	Recommended but limited to
	(varies with			95.5%	recyclable materials, which
	technology				could be better removed by
	and types of				source separation.
	materials being
	recycled)
2c	Source	25%	10%	77.5%	Recommended but limited to
	Separation				only a part of the waste
	Scheme				stream.
3a	Composting	15-25%	10-20%	80-	Recommended but limited to
	green wastes			86.5%	green wastes.
	(low technology)
3b	Composting	50-75%	25-33%	50-	Available technologies exist.
	municipal solid			62.5%	Trials recommended.
	wastes (medium-				Critical to success is securing
	high technology)				a market for the 'compost'
					product.
4a	Bio-gas systems	15-25%	10-20%	80-	Trials in progress; however,
	for green waste			86.5%	limited use.
					Very valuable system for rural
					areas.
4b	Bio-gas systems	75%	33%	50%	Not recommended at this
	for MSW				time. High financial costs.
5	Waste to Energy	50%	20%	60%	Not recommended due to low
	systems and Refuse				calorific value of waste.
	Derived Fuels
6	Incineration	65-80%	15-20%	40-45%	Not recommended due to high
					capital and operating costs.

1. Provides the estimated maximum percentage of waste that can be treated by a specific waste management system, given the present composition of the waste stream in the majority of the Philippines.

2. LANDFILLS

2.1 Classification of Landfills

As noted in Section 1.4, landfills are a vital component of any system of management of MSW; in many cases, a landfill is the only option available to an LGU after the MSW is collected. For the purposes of planning it is convenient to classify landfills into a number of 'principal stages' in the progression from open dumps to fully engineered, environmentally secure, sanitary disposal sites as follows:

• Open Dump;

• Controlled Dump; and

• Sanitary Landfill.

In reality, each 'stage' of landfill development is not discrete but a point on a continuum, involving progressively higher and more sophisticated levels of site engineering, operation and management, all of which may be desirable or necessary but not always achievable in the short-term. While open dumps are considered to be unacceptable, controlled dumps and engineered sanitary landfills can provide effective disposal of an LGU's MSW in accordance with appropriate local health and environmental standards.

2.2 Key Characteristics of Different Types of Landfills

2.2.1 Open Dumps

 Open Dumps have the lowest initial capital investment and operating cost of the three basic types of landfills. They are generally sited in vacant plots of land and are typically developed in low-lying marshy lands, often as a means of reclaiming land for subsequent development. They may be located adjacent to existing residential development because of constraints on availability of suitable land or, alternatively, may attract the development of communities involved in recycling activities. As a consequence of the proximity of residential communities, Open Dumps are often of small size, of limited capacity and pose high potential environmental risks (Table 2.1).

Table 2.1 Potential Environmental Impacts of Open Dumps

Parameter	Potential Impacts
Water	Contamination of groundwater and surface water, and Major effect on water resources and water supply (aquifers).
Flooding	Reduction in flood storage capacity and an increased risk of flooding upstream of the site. Need for costly flood control measures.
Ecology	Loss of wetland habitats, including flora and fauna
Pests	Vermin, pests and scavenging animals attracted to fresh and exposed waste;
Health	Risks from water-borne diseases and potential for the spread of communicable diseases via pests. Contact with clinical and industrial wastes.
Air Quality Safety	High levels of odor and dust because waste is not covered. Uncontrolled settlement beneath buildings and structures constructed on old sites. Landfill gas build-up and migration with potential to cause explosions or asphyxiation. Stability of high and steep faces of deposited waste.
Aesthetic	Visual blight from uncovered waste, blown litter, etc.
Socio-economic	Distress to local residents, stigma associated with presence of dump site and loss in property values.

The high potential environmental impacts from Open Dumps derive from the following factors:

• they are unplanned;

• there are no controls over waste inputs (both waste quantities and waste composition); and

• there are no controls over emissions of pollutants released from waste decomposition.

2.2.2 Controlled Dump

 A Controlled Dump is a non-engineered disposal site at which MSW is deposited in accordance with minimum prescribed standards of site operation. Typically Controlled Dumps have minimal site infrastructure. Controlled Dumps are the first stage in the progression from Open Dumps. In upgrading from Open Dump to Controlled Dump there are generally no significant investments required in capital works or equipment purchases; rather, upgrading is concentrated primarily on improvements to operational and management issues. Basic operational controls include:

• control over size of waste emplacement (working) area, with waste spread and compacted in thin layers in a small working area;

• waste outside of the area being actively worked is covered with soil/sand/inert material, working area is covered at the end of each day;

• covering and seeding/planting of completed areas;

• supervision of site operations by trained staff;

• no fires permitted on site; and

• organisation of informal waste picking activities with scavenging controlled by agreeing 'rules' with the waste pickers (e.g., restrictions on location and time allowed following waste deposition, no disturbance of waste after it has been covered).

 Where resources permit, capital investments should be channeled into haul road construction, peripheral site drainage and litter fencing, supplemented by mobile plant for spreading and compacting waste and inert cover.

 The site of a Controlled Dump is generally identified on the basis of land availability and convenience and is already being used as an open dump; typically a site is not selected on the basis of technical, environmental or financial criteria. Accordingly, there is typically little provision for the management of pollutants released during decomposition of municipal solid waste. Simple and rudimentary control of pollutants may be achieved through good site operational practices and, where feasible, peripheral drainage works.

2.2.3 Sanitary Landfill

 The most significant jump in technology, expertise and technical resources required arises at the transition from Controlled Dump to an engineered Sanitary Landfill. A Sanitary Landfill is a disposal site designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner that exerts engineering control over significant potential environmental impacts arising from the development and operation of the facility. In particular, engineering of the site is undertaken to contain and regulate the uncontrolled migration of leachate (water contaminated from contact with decomposing waste) and landfill gas.

 In siting a Sanitary Landfill, significant effort is directed into identifying and selecting a favorable location with respect to existing environmental conditions in order that the requirements for landfill engineering are kept to a minimum or the overall potential impacts of site development are considered to be least significant. In practice, land availability is often the fundamental factor and most sites for Sanitary Landfills are selected in far from ideal settings, necessitating that the site is designed and engineered in a manner that minimizes environmental impact.

 Allied with engineering design is also the fundamental requirement that the Sanitary Landfill is constructed, operated, managed and maintained to the standards stipulated as the basis of the design. Failure to maintain the specified design standards for all aspects of site engineering, operation and management will inevitably lead to an overall site performance lower than anticipated and, at worst, no better than that of an Open Dump.

 Overall, four basic criteria should be met by both site design and site operations before a waste disposal site may be regarded as a truly sanitary landfill:

• isolation of the waste from the surrounding environment, unless the site is of low environmental sensitivity or the waste deposited is considered to be inert and non-polluting;

• containment, collection and treatment of pollutants derived from degradation of waste, on-going throughout the life of the site and following completion of the site, until such time as the waste has degraded biologically, chemically and physically so as to pose no harm to the surrounding environment;

• managed release of treated pollutants back into the surrounding environment when considered 'safe', supplemented by environmental monitoring to assess the impacts of such releases; and

• full control over site operations, with well-qualified and adequately trained staff supervising and recording the progress of waste disposal.

 The key elements in the progression from Open and Controlled Dump to Sanitary Landfill focus upon gradual changes to site design and key operational management practices, including:

• selection of an appropriate location for the site;

• full or partial geological/hydrogeological isolation of the site;

• designing the site — the civil engineering, operational methods and restoration/afteruse;

• site preparation in advance of waste deposition to aid leachate control and collection;

• phasing of waste deposition to exert maximum operational control;

• control of groundwater and surface water entering the site;

• collection and disposal of leachate (may include simple on-site treatment);

• spreading and compaction of wastes in defined operational areas;

• installation of landfill gas control and venting measures; and

• phased and progressive restoration of the site following waste deposition.

2.2.4 Planning and Engineering of Landfills

 The degree of site-specific engineering undertaken is dependent upon several factors, including the following:

• waste composition, particularly the presence of polluting or toxic substances;

• affordability;

• available expertise;

• environmental sensitivity of the site (prevailing conditions);

• potential impacts and consequences of landfilling; and

• prevailing legislation.

 Notwithstanding the issues of affordability and available expertise, in general the more sensitive the environmental setting or the greater the potential impact of landfill development, the greater the level of engineering that may be required, as illustrated schematically in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2 Typical Standard of Landfill Required for Different Environmental Settings

Environmental		Potential Impact
Sensitivity	Insignificant	Moderate	Severe
Low	Controlled	Controlled	Sanitary (Level 1)
Medium	Controlled	Sanitary (Level 1)	Sanitary (Level 2)
High	Sanitary (Level 1)	Sanitary (Level 2)	Sanitary (Level 2)

 At a fundamental level, a Sanitary Landfill is distinguished from a Controlled Dump by the basic requirement to plan and design the engineering of the site, regardless of whether:

• the engineering subsequently adopted is simple (for example, Sanitary Landfill based upon a philosophy of dilute and attenuate or minimum levels of containment engineering); or

• highly complex (for example, a Sanitary Landfill operated as a bioreactor landfill, with high standards of containment engineering and sophisticated leachate control and management involving re-circulation and on-site treatment).

 Beyond this, the level of engineering is dictated by site-specific conditions and the prevailing environmental legislation and standards. Nevertheless, for planning purposes only, it is possible to recognise at least two fundamental levels of Sanitary Landfill, which may be described briefly as follows:

 Sanitary Landfill (Level 1): Basic level of site engineering undertaken, to minimum prescribed standards, particularly in respect of the standards and methods of containment engineering advocated and in the methods and procedures adopted for site operation and management; and

 Sanitary Landfill (Level 2): Level of site engineering required and established by a risk assessment of the environmental impacts of specified design rates of seepage of leachate. Engineering of the site typically encompasses comprehensive containment, treatment and management of leachate and landfill gas, the latter regulated by prescribed minimum standards for active landfill gas control.

2.3 Summary of Key Characteristics

A summary of the key characteristics of each of the principal stages and types of landfill is provided below in Table 2.3.

Type		Key Characteristics
Open	•	Unplanned, poorly sited and open of small capacity
Dump	•	No site preparation and no cell planning — waste deposited
		across large part of the site
	•	Thin layers of waste — relatively rapid aerobic decomposition
	•	No leachate or landfill gas management
	•	Contamination of surface water and groundwater
	•	No or only occasional cover and with no or intermittent
		compaction of waste
	•	Litter blow within and beyond site boundary — no fence
	•	No record keeping and no control over waste inputs
	•	Uncontrolled presence of vermin, pests and scavenging animals
	•	Waste picking and trading
	•	Significant potential for environmental impacts
Controlled	•	May be hydrogeologically sited, but generally not
Dump	•	No cell planning but waste deposition restricted to small working
		areas
	•	Anaerobic and aerobic decomposition
	•	Peripheral site drainage and surface water control
	•	No leachate or landfill gas management
	•	Regular, but not necessarily daily, inert cover, with compaction in
		some cases
	•	Fence, including provision for litter control
	•	Basic record keeping but no control over waste inputs
	•	Provision of maintained access road
	•	Controlled waste picking and trading
	•	Site covered and replanted following completion of waste
Sanitary	•	Site design based on hydrogeological considerations
Landfill	•	Planned capacity with phased cell development
Level 1	•	Site preparation including surface water control and containment
		engineering where necessary
	•	Primarily anaerobic decomposition
	•	Leachate management with leachate abstraction and simple
		treatment
	•	Landfill gas management with passive Landfill gas measures
	•	Application of cover materials
	•	Compaction of waste to minimum specified target densities
	•	Specified operational procedures to protect local amenity,
		including vector control
	•	Fence, gate and other site infrastructure with surfaced primary
		access road
	•	Full record of waste volumes, types and source
	•	Special provisions and procedures for dealing with special wastes
	•	Fully trained labor force and experienced site management
	•	Provision for aftercare following site restoration and closure
	•	No waste picking
Sanitary	•	Site design based on environmental risk assessment
Landfill	•	Key factors in site design are often hydrogeological site
Level 2		conditions
	•	Planned capacity with phased cell development
	•	Extensive site preparation and containment engineering
	•	Primarily anaerobic decomposition
	•	Full leachate management with leachate abstraction and treatment
	•	Full gas management with active landfill gas abstraction where
		necessary
	•	Application of daily, intermediate and final cover
	•	Compaction of waste to minimum specified target densities
Sanitary	•	Specified operational procedure to protect local amenity
Landfill		including vector control
Level 2	•	Fence, gate and other site infrastructure
	•	Surfaced primary access road and maintained secondary and
		tertiary haul roads
	•	Full record of waste volumes, types and source
	•	Special provisions and procedures for dealing with special wastes,
		including on-site laboratory
	•	Fully trained labor force and experienced site management
		Extended lifetime
	•	Provision for aftercare following site restoration and closure
	•	No waste picking

3. THE PROCESS OF UPGRADING

3.1 Introduction

The upgrading of landfill standards inevitably must take place gradually and progressively over time. It is not feasible to instigate radical changes in one go since the proposed changes need to accommodate the following factors:

• political will on the part of the Government of the Philippines, the LGUs and the public at large to higher standards of environmental quality and environmental protection;

• access to appropriate expertise in the design and construction of more secure landfill disposal sites;

• access to appropriate expertise to operate and manage disposal sites to higher standards than hitherto;

• the affordability of enhanced standards of landfill disposal; and

• access to adequate resources (finance, equipment and manpower) to ensure that the sites are constructed and operated to the standards to which they are designed in order to maintain the environmental integrity of the landfill facility.

The last point is, perhaps, the most critical. The upgrading of waste disposal practices and overall landfill standards will not occur simply through adopting more sophisticated engineering of selected disposal sites — without appropriate operation and management Sanitary Landfills rapidly revert to open dumps with the following serious consequences:

• capital investment in landfill construction is wasted;

• if site engineering is successful, pollutant loadings (volume and concentration) are often greatly elevated in comparison to non-engineered sites, thereby posing a significantly greater threat of contamination to the immediate environment of the site; and

• the public perception of sanitary methods of waste disposal is compromised, thereby jeopardizing any attempts at cost recovery.

3.2 Conversion of Open Dumps

The option of upgrading existing Open Dumps to higher-grade facilities, particularly Sanitary Landfill, is a solution which has several advantages in that it solves two problems at the same time:

• if a new site is chosen the old site has to be closed and rehabilitated; and

• it avoids the need for new land, which is often scarce and expensive.

If carried out sensitively, with due consideration for the protection of the environment including groundwater and surface waters, conversion of Open Dumps may be feasible in some circumstances. However, in the majority of cases, the unplanned nature of the existing development would generally preclude conversion of the site into anything other than a Controlled Dump. Exceptional cases are likely to be found where the site is located in hydrogeologically suitable locations and only a small part of the site has been developed to date. Upgrading of Open Dump to Controlled Dump is relatively simple and relies upon changes more in operational and management practices. Improvements can be made to Open Dumps with little capital outlay and few increased costs.

Simple recommendations and management procedures that have been implemented successfully elsewhere and that may be appropriate include the following:

• rather than owning specific items of mobile plant for site preparation and operation, a LGU may rent the heavy equipment necessary to improve the infrastructure and grading of the site;

• alternatively, the work of maintaining the Controlled Dump and site infrastructure could be subcontracted to a private engineering firm with appropriate resources;

• one LGU may own equipment that is rented to/shared with adjacent LGUs periodically;

• heavy plant and equipment could be rented periodically (about every two to three months) to adjust the grading of the site and excavate suitable cover material;

• subsequently, maintenance of the grading of the site and the application of cover material could be undertaken manually by municipal workers.

3.3 Progressive and Staged Upgrading

Direct upgrading of landfill standards to meet the currently very strict national standards is not possible for most cities in the Philippines. It is, therefore, essential to adopt a step-by-step approach in order:

• to improve the overall standards of landfills;

• to phase out Open Dumps; and

• to rehabilitate existing abandoned dump sites to protect the public and the environment.

It should, however, be emphasized that this is not an end in itself and the upgrading of standards is a continuous process. The eventual aim is that all LGUs eventually reach a level of environmental and health protection in line with national standards. The selection of an appropriate level of landfill design and construction standards should be based upon the environmental impacts associated with the specific site (see Table 2.2), as well as the financial condition of the LGUs and should be evaluated carefully on the basis of site-specific feasibility studies.

3.3.1 Highly Urbanized Cities (HUG)

 Waste disposal by properly designed and constructed sanitary landfill facilities should be provided for all HUC as a matter of urgency. Those HUCs that have sufficient human and financial resources should plan and upgrade to full Sanitary Landfill (Level 2, unless the evaluated environmental sensitivity of the site dictates that Level 1 is acceptable) without undue delay. For HUCs with insufficient resources as an intermediate stage of upgrading to Controlled Dump or Sanitary Landfill (Level 1) will be required.

3.3.2 First Class Cities and Municipalities

 In order to allow for step-wise improvement in landfill practices in less wealthy areas it is essential that medium level standards are developed and selected and applied on the basis of the ability of the respective LGU or LGU cluster to pay. Those LGUs that cannot afford to adopt Sanitary Landfill in the short-term should first upgrade to Controlled Dump and later to Sanitary Landfill (Level 1), as permitted by the resources available to them.

3.3.3 Second and Lower Class Cities and Municipalities

 In order to allow for step-wise improvement in landfill practices in less wealthy areas it is essential that medium level standards are developed and selected and applied on the basis of the ability of the respective LGU or LGU cluster to pay. Those LGUs that cannot afford to adopt Sanitary Landfill (Level 1) should upgrade to Controlled Dump.

3.4 Clustering

3.4.1 Rationale

 It is inevitable that the adoption of higher environmental standards for landfills, as embodied in one of the goals of the INSWMSF for more environmentally secure methods of waste disposal, will result in higher costs for disposal of MSW than hitherto faced by most LGUs. Thus one of the key issues already identified in the process of upgrading is affordability.

 It is well established that significant economies of scale arise from developing landfills of relatively large capacity rather than a series of individual small sites of limited capacity. Consideration of the costs (including efficiency) of a number of items including, but not limited to, the following:

• site acquisition;

• site support infrastructure;

• treatment facilities;

• use of mobile plant and equipment;

• containment engineering and site preparation; and

• provision of environmental controls.

 demonstrate that the overall cost per tonne of waste disposed, or the cost per m3 of void space consumed progressively reduces as the capacity of the site increases and the volume of waste handled on a daily basis increases.

 For smaller LGUs the process of upgrading over time from an Open Dump to a Sanitary Landfill (whether Level l or Level 2) may not be deemed to be affordable in the foreseeable future if the disposal facility is funded solely by the resources of a single LGU. However, a Sanitary Landfill constructed to serve a group (cluster) of two or more LGUs on a more regional basis will generally prove to be more a cost-effective solution than could be adopted by each individual LGU in isolation.

 Accordingly, the construction of a regional Sanitary Landfill offers the possibility of a cluster of cities and municipalities being able to construct facilities that have better environmental controls than could otherwise be afforded by each individual LGU.

4.2 Size of Cluster

 There are no well developed rules for establishing the optimum size of clusters. The development of a regional landfill to serve several municipalities must be evaluated thoroughly by a full feasibility study.

 However as a preliminary indication, the following general guidance may be offered:

• significant economies of scale, in terms of the efficient use of a single set of mobile plant and equipment dedicated to a site, will generally be obtained with a daily rate of waste input of at least 300 tonnes per day. On the basis of an average waste generation rate of 0.5 kg per capita per day, the 'minimum' size of the population served by the landfill, therefore, should be approximately 600,000;

• smaller served populations are still likely to prove feasible although the economies of scale achieved will be somewhat less;

• larger served populations may benefit from significant economies of scale if the landfill facility is able to handle in excess of 500 tonnes per day;

• the location of the regional landfill should be as close as possible to the center of gravity of the population of the area served by the landfill in order to minimize the costs of waste collection and transfer, and

• it is probably economic, in terms of the cost of waste transfer, to service an area within a radius of 30 km to 40 km of the regional landfill facility or within 1 hour to 1.5 hours travel time of the landfill facility. For haulage distances in excess of 10 km to 15 km to the regional landfill, it would be necessary to use transfer stations as a cost efficient means of minimizing the overall cost of water transfer to the landfill.

3.5 Technical Norms

Suggested technical norms, environmental quality requirements and operational performance standards for each stage of landfill are set out in the following Sections:

• Section 4 — Controlled Dumps;

• Section 5 — Sanitary Landfill (Level 1); and

• Section 6 — Sanitary Landfill (Level 2).

The Technical Guidelines are provided to assist LGUs in upgrading landfills in accordance with DAO 98-49. The operational performance standards set out are for guidance as an illustration of minimum acceptable standards.

4. GUIDELINES FOR CONTROLLED DUMPS

Suggested technical norms, environmental quality requirements and operational performance standards for Controlled Dumps are set out in Table 3.

 

Table 3. Controlled Dump

Technical Norms	Environmental Quality Requirements	Operational Performance
			Standards
Site	Daylight hours only where feasible	06.00-18.00, 365 days per year.
Availability	and consistent with waste collection
	and waste transfer operations.
	Avoid nighttime hours which are the	If nighttime working required,
	most sensitive with respect to noise	restrict working times to discrete
	and artificial light, unless the site is	periods (for example, mid evening
	remote from sensitive receivers.	and around day-break).
Road	Good access to the site off the	Permanent roads surfaced
Construction	principal haulage routes.	supporting two-way traffic flow.
	Primary access road constructed to	Minimum width of road 6 m
	high standard to minimize wear and	(excluding shoulders).
	tear on delivery vehicles and maintain	Temporary roads designed to
	trafficability of haulage routes to	facilitate drainage.
	waste discharge areas in wet weather
	conditions.
Surface Water	Isolate surface water and stormwater	Surface water interception ditches to
and	flows from deposited waste in order to	drain slopes upgradient of the
Stormwater	avoid potential wash-out.	area being filled.
Drainage
			Minimize size of active area.
Restoration	Site restored progressively upon	Cover layer — minimum
	completion of filling in any particular	thickness for public open
	phase.		space is 600 mm (300 mm for
			drainage and 300 mm for
			soil).
			Grade slopes to promote
			surface run-off.
			Completed parts of the site
			should be seeded and planted
			will native species of grass as
			soon as possible in order to
			reduce the potential for soil
			erosion
Afteruse	Upon completion of the controlled	Public open space, recreational
	dump the site should be returned to	use, grazing and some other forms
	some form of productive use.	of agriculture (with suitable
			depth of soil) are compatible
			afteruses.
			Building works are not
			recommended.
Other Site	Site support facilities to provide	Provisions may include the
Infrastructure	minimum levels of environmental	following:
	control.
			•	services (electricity, water,
				etc.); and
			•	small site office.
Site	Particular responsibilities with		Experienced Operations
Management	regard to:		Manager with drive and
				commitment.
	•	Securing resource requirements;
	•	Recruitment and appropriate
		training of staff; and
	•	Enforcement of site operational
		practices.
Site Access	Protection of the public from	Access to site regulated. Waste
	potentially dangerous site activities	pickers on site controlled by site
	(e.g., mobile plant).	management according to agreed
			rules and procedures (e.g., no
			setting fire to waste).
Waste	Forward planning of site operations	Quantity of waste loads and types
Recording	and efficient utilization of available	of waste to be recorded manually
	void space.	by a site clerk.
			Information on difficult/special
			wastes to be recorded, including
			location of waste deposition.
Protection of	Reduce impacts of site activities	Key measures are:
Local	upon developments adjacent to the
Amenities	site to minimum levels	•	use of litter fences;
			•	daily liner patrols within and
				beyond site boundary;
			•	prevention offices on site;
			•	elimination of smoke from
				waste on fire;
			•	control of pests and vermin;
				and
			•	reduction in persistent odors
				through the application of
				cover.
Environmental	Monitoring of the groundwater	Monitor existing water wells using
Monitoring			approved water quality monitoring
			methods to determine and record
			the baseline quality of the
			groundwater while open dumping
			was resorted to
			Regular monitoring thereafter to
			establish how controlled dump is
			affecting the quality of the groundwater
Waste	Key issues in waste emplacement	Supervision of waste deposition by
Emplacement	are as follows:	trained staff:
	•	Minimise active filling area to	Restriction of active waste
		exert maximum environmental	deposition area to c. 2 Ha. and two
		control;	faces.
	•	Minimise potential for	Compaction of waste by mobile
		environmental nuisance and	plant to crush large hollow items
		impact to local amenity; and	and a minimum number of 3
			passes of mobile plant.
	•	Maximise available void space.	Limit layer thickness to a
			maximum of 0.75 m.
			Place inert cover materials,
			100 mm thick, on exposed faces of
			waste daily (if available), at the
			very least every 3 days.
			Intermediate cover, 150 mm thick,
			placed on temporarily completed
			areas of waste. Grade to drain
			clean water.
Maintenance	Efficient functioning of the following	Regular daily and weekly
	components should be maintained:	servicing of mobile plant by
			qualified mechanic/fitter.
	•	site roads;
	•	drainage works; and	Supply of spare parts of key
			items and components held on
	•	any mobile plant.	site.
			Maintenance of drainage works in
			advance of rainy season.
			Maintenance of site roads as and
			when required, at least quarterly.
			In wet weather re-grade as
			required.

 

5. GUIDELINES FOR SANITARY LANDFILL (LEVEL 1)

Suggested technical norms, environmental quality requirements and operational performance standards for a relatively simple Sanitary Landfill (Level 1) are set out in Table 4. The degree of engineering assumes a site with 'moderate' levels of environmental sensitivity (i.e., in close proximity to potential surface water or groundwater resources) where the potential impacts of landfill development are not severe. The site engineering, therefore, relies upon in situ strata to provide requisite levels of site containment.

Table 4 Sanitary Landfill (Level 1)

Technical Norms	Environmental Quality		Operational Performance
	Requirements		Standards
Site Design	Based upon detailed site-specific		Prevailing legislation relating to
	surveys, inter alia, of:		ambient environmental conditions.
	•	Geology;		Risk assessment of
	•	Hydrogeology (groundwater);		key-environmental constraints to
	•	Hydrology (surface water);		establish appropriate levels of site
	•	Properties of site materials; and		engineering (as required).
	•	Socio-economic conditions
		adjacent to the site.		Specified mitigation measures to
				minimize potential impact of site
				development (Environmental
				Management Plan).
Site	Daylight hours only where feasible	07.00-18.00, 365 days per year
Availability	and consistent with waste collection
	and waste transfer operations.
	Avoid nighttime hours which are the	If nighttime working required,
	most sensitive with respect to noise	working areas must be provided
	and artificial light, unless the site	with adequate noise screening and
	is remote and/or screened from	floodlighting to minimize
	sensitive receivers.	environmental impacts and health
				and safety risks.
Buffer Zones	Dependent upon siting criteria —	Putrescible waste to be deposited
and Standoffs	where practicable landfill boundary	no closer than 50 m to isolated
	at least 60 m from residential	dwellings and 100 m from more
	properties and at least 300 m from	extensive residential dwellings.
	ecologically and environmentally
	sensitive areas (e.g., school,	Wherever practicable, putrescible
	religious center).	waste to be deposited no closer
			than 100 m to isolated dwellings
	Landfill footprint > 10 m from site	and 200 m to more extensive
	boundary to permit:	residential development
	•	Installation of screening measures
		as required;
	•	remedial engineering measures.
Site	Minimise active operational area	Progressive phased site
Development	(visual impact).	development and restoration.
	Minimise area taken from potential	Area method of filling using
	productive use (economic impact).	cellular approach.
	Return parts of the site to use as	Operational Plan to include fill
	rapidly as possible.	sequencing.
Containment	Protection of groundwater and surface	Minimum level of basal and lateral
Engineering	water resources — no discernible	containment acceptable assessed
(Basal, lateral	impact on existing (i.e.,	on basis of environmental
and Upper	pre-construction/baseline) water	sensitivity of the site.
surface)	quality.
	No discernible impact on the ability	Where feasible, provided by l m
	of surface water or groundwater to:	(or more) of non-fissured,
			remoulded and recompacted clay
	•	support aquatic or plant life; or	with a hydraulic conductivity
	•	be used by humans (e.g.,	less than 1 x 10° ms 1
		irrigation, industrial).
			For attenuate and disperse sites
			criteria to be developed based
			upon existing water quality,
			established groundwater flow
			regime and anticipated
			contaminant loading.
Leachate	Minimize the generation of	Adopt cellular method of filling,
Control and	contaminated water (leachate) that	with cell size based on water
Management	poses a risk to the environment or	balance principles.
	that requires to be processed and
	treated.		Segregate clean water (see
			surface water/stormwater
	Minimize the potential for seepage	drainage).
	through the basal containment
	system and avoid a build-up of	Maximum head of leachate above
	leachate within the site.	the basal lining system of 3.0 m.
			Grade base of landfill to promote
	Treat leachate before effluent is	leachate drainage and collection.
	permitted to be discharged back	Install provision for abstracting
	into the environment.	leachate from the landfill.
			Install provision for simple
			leachate treatment on-site. Treated
			effluent to meet minimum quality
			standards specified by
			environmental legislation.
Landfill Gas	Reduce the potential for:	Install simple landfill gas
Control and			collection system during site
Management	•	gas pressurisation within the	construction comprising vertical
		deposited waste beneath the	gas wells.
		capped surface;
	•	the uncontrolled migration of	Provide passive gas venting or
		landfill gas beyond the site	temporary flare
		boundary; and
			Containment engineering (lateral
	•	the build-up of landfill gas in	and capping) to retard gas
		confined spaces and the potential	migration.
		for explosions, asphyxiation,
		fires, etc. within the site or	Maximum concentration of gases
		beyond the site boundary.	at the site boundary:
			•	methane — 1% by volume;
			•	carbon dioxide — 1.5% by
				volume.
			•	Flammable gas — 30 ppm
				(ambient/ground surface).
Road	Good access to the site off the	Surfaced road supporting two-way
Construction	principal haulage routes with	traffic Minimum width of surfaced
	uninterrupted access to emergency	road 6.8 m (excluding shoulders).
	vehicles at all times.
	Primary access road constructed to	Designed to conventional highway
	high standard to minimize wear and	standards based upon projected
	tear on delivery vehicles.	traffic flows and equivalent axle
			loadings.
	Road routed away from sensitive	Road routed in buffer zone.
	residential developments to minimize	Screening mounds, vegetation
	potential noise, air quality and	belts and noise fencing as
	safety impacts.	required.
			Permanent roads surfaced.
	Maintain trafficability of haulage	Temporary roads designed to
	routes to waste deposition areas	facilitate drainage. Maintained,
	under all weather conditions.	repaired and re-graded on a
			regular basis.
Surface Water	Isolate surface water and stormwater	Surface water interception ditches
and Stormwater	flows from deposited waste in order	to drain slopes upgradient of the
Drainage	to avoid potential wash-out and to	area being filled.
	minimize the production of leachate.
			Construct temporary or permanent
	Where feasible avoid or re-route	berms/bunds to prevent run-on of
	surface flows.	surface water and stormwater and
			to segregate clean water from
	If unavoidable culvert flows beneath	contaminated water.
	containment layer.
			Grading of slopes in filled areas
			(temporarily or permanently
			capped) to shed water rapidly.
			Minimize size of active area.
Groundwater	Isolate groundwater (including springs	Install underdrain system to
drainage	and seepages) from deposited waste in	intercept groundwater flows and to
	order to minimise the production of	eliminate uplift pressures on the
	leachate.		underside of the containment
			layer.
	Avoid the potential for pressure
	build-up on the underside of the
	containment layer potentially leading
	to uplift.
Restoration	Site restored progressively upon	Capping layer overlain by agricultural
	completion of filling in any particular	solum comprising a subsoil drainage
	phase.		layer and organic subsoil and topsoil.
			Thickness of solum depends upon
	Restored slopes consistent with:	intended afteruse.
	•	prevailing topography;	Minimum thickness for public open
	•	slope stability considerations;	space is 600 mm (300 mm for drainage
	•	intended afteruse; and	and 300 mm for soil).
	•	site drainage.
			Restoration Plan to be produced as a
	Minimize soil erosion and transport of	formal part of the Working Plan.
	suspended sediment in surface water.
			Restored slopes lie typically in the range
			1:6 (vertical:horizontal) to 1:30.
			Steeper/shallower slopes are not
			recommended. If slopes are too shallow
			settlement may disrupt the surface
			drainage pattern.
			Completed parts of the site should be
			seeded and planted with native species of
			grass as soon as possible in order to reduce
			the potential for soil erosion and
			desiccation of the capping layer.
			Sedimentation traps as part of surface
			water drainage system.
Afteruse	Upon completion the landfill facility	Public open space, recreational use,
	should be returned to some form of	grazing and other forms of agriculture
	productive use.	are compatible afteruses.
			Buildings and industrial activities are not
			recommended, especially on deep and/or
			large sites (continued settlement,
			leachate and landfill gas generation).
Aftercare	Potential for contamination of the	Aftercare provisions may be of limited
	surrounding environment is high if	duration, extending only to the
	operational controls are not maintained	maintenance and re-grading/filling of
	and site engineering fails or is	capping layer and agricultural solum.
	breached.
			Continued operation of all components
			of the leachate and landfill gas control
			and management systems should also
			be included.
			Continue environmental monitoring
			until stabilisation is achieved.
Other Site	Site support facilities to underpin site	Provisions may include the following:
Infrastructure	construction and operation to specified
	environmental standards.	•	Services (electricity, water, etc.);
			•	Site offices;
			•	Weighbridge(s) and office;
			•	Workshop and stores;
			•	Fuel compound;
			•	Waste inspection/quarantine area,
			•	Vehicle washing facilities.
Working Plan	Guidance on how the site will be	The Working Plan should include the
	operated and developed in accordance	following:
	with the site design. An essential	•	Construction Method Statements;
	component in order to maintain the	•	Phasing Plan;
	environmental integrity of the site.	•	Operational Plan;
			•	Site Management Plan;
			•	Environmental Management Plan;
			•	Environmental Monitoring Plan;
			•	Restoration and Aftercare Plan;
			•	Health and Safety Plan;
			•	Emergency Response & Procedures
				Plan; and
			•	Plant and Infrastructure Maintenance
				Protocol.
Site	Particular responsibilities with regard to:
Management			Operation of the landfill facility as
	•	Forward planning of human,	designed, in full compliance with the
		technical and financial resource	specified Working Plan.
		requirements;
	•	Recruitment and appropriate	Appropriately qualified and experienced
		training of staff;	Operations Manager, with established
			vocational training qualifications (if
	•	Enforcement of site operational	possible).
		practices;
	•	Implementation of H&S Policy,
		Emergency Response & Procedures
		Plan, Environmental Management
		Plan and Environmental Monitoring
		Plan.
Site Access	Protection of site engineering	Site to be securely fenced, particularly
	measures, particularly containment	in the following areas:
	engineering.
	Protection of the public from	•	Waste reception area;
	potentially dangerous site activities	•	Waste quarantine area;
	(e.g., mobile plant, potentially	•	Mobile Plant compound;
	unstable slopes, landfill gas, etc.).	•	Treatment plants:
				•	Active waste emplacement cell(s);
				•	Ponds and lagoons;
				•	Uncapped areas of the site.
			Access to site regulated — visitors to sign
			in. Accommodation for waste pickers
			activities by organizing multiple
			working faces or recycling/picking area
			adjacent to the waste reception area.
Waste	Forward planning of site operations	Quantities, sources and origin of waste
Recording	and efficient utilization of available	loads to be recorded accurately over a
	void space.	weighbridge and logged electronically.
Waste	To try to ensure that only permitted	Specification of permitted waste in the
Inspection and	wastes are accepted at the landfill	Site Licence.
Checking	facility.
			Routine visual inspection of waste loads
	To identify non-conforming loads and	at the waste reception area and at the
	loads on fire.	active face prior to incorporation into
			the landfill. Adequately trained and alert
			and responsive site operatives (waste
			marshalls and banksmen).
			Quarantine of suspect loads pending
			receipt of analytical results.
Protection of	No significant impact of site activities	Range of site-specific operational
Local	upon developments adjacent to the	procedures to deal with potential
Amenities	site.		nuisance.
	Environmental impacts no more	Effectiveness judged against:
	intrusive or significant than assessed
	in the Environmental Assessment and	•	No litter beyond site boundary (excl.
	incorporated in the Environmental		severe weather conditions);
	Management Plan.	•	No fires and no smoke on site;
				•	No mud transferred to public
					highway;
				•	Control of pests and vermin;
				•	Escape of fugitive dust;
				•	Absence of persistent odors;
				•	Noise levels at sensitive receivers.
				Control/trigger levels where specified in
				existing legislation should be used (e.g.,
				ambient air quality, noise levels). Where
				it is not possible to stipulate controls
				quantitatively, effectiveness should be
				judged against a pre-determined response
				time to address any inherent problem.
Waste	A number of key issues are involved in	Supervision of waste deposition by
Emplacement	waste emplacement in order that waste	adequately trained and experienced
	may be off loaded and deposited in the	staff.
	most secure, efficient and safest
	manner, with respect to site users, site	Phased site development and cellular
	personnel and the site environs:	method of filling, cell size optimized on
			the basis of water balance principles.
	•	Minimize active filling area to exert	Compaction of waste by mobile plant
		maximum environmental	to specified target placement densities,
		control (e.g., minimize leachate	typically between 0.8-0.9 t/m3, adopting
		generation);	a maximum layer thickness of 0.5m.
	•	Minimize potential for
		environmental nuisance and impact
		to local amenity; and
			Inert cover materials placed on exposed
	•	Maximize available void space.	faces of waste at the end of each day or
			upon completion of a lift (2.5 m high).
			Cover material — usually 150 mm thick.
			Intermediate cover, usually 300 mm
			thick, placed on temporarily completed
			areas of waste.
Maintenance	Efficient functioning of all components	Built-in redundancy and flexibility for key
	of the landfill facility should be	elements of site construction and
	maintained, including, inter alia, the	operation (e.g., modular leachate
	following:	treatment plant with duty and standby
			pumps).
	•	Site roads;
	•	Drainage works;	Standby/alternate power supply.
	•	Leachate collection and transfer	Preventative maintenance schedule to be
		system;	adopted allied with routine and regular
	•	Landfill gas transfer system;	servicing by qualified mechanic/fitter.
	•	Treatment plants;	Supply of spare parts of key items and
	•	Buildings; and	components held on site.
	•	Mobile plant, fixed plant and
		vehicles.
Environmental	Site operations shall comply, at all	Environmental monitoring to be
Monitoring	times, with relevant National,	undertaken on a regular basis during all
	Provincial and Local Environmental	phases of site development, site
	Legislation currently in force.	restoration and upon, and following,
	Monitoring provides the mechanism	completion of site activities.
	for:
	•	assessing the overall environmental	Measurements should include:
		impacts of site development;
			•	Surface water,
	•	determining, at an early stage,	•	Groundwater;
		potential pollution emanating	•	Leachate;
		from the site;	•	Landfill gas;
			•	Noise;
	•	identifying any deviations from	•	Air quality
		acceptable standards of site
		operation; and	The number of locations monitored, and
			the range of parameter monitored, is site
	•	formulating proposals for site	specific. However, the following
		remediation measures, as necessary.	generalizations can be made:
			Water quality — indicator parameters (pH,
			conductivity or total dissolved solids,
			BOD, COD, ammoniacal nitrogen or
			nitrate, chloride and sulphate) monitored
			monthly at a minimum of four locations.
			More extensive suite, including major
			elements and ions and trace metals
			monitored quarterly.
			Water level — groundwater level
			monitored monthly at a minimum of six
			locations.
			Landfill gas — CO2, CH4, O and
			flammable gas measured routinely, at
			least monthly in confined spaces
			(buildings and boreholes) and along the
			site boundary.
			Noise — weekly measurement at
			locations adjacent to noise sensitive
			receivers.
			Air Quality — measurement of Total
			Suspended Particulates (TSP) and
			Respirable Suspended Particulates
			(RSP) weekly during major
			construction activities, fortnightly to
			monthly thereafter. Sulphur Dioxide
			(SO2) and Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx)
			may also be measured monthly in
			critical/sensitive locations.

 

6. GUIDELINES FOR SANITARY LANDFILL (LEVEL 2)

Suggested technical norms, environmental quality requirements and operational performance standards for a more sophisticated Sanitary Landfill (Level 2) are set out in Table 5. The degree of engineering assumes a site with 'moderate to high' levels of environmental sensitivity (i.e., in close proximity to potential surface water or groundwater resources) where the potential impacts of landfill development are potentially severe. The site engineering, therefore, relies upon a composite lining system determined by risk analysis to provide requisite levels of site containment.

Table 5 Sanitary Landfill (Level 2)
Technical Norms	Environmental Quality Requirements	Operational Performance
			Standards
Site Design	Based upon detailed site-specific	Prevailing legislation relating to ambient
	surveys, inter alia of:	environmental conditions.
	•	Geology;	Risk assessment of key environmental
	•	Hydrogeology (groundwater);	constraints to establish appropriate
	•	Hydrology (surface water);	levels of site engineering.
	•	Properties of site materials; and
	•	Socio-economic conditions adjacent
		to the site.	Specified mitigation measures to
			minimize potential impact of site
			development (Environmental
			Management Plan).
Site	Daylight hours only where feasible	07.00-18.00, 365 days per year.
Availability	and consistent with waste collection
	and waste transfer operations.	If nighttime working required, working
			areas must be provided with adequate
	Avoid nighttime hours which are the	noise screening and floodlighting to
	most sensitive with respect to noise	minimize environmental impacts and
	and artificial light, unless remote	health and safety risks.
	and/or screened from sensitive
	receivers.
Buffer Zones	Dependent upon siting criteria —	Putrescible waste to be deposited no
and Standoffs	where practicable landfill boundary	closer than 50 m to isolated dwellings
	at least 100 m from residential	and 100 m from more extensive
	properties and at least 500 m from	residential dwellings.
	ecologically and environmentally
	sensitive areas (e.g., school, religious
	center).	Wherever practicable, putrescible waste
			to be deposited no closer than 200 m
	Landfill footprint > 20 m from site	to isolated dwellings and 250 m to more
	boundary to permit:	extensive residential development.
	•	installation of screening measures
		as required; and
	•	remedial engineering measures.
Site	Minimize active operational area	Progressive phased site development
Development	(visual impact).	and restoration.
	Minimize area taken from potential	Area method of filling using cellular
	productive use (economic impact).	approach.
	Return parts of the site to use as	Operational Plan to include fill
	rapidly as possible.	sequencing.
Containment	Protection of groundwater and surface	Maximum specified permissible leakage
Engineering	water resources — no discernible	rate determined from a risk assessment
(Basal, lateral	impact on existing (i.e.,	of the anticipated impact of the
and Upper	pre-construction baseline) water	seepage of leachate. Based upon the
surface)	quality.	environmental sensitivity of the site.
	No discernible impact on the ability of	Minimum standard is a multi-layered
	surface water or groundwater to:	system, with synthetic and natural
			components, comprising 1.5 mm/2 mm
	•	support aquatic or plant life; or	HDPE combined with 0.6 m of clay with
	•	be used by humans (e.g., irrigation,	a permeability, <1.0 x 109 ms4.
		industrial).
Leachate	Minimize the generation of	Adopt cellular method of filling, with cell
Control and	contaminated water (leachate) that	size based on water balance principles.
Management	poses a risk to the environment or	Advocate leachate recirculation to dry
	that requires to be processed and	absorptive waste where feasible.
	treated.	Segregate clean water (see surface
	Minimize the potential for seepage	water/stormwater drainage).
	through the basal containment system
	and avoid a build-up of leachate within	Maximum head of leachate above the
	the site.	basal lining system of 1.0 m.
			Install leachate collection system above
	Treat leachate before effluent is	the basal containment layer.
	permitted to be discharged back into	Minimum hydraulic conductivity of
	the environment.	drainage layer - 1 x 10-4 ms-4.
			Install provision for abstracting leachate
			from the landfill;
			Install provision for leachate treatment
			on-site or off-site at a suitable Sewage
			Treatment Plant (STP).
			Treated effluent to meet minimum
			quality standards specified by
			prevailing environmental legislation with
			respect to effluent standards.
Landfill Gas	Reduce the potential for the	Install landfill gas collection system
Control and	uncontrolled migration of landfill gas	during site construction comprising
Management	beyond the site boundary.	vertical gas wells and horizontal
			collection pipes.
	Reduce the potential for gas	Containment engineering (lateral and
	pressurisation within the deposited	capping) to retard gas migration.
	waste beneath the capped surface.
			For large and/or deep sites install
	Avoid build-up of landfill gas in	active landfill gas extraction system, with
	confined spaces and the potential for	gas plant, in order to regulate gas
	explosions, asphyxiation, fires, etc.	pressure within the landfill. Specify
	within the site or beyond the site	maximum permitted pressure above
	boundary.	atmospheric pressure at a depth of 1 m
			below the capping layer (typical value -
			10 mb above atmospheric).
			Maximum concentration of gases at the
			site boundary:
			•	methane — 1% by volume;
			•	carbon dioxide — 1.5 8 by volume;
			•	Flammable gas — 30 ppm (ambient/
				ground surface)
Road	Good access to the site off the	Surfaced road supporting two-way
Construction	principal haulage routes with	traffic. Minimum width of surfaced road
	uninterrupted access to emergency	7.3 m (excluding shoulders).
	vehicles at all times.
	Primary access road constructed to	Designed to conventional highway
	high standard to minimize	standards based upon projected traffic
	wear-and-tear on delivery vehicles.	flows and equivalent axle loadings.
	Road routed away from sensitive	Road routed in buffer zone. Screening
	residential developments to minimize	mounds, vegetation belts and noise
	potential noise, air quality and safety	fencing as required.
	impacts.
			Permanent roads surfaced. Temporary
	Maintain trafficability of haulage	roads designed to facilitate drainage.
	routes to waste deposition areas	Maintained, repaired and re-graded on
	under all weather conditions.	a regular basis.
Surface Water	Isolate surface water and stormwater	Surface water interception ditches to
and	flows from deposited waste in order to	drain slopes upgradient of the area
Stormwater	avoid potential wash-out and to	being filled.
Drainage	minimize the production of leachate.
			Construct temporary or permanent
	Where feasible avoid or re-route	berms/bunds to prevent run-on of
	surface flows.	surface water and stormwater and to
	If unavoidable culvert flows beneath	segregate clean water from
	containment layer.	contaminated water.
			Grading of slopes in filled areas
			(temporarily or permanently capped)
			to shed water rapidly.
			Minimize size of active area
Groundwater	Isolate groundwater (including springs	Install underdrain system to intercept
Drainage	and seepages) from deposited waste in	groundwater flows and to eliminate
	order to minimize the production of	uplift pressures on the underside of the
	leachate.	containment layer.
	Avoid the potential for pressure
	build-up on the underside of the
	containment layer potentially leading
	to uplift.
Restoration	Site restored progressively upon	Capping layer overlain by agricultural
	completion of filling in any particular	solum comprising a subsoil drainage
	phase.	layer and organic subsoil and topsoil.
			Thickness of solum depends upon
	Restored slopes consistent with:	intended afteruse. Minimum thickness
			for public open space is 600 m (300
	•	prevailing topography;	mm for drainage and 300 mm for soil).
	•	slope stability considerations;
	•	intended afteruse; and	Restoration Plan to be produced as a
	•	site drainage.	formal part of the Working Plan.
			Restored slopes lie typically in the range
	Minimize soil erosion and transport of	1:4 (vertical:horizontal) to 1:30.
	suspended sediment in surface water.	Steeper and shallower slopes are
			not recommended. If slopes are too
			shallow settlement may disrupt the
			surface drainage pattern.
			Completed parts of the site should be
			seeded and planted with native species
			of grass as soon as possible in order to
			reduce the potential for soil erosion and
			desiccation of the capping layer.
			Sedimentation traps as part of surface
			water drainage system.
Afteruse	Upon completion the landfill facility	Public open space, recreational use,
	should be returned to some form of	grazing and other forms of agriculture
	productive use.	are compatible afteruses.
			Buildings and industrial activities are not
			recommended, especially on deep and/or
			large sites (continued settlement, leachate
			and landfill gas generation).
Aftercare	Potential for contamination of the	Aftercare Plan to be produced as formal
	surrounding environment is high if	part of the Working plan.
	operational controls are not maintained
	and site engineering fails or is breached.
			Continued operation of all components
			of the leachate and landfill gas control
			and management systems.
			Continued environmental monitoring.
			Maintenance and re-grading/filling of
			capping layer and agricultural solum.
Other Site	Site support facilities to underpin site	Provisions may include the following:
Infrastructure	construction and operation to high
	environmental standards.	•	Services (electricity, water, etc.);
			•	Site offices;
			•	Amenity block and messroom;
			•	Weighbridge(s) and office;
			•	Workshop and stores;
			•	Fuel compound;
			•	Waste inspection/quarantine area;
			•	On-site laboratory; and
			•	Vehicle washing facilities.
Working Plan	Guidance on how the site will be	The Working Plan should include the
	operated and developed in accordance	following:
	with the site design. An essential	•	Construction Method Statements;
	component in order to maintain the	•	Construction Quality Assurance
	environmental integrity of the site.		Protocol;
			•	Construction Program;
			•	Phasing Plan;
			•	Operational Plan;
			•	Site Management Plan;
			•	Environmental Management Plan;
			•	Environmental Monitoring Plan;
			•	Restoration and Aftercare Plan;
			•	Health and Safety Plan;
			•	Emergency Response & Procedures
				Plan; and
			•	Plant and Infrastructure Maintenance
				Protocol.
Site	Particular responsibilities with regard	Operation of the landfill facility as
Management	to:		designed, in full compliance with the
	•	Forward planning of human,	specified Working Plan.
		technical and financial resource
		requirements;	Appropriately qualified and experienced
	•	Recruitment and appropriate	Operations Manager, with established
		training of staff;	vocational training qualifications (if
	•	Enforcement of site operational	possible).
		practices;
	•	Implementation of H&S Policy,
		Emergency Response & Procedures
		Plan, Environmental Management
		Plan and Environmental Monitoring
		Plan.
Site Access	Protection of site engineering	Site to be securely fenced, particularly
	measures, particularly containment	in the following areas:
	engineering.
	Protection of the public from	•	Waste reception area;
	potentially dangerous site activities	•	Waste quarantine area;
	(e.g., mobile plant, potentially	•	Mobile Plant compound;
	unstable slopes, landfill gas, etc.).	•	Treatment plants;
			•	Active waste emplacement cell(s);
			•	Ponds and lagoons;
			•	Uncapped areas of the site.
			Access to site regulated — visitors to sign
			in. No waste pickers permitted on site.
Waste	Forward planning of site operations	Quantities, sources and origin of waste
Recording	and efficient utilization of available	loads to be recorded accurately over a
	void space.	weighbridge and logged electronically.
Waste	To try to ensure that only permitted	Specification of permitted waste in the
Inspection and	wastes are accepted at the landfill	Site Licence.
Checking	facility.
			Routine visual inspection of waste loads
	To identify non-conforming loads and	at the waste reception area and at the
	loads on fire.	active face prior to incorporation into
			the landfill. Adequately trained and alert
			and responsive site operatives (waste
			marshalls and banksmen).
			Chemical and physical analysis of waste
			loads at random and when the load is
			suspect. Quarantine of suspect loads
			pending receipt of analytical results.
Protection of	No significant impact of site activities	Range of site-specific operational
Local	upon developments adjacent to the	procedures to deal with potential
Amenities	site. Environmental impacts no more	nuisance.
	intrusive or significant than assessed	Effectiveness judged against:
	in the Environmental Assessment and
	incorporated in the Environmental	•	No litter beyond site boundary
	Management Plan.		(excluding severe weather
				conditions);
			•	No fires and no smoke on site;
			•	No mud transferred to public
				highway;
			•	Control of pests and vermin;
			•	Escape of fugitive dust;
			•	Absence of persistent odors;
			•	Noise levels at sensitive receivers.
			Control/trigger levels where specified in
			existing legislation should be used (e.g.,
			ambient air quality, noise levels). Where
			it is not possible to stipulate controls
			quantitatively, effectiveness should be
			judged against a pre-determined response
			time to address any inherent problem.
Waste	A number of key issues are involved in	Supervision of waste deposition by
Emplacement	waste emplacement in order that waste	adequately trained and experienced
	may be off loaded and deposited in the	staff.
	most secure, efficient and safest
	manner, with respect to site users, site	Phased site development and cellular
	personnel and the site environs:	method of filling; cell size optimized on
			the basis of water balance principles.
	•	Minimize active filling area to exert	Compaction of waste by mobile plant
		maximum environmental control	to specified target placement densities,
		(e.g. minimize leachate generation);	typically between 0.8-0.9 t/m3,
			adopting a maximum layer thickness of
	•	Minimize potential for	0.5m.
		environmental nuisance and
		impact to local amenity; and	Inert cover materials placed on exposed
			faces of waste at the end of each day or
	•	Maximize available void space.	upon completion of a life (2.5 m high).
			Cover material — usually 150 mm thick.
			Intermediate cover, usually 300 mm
			thick, placed on temporarily completed
			areas of waste.
Maintenance	Efficient functioning of all components	Built-in redundancy and flexibility for key
	of the landfill facility should be	elements of site construction and
	maintained, including, inter alia, the	operation (e.g., modular leachate
	following:	treatment plant with duty and standby
			pumps).
	•	Site roads;
	•	Drainage works;	Standby/alternate power supply.
	•	Leachate collection and transfer
		system;	Preventative maintenance schedule to be
	•	Landfill gas transfer system;	adopted allied with routine and regular
	•	Treatment plants;	servicing by qualified mechanic/fitter.
	•	Buildings; and
	•	Mobile plant, fixed plant and	Supply of spare parts of key items and
		vehicles.	components held on site.
Environmental	Site operations shall comply, at all	Environmental monitoring to be
Monitoring	times, with relevant National,	undertaken on a regular basis during all
	Provincial and Local Environmental	phases of site development, site
	Legislation currently in force.	restoration and upon, and following,
	Monitoring provides the mechanism	completion of site activities.
	for:
	•	Assessing the overall environmental	Measurements should include:
		impacts of site development;
			•	Surface water,
	•	determining, at an early stage,	•	Groundwater;
		potential pollution emanating	•	Leachate;
		from the site;	•	Landfill gas;
			•	Noise;
	•	identifying any deviations from	•	Air quality
		acceptable standards of site
		operation; and
	•	formulating proposals for site	The number of locations monitored, and
		remediation measures, as necessary.	the range of parameter monitored, is site
			specific. However, the following
			generalizations can be made:
			Water quality — indicator parameters (pH,
			conductivity or total dissolved solids,
			BOD, COD, ammoniacal nitrogen or
			nitrate, chloride and sulphate) monitored
			monthly at a minimum of four locations.
			More extensive suite, including major
			elements and ions and trace metals
			monitored quarterly.
			Water level — groundwater level
			monitored monthly at a minimum of six
			locations.
			Landfill gas — CO2, CH4, O and
			flammable gas measured routinely, at
			least monthly in confined spaces
			(buildings and boreholes) and along the
			site boundary.
			Noise — weekly measurement at
			locations adjacent to noise sensitive
			receivers.
			Air Quality — measurement of Total
			Suspended Particulates (TSP) and
			Respirable Suspended Particulates
			(RSP) weekly during major
			construction activities, fortnightly to
			monthly thereafter. Sulphur Dioxide
			(SO2) and Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx)
			may also be measured monthly in
			critical/sensitive locations.

7. ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS

The construction and operation of Sanitary Landfills will generally conform to standards laid down in existing rules and regulations governing environmental quality. In particular, attention is drawn to the following legislation, current at the time of publishing these Technical Guidelines:

DAO 90-34 : Revised water usage and classification, Water Quality criteria amending Section Nos. 68 and 69, Chapter III of the 1978 NPCC Rules and Regulations;

DAO 90-35 : Revised effluent regulations of 1990, revising and amending the effluent regulations of 1982;

DAO 93-14 : Revising Chapter II, Sections 57 to 66 of the 1978 Implementing Rules and Regulations for P.D. 984 (Air Quality);

DOH 1993 : Philippine National Standards for Drinking Water; and

National Pollution Control Commission (1978): Noise Control Regulations

The Project Management Office of the

Presidential Task Force on Waste Management Staff

NOLAN B. FRANCISCO

Technical Staff:

ARNOLD S. BUFI

 

ENRICO P. MEDINA

MA. DELIA CRISTINA M. VALDEZ

MARGARITA M. TUMALAD

RALPH E. FLAUTA

RAUL T. JARDIN

MYRNA M. FORTU

LUCILA B. GRANADO

BUTCH P. BLAQUERA

JANNET S. YANTO

ARVL P. MIGUEL

Administrative Staff:

JESSIE O. TAÑOLA

CYNTHIA C. EVARDONE

ANTONIO R. ROL

FELIPE L. PESQUIZA