“closure of existing illegal waste sites”...scavenging, reuse or recycling and sanitary disposal...

Environmental Assessment

Istanbul Municipal Infrastructure Project i

T.R. ISTANBUL METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY

ISTANBUL MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT (IMIP)

“Closure of Existing Illegal Waste Sites”

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REPORT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN

Category B

Prepared By : Aqwadem Consulting Date : January 31, 2007

E1617

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized


Istanbul Municipal Infrastructure Project ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. BACKGROUND....................................................................................................... 1 II. POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK.............................. 5 III. ISTANBUL MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT (IMIP)

DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................... 14 IV. CLOSURE OF EXISTING ILLEGAL WASTE SITES ......................................... 18

ANNEX A - Baseline information on the European side Wild Dumps 23 ANNEX B - Environmental Management Plan for 40 Closure of Existing Illegal Waste Sites


Istanbul Municipal Infrastructure Project 1

I. BACKGROUND

Solid Waste In Turkey : In Turkey, the solid waste management issue is getting more important each year for the last decade, because of the increasing population and changes in lifestyle which give rise to increase in solid waste generation and changes in the composition. TThe increasing waste quantities (from 15 million tonnes in 1991 to 25.0 million tonnes in 2004 and reaching to an anticipated 30 million ton levels in 2010 has become a major environmental concern. Turkey’s municipal solid waste generally consists of wastes generated from residential and commercial areas, industries, parks and streets, and is not sorted at the source effectively; despite presence of .the recent Packaging Waste Control Regulation (2004) Composting plants have been installed in some cities while in other centers disposal practices vary from landfilling to dumping in quarries, stream and even the sea. Responsibility related to collection, transportation, sanitary disposal and recovery of solid wastes belongs to municipalities and metropolitan municipalities as per the applicable legislation. The Ministry of Environment and Forestry has the role to regulate the system. In Turkey, waste management refers to collection, transportation and disposal of the wastes and city street cleaning in most municipalities. Currently, with the exception scavenging, reuse or recycling and sanitary disposal of municipal wastes are not widely used practices.

YEAR 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 2001 2002 2003 2004 Number of municipalities receiving solid waste services

1,985 2,126 2,172 2,275 2,579 2,915 2,984 3,018 3,028

Population served (%) 71 72 71 71 72 75 76 77 77 Quantity of solid waste collected (1000 tonnes/year)

17,757 20,910 22,483 24,180 24,945 25,134 25,373 26,118 25,014

Solid waste generated per capita (kg/capita-day)

1.10 1.27 1.37 1.48 1.51 1.35 1.34 1.38 1.31

Number of Regulated landfills 2 6 6 8 8 12 12 15 16Source: State Statistical Institute of Turkey, Environmental Statistics According to surveys conducted by the State Statistical Institute (SSI), total waste collected by municipalities in Turkey is around 25 million tonnes since 1998. The amount of waste per capita is around 1,34 kg/capita-day. These figures correspond to Domestic / municipal waste sourced from:

• Houses (approx. 80%) • Commercial and domestic industrial (approx. 15%) • City maintenance wastes (parks, street cleaning, etc.) (approx. 5%)



As far as general situation is concerned, Turkey has a quite effective waste collection and transport system. However the final disposal aspect is deficient. There are only 16 sanitary landfills (SSI, 2004) and mainly in the major municipalities corresponding to 28% of the total municipal waste collected. The landfills with no sanitary conditions have started to create water, air and soil pollution concerns. Wild dumps are also causing risk of landfill gas blasts, fire risks, health problems, easthetic problems, bad odor, etc. Currently, with the establishment of the unions of municipalities, final disposal has become a major agenda item. In big municipalities the collection and transportation is made in better conditions comparing to small to mid size municipalities. While standard bins and sanitary compression trucks are used in big municipalities, this is usually in the form of old and open bins and tractors in small municipalities. Solid Waste Management in Istanbul : Istanbul, whose 2006 population is estimated at about 12.5 million, is the largest city of Turkey and its main center of industrial, financial, service and other economic activities. Administratively, both a State province and a metropolitan municipality, Istanbul covers an area of 5,349 km2 (or only about 0.7% of the surface of Turkey). Yet among all provinces of Turkey, it makes the by far single largest contribution (23%) to the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Rapid population increase over the past few decades – essentially owing to the attraction which Istanbul’s expanding labor market exerted on Turkey’s internal migration - has severely taxed the capacity of the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM) to deal with urban development problems. One of the biggest problems being to handle the increasing amount of solid waste in an proper and environmentally friendly way. In order to tackle with this situation and alleviate any negative environmental impact IMM has invested on many facilities and infrastructures especially in last decade. These investments include: solid waste sanitary landfills, composting facilities, wastewater treatment plants, cleaning of Haliç bay, medical waste incineration facility and rehabilitation of old solid waste dump sites.

Collection and Transportation: The collection of solid waste is the responsibility of the 32 boroughs and 41 smaller municipalities located within IMM. These local authorities collect the solid waste themselves or have contracts with local private companies to collect the waste. The local authorities also have the responsibility to transport the waste to one of six area transfer stations. Transfer Stations: IMM is responsible for consolidation and transfer of waste from the individual local authorities. IMM currently maintains six transfer stations (three on the European side of IMM and three on the Asian side). The transfer stations include systems for vehicle weighing, offloading of solid waste collection vehicles, waste compaction into transfer vehicles, and then offsite transport to the area landfills. Waste is consolidated and compacted into 35 m3 waste containers for transport to the landfills. The transfer stations are operated



by private contractors. Five additional transfer stations are planned within IMM. Landfills: IMM currently owns two active solid waste landfills (one on European side of Istanbul and one on Asian side) both constructed in 1994. The landfills currently manage about 13,000 tons per day. The landfills were designed in 1994 by CH2M and consist of a composite liner system (60 cm clay, geomembrane, and then drainage layer). Leachate is collected and receives pretreatment (via aerobic treatment) prior to discharge to the ISKI (the Istanbul Water and Sewerage Department) wastewater collection system. Based on current design and usage, the landfill capacity is expected to last until about 2008 or 2009. Also being considered is an upgrade of the leachate collection system to include membrane treatment technology is planned to eliminate IMM’s reliance on ISKI. Inclusion of landfill gas collection and energy production is also planned at the landfills. The landfills are not operated by IMM but by ISTAC, the municipal utility that is 99% owned by IMM.

Waste Segregation. IMM does not currently have a formal program for waste segregation of recyclables. ISTAC is currently working with four of the local authorities in implementing source segregation programs for recyclables. ISTAC will be implementing similar programs with 11 other local authorities. Assistance with public education for waste source segregation is a high priority.

Sea Vessel Waste. Under an international treaty, IMM is required to provide solid and liquid waste collection services for the ships navigating through Istanbul. This includes ship-board generated solid waste petroleum residue, bilge water, sewage, sludge, dirty ballast, waste lubricating oil, petroleum contaminated rags, and petroleum sediment. Sea vessel waste collection is conducted by ISTAC. ISTAC currently uses 12 barges to collect the above waste and transport it to a recently completed port waste processing facility in Haydarpasa. Each barge can only store one specific waste type which is an inefficient system. ISTAC is proposing to purchase two additional barges that can handle multiple waste streams. Monitoring for illegal dumping by sea vessels is also performed by ISTAC. They maintain two airplanes for monitoring the ports and seas. It should be noted that the fees for sea vessel waste collection are significantly less than the cost for the service (cost of service is about 4 times fee charges). IMM purposefully charges this lower fee as an incentive to encourage use of their facilities in order to deter illegal dumping. Industrial Waste. Laws and regulations established by the government currently provide the regulatory framework for the generation, transport and disposal of industrial wastes. This establishes disposal requirements and licensing procedures for generators, transporters, and treatment facilities for industrial wastes. Despite the recent revisions to the Environmental Law of 5491 dated 26/4/2006 does not impose any responsibility regarding building and operation of hazardous waste disposal facilities, currently, IMM plans to take on responsibility for disposal of industrial waste within Istanbul. The individual companies have the responsibility for coordinating transport and



disposal of the industrial waste they generate. Licensed private transporters transport industrial waste for disposal. Currently, there are no licensed industrial (hazardous) waste disposal facilities in Istanbul and all industrial hazardous waste is transported to a facility in Kocaeli, Izmit for disposal. It is suspected that the high transportation costs as well as general lack of environmental protection awareness of industrial facilities in Istanbul on waste segregation and disposal has caused improper disposal of industrial waste to be a prevalent practice within the region. IMM estimates that industry generates about 75,000 tons of industrial waste per year in the region, yet the hazardous waste treatment and disposal facility in Izmit has a design capacity to treat only about 35,000 tons per year. IMM indicated that specific investigations into current industrial waste disposal practices by industry are ongoing. Establishing a new and effective industrial waste management program is the highest priority for IMM. This will include construction of a new industrial waste treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) facility within the IMM service area as well as implementing a training program for industry. Other wastes include construction and demolition debris, composting materials, medical wastes and industrial wastes. Construction and demolition debris are disposed of separately at the two existing landfills. Medical wastes (about 24 tons per day) are currently disposed at a medical waste incinerator located at the Odayeri landfill. IMM also maintains one composting facility (1,000 tons per day) for disposal of biodegradable wastes. This is also located next to the Odayeri landfill. A new medical waste facility is planned for the Asian side of Istanbul. Wild (unregulated) dumpsites: Subject of this report, existing wild dumpsites within the boundaries of Istanbul, create a major risk for the environment and people. These dump sites are located in neighboring small municipalities and serving a population around 550,000 people. The amount of generated and wild dumped wastes is estimated to be around 566 tons per day during winter and 862 tons per day during summer.

Environmental Consequences: Proper Solid Waste Management practices are crucial for preventing any harm for environment. Poor implementations yield in water, air and soil pollutions hence jeopardizing the community health as well. In this respect, illegal dumpsites, which are mainly close to water creeks and settlements, are an important source of pollution and risk holder for environment and community health.



II. POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE

FRAMEWORK

Although there are many attempts in Turkey to improve the municipal/local solid waste management practices, these efforts are limited to collection, transportation and recently landfill construction and operation. The governments’ efforts are also in this direction. Moreover, they encourage small municipalities and rural settlements to union for a common solid waste management strategy mainly starting with establishment of a sanitary landfill. However, waste minimization efforts are limited such as recycling, composting, etc. On the other hand, another critical deficiency in the current policies is regarding illegal dump sites and wild dumping. Lack of financial and technical capacity, together with poor regulatory environment has yield in wild dumping /illegal dumpsites in most of the municipalities in Turkey. However, the worse is that current improvement policies do not prioritize the rehabilitation of these dumps. The Metropolitan Municipality Law No.5216, passed on July 23, 2004 expanded the geographical area of IMM from 1,830 km2 to 5,349 km2. The Law also required IMM to prepare both a Metropolitan Strategic Development Plan (Strategic Plan) and an Environmental Plan to reflect the demands of the expanded area identify the corresponding investment needs and explore possible sources of financing. The Strategic and Environmental Plan was completed in July, 2006 and has been approved by the Municipal Council of the Metropolitan Municipality. Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality, is far advanced of the average level of the Turkish municipalities in solid waste management. They have invested and operating sanitary landfills, composting facilities, medical waste facilities, etc. But, they are still beyond a full and proper solid waste management system especially in respect to industrial wastes and rehabilitation of existing wild/illegal dumpsites. Hence, with the recent strategic planning, IMM has put its strong willingness to invest on the deficient components of the solid waste and other environmental management issue. To address its multiple needs, as well as solid waste management needs, IMM has requested the Bank to assist it in the financing of an investment program, the proposed Istanbul Municipal Infrastructure Project (IMIP). The program would focus in particular on investments addressing priority infrastructure needs for improving environmental management and increasing preparedness for possible natural disasters of seismic origin. According to the recent Strategic Plan prepared by IMM, the environmental management issues are summarized as follows:

• It is projected that statutory powers and responsibilities of public administrations will increase in the short and medium run, the increase in cultural investments and socio-cultural development will raise the environment



awareness of the people, and as a natural consequence of this, the participations of civil society organizations will increase. Civil society organizations with increased activity will have close and organic cooperation with public organizations. About the same period, it is contemplated that the “polluter pays” principle will be replaced by the principle of “preventing pollution” predominantly. It is expected that rational creation of environmental revenues and the necessity of compliance with EU Directives will positively affect reaching a sustainable urban development performance.

• It is expected that investments will increase in using clean production technologies and developing renewable energy resources starting mainly from the public agencies.

• It is inevitable to create an integrated solid waste management system for Istanbul in light of the fact that recycling and regaining has emerged as a significant potential by effective use of environmental resources by way of integrated environmental management, and international trends and expectations of the people.

• The trend of increasing the share of mass transport aimed at controlling and alleviating the air pollution in Istanbul will be strengthened, and the use of biogas/bio-diesel in municipal mass transport vehicles will be increased. Institutional capacity will be built to control more effectively the industrial air pollutant emissions, and by the institutionalization of inspections and delegating this function to local governments, more efficient and cleaner burning technologies will be spread.

• The green spots in the city will be transformed into urban green fields, alternative solutions to alleviate the risk of drought will become more important and legal regulations will be created to prevent construction pressure in the water basins. It is highly likely that policies to ensure attainment of EU beach water standards quality will be formulated to prevent pollution in the Marmara Sea and straits.

On the other hand, on national level Turkey’s Ninth National Development Plan (2007-2011) calls for more strategic policymaking and stronger implementation capacity in public administration. The Plan states that comprehensive reforms started in public administration and public financial management should focus on strengthening public confidence in administration, ensuring financial efficiency and the provision of effective municipal services by local governments.

Legislative Framework : Main legislation governing solid waste management in Turkey consists of Environmental Law, Municipal Law, Metropolitan Municipality Law, and Ministry of Environment and Forestry regulation for “Control of Solid Waste” and other relevant regulations. 1) Environment Law (No 2872, Date 9.08.1983): This law describes the framework

for protection of the environment, prevention of pollution and provision of



sustainable development through environment friendly applications. There are various clauses in this law related wastes :

a) Article 8: For any kind of waste, it is forbidden to dispose them directly or indirectly, to dump, to transport, and etc., in a way to harm environment and in violation of the standards and procedures set by the relevant regulations.

b) Article 9: “ It is forbidden to bring any kind of wastes from other countries as to harm the ecologic system of the country.

c) Article 11: The responsible institutions for treatment, disposal of the waste are obliged to take related precautions for not polluting the environment while performing related services.

The rules and technical procedures for direct or indirect disposal of the wastes

to the environment are determined by related regulations. d) Supervision (Article 12): The supervision of waste treatment, disposal and

importing are made by DG Environment. The procedures for the supervision and qualifications required for the supervisors are set by relevant regulations.

2) Municipal Law (Law No: 5393 - Date: 03.07.2005) :

a) Article 14 (Tasks and Responsibilities of Municipalities): Item a) of this Article states that “ Municipalities do directly or outsource the services for urban infrastructure such as settlement, water and sewerage, transportation; geographical and urban information systems; environment and environmental safety/health; cleansing and solid waste; municipal police, fire brigade, emergency aid, rescue and ambulance; in-city traffic; cemetery, forestation and parks, housing; culture and art, tourism and promotion; youth and sports; social services and social aids, wedding, vocational training and skill development; development of local economy and trade. Metropolitan municipalities and municipalities over 50.000 population establish women and children protection shelters.”

b) Article 15 (Authority and Concession of Municipalities) : Item g) of this

article states that “municipalities are authorized for conducting directly or outsourcing all necessary services for solid waste collection, transportation, separation/sorting, recycling, dumping/landfilling and eliminating.”

3) Metropolitan Municipality Law (Law No: 5216- date : 10.07.2004) : Item (i) of

Article 7. (tasks, authority and responsibilities of Metropolitan Municipalities) states that : “…to prepare or outsource for preparation of metropolitan municipality solid waste management plan; to provide services for recycling, landfilling or eliminating solid wastes and excavation wastes except the services for collection from source and transportation, and to establish and operate or outsource establishment and operation of relevant facilities; to implement services for industrial and medical wastes, and to establish and operate or outsource establishment and operation of relevant facilities; to collect or outsource for collection of wastes of naval vessels, to perform treatment and all required arrangements.



4) Ministry of Environment Regulation for Control of Solid Waste (No: 20834 and Date: 14.03.1991- revised 7 times last one being on 25.04.2002): This regulation gives the basics framework for solid waste management and regulation in Turkey. Scope of the regulation includes collection, transportation, recycling, eliminating and disposal of:

• Domestic wasteG• Plant wastes from parks and gardens,G• Bulky solid wastes;G• Domestic wastes from industrial zones and commercial places;G• Effluent sludge from domestic WWTPsG• Effluent sludge of Industrial WWTPs that are not classified as hazardous; andG• Excavation earth/soil and construction rubble/dirt G

Special wastes, medical, harmful and hazardous wastes are not scope of this regulation and handled with separate regulations.

a) Section 2 of this regulation sets the principles and procedures for production, disposal/elimination and recycling of the solid waste. According to this section :

i) Minimum production is the main principle; The ministry has the right to ask for recycling or other elimination methods for minimization of the solid waste amount.

ii) Ministry, provincial government and municipalities can/do organize training for related persons/community to minimize the waste, to provide the separation at source, to avoid mixture of domestic and hazardous wastes and for recycling habits.

iii) Provincial government and municipalities do encourage recycling efforts and facilities. Ministry can provide fund to persons or institutions for their running recycling facilities.

iv) Producers are forbidden to dispose medical wastes, hazardous wastes, batteries, recyclables, big size wastes like white staff with domestic waste.

b) Section 3 of the regulation is for recycling/reuse of Packaging wastes and Licensing of private operators. Accordingly:

i) Ministry sets quotas for recycling/reuse/collection of package/bottles, etc used by manufacturing/importing companies. The companies have to obey to this quota each year.

ii) The companies which failed to reach the quota and those who did not provide any application for quota has to implement a deposit system for their packages.

iii) The companies have to recycle the packages in their facilities or they have to use licensed recycling facilities. They can not dispose their packages to public landfills/ facilities.

iv) Those who would like to operate a recycling facility for packages has to apply to the Ministry for pre-licensing. If the application is assessed eligible, the pre-licensing is granted. But, this is a temporary licensing and Ministry monitors the implementation to assess the properness of the



facility. If the facility is found appropriate and is found operating in accordance to standards and procedures, then a licensing valid for 3 years is granted to the operator. After 3 years, the operator has to re-apply to the ministry for licensing. The ministry regularly monitors/supervise the facility and if they found something wrong they first provide a warning to the operator for the correction. If the problem/violation continues then the facility is closed temporarily or the license of the operator is cancelled.

c) Section 4 of the regulation is for Sorting at Source and Transportation. According to this section:

i) Procedures cannot dispose their wastes to sea, river, lake, forest, like places in a way to damage and pollute the environment;

ii) The packaging for disposal of waste should be in line with the standards of the Ministry and has to be closed and ready for collection during the collection time at the roadsides.

iii) Municipalities at urban and provincial governors at rural have to implement sorting and source for domestic waste to minimize the waste and to put on the environmental preservation.

iv) The procedures for sorting at source are determined by a communiqué by the Ministry.

v) The transfer of wastes has to be conducted by special cars appropriate for that task. The industrial and tourism facilities beyond the urban boundaries have to make their own separation/sorting and domestic waste transportation. This transportation is supervised by the provincial government and Ministry.

vi) Transfer Stations are encouraged to be used to optimize the operation (cost minimization, traffic, etc).

d) Section 5 is for dumping/landfilling of the solid waste : This section draws a

framework of principles for a sanitary landfill establishment and operation including the sub-topics of :

i) The wastes to be dumped in sanitary domestic landfills and exceptions ii) The disposal of the excavated earth iii) Selection of sanitary landfill site iv) Landfill facilities v) Leachate Collection vi) Removal of Gas vii) Dumping treatment plant effluent sludge within domestic landfill viii) Precautions to prevent negative impact on environment ix) Landscaping at landfills x) Licensing for landfills: In urban areas Municipalities or metropolitan

municipalities and in rural areas provincial governors are authorized for licensing provided that they have obtained prior consent of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (for population above 10.000) or of local environment directorate (for population below 10.000).

xi) Principles of landfill operation and supervision

Some other Applicable Regulations on solid waste management can be listed as follows:



i) Regulation on the Control of Medical wastes (Official Gazette No: 21856 and Date 20.05.1993) (amendment 24.06.1998)

ii) Regulation on the Control of Hazardous waste (Official Gazette No: 22387 and Date 27.08.1995).(5 times revised)

iii) Regulation on the control of waste oils iv) Regulation on the control of used batteries and accumulators v) Regulation on the control of packaging and packaging waste vi) Regulation on Control of Construction Rubble, Excavation earth, etc.

Institutions Responsible: In Turkey, the responsibility for solid waste management is regulated by central government and implemented by local administrations (municipalities and local governors). The distribution of the roles can be classified as follows:

• Ministry of Environment and Forestry:Go Regulation of the sector; determination of rules and standards; o Preparation of regional waste management plans and environmental

master plans o Licensing for recycling and eliminating facilities o Encouraging regional waste management unions o Funding o Community Training and Awareness Rising

• Municipalities / Union of Municipalities : It is encouraged by the Ministry of

Environment to form union of municipalities to manage the waste in regional/basin base. This is a very efficient and cost-effective approach if implemented with other tools of the solid waste management techniques (recycling, transfer stations, composting, re-use facilities, etc.) in a proper way. The roles of the municipalities or unions can be listed as below:

o Overall responsibility of preparation, implementation and management of the solid waste programs

o Collection, transportation, dumping, etc of solid waste and operation of landfills or related facilities (waste reduction or elimination);

o Outsourcing to private operators; o Licensing to Private Operators with prior consent of the Ministry of

Environment and Forestry; o Monitoring and Supervision of Private Operators together with

environmental directorates; o Community training and awareness rising; o Fee collection, financial and overall management of the sector in local.

• Metropolitan Municipalities: In case of Metropolitan municipalities the

responsibilities are divided as follows:Go Metropolitan Municipality is responsible for overall planning and

management of the solid waste system in the boundaries of the metropolitan. However, district municipalities within the boundaries of the metropolitan have the responsibility to



o Collect and transport the waste to the landfill operated by the Metropolitan Municipality;G

o To collect related fees from the citizens/customers but through the water bills collected by metropolitan municipality’s water authority (SKIs).

o Training and awareness programsGo Waste reduction or recycling measuresG

• State Planning Organization (SPO) : Determines policies as like with the other sectors by preparing and monitoring development plans

• Treasury : Assessment of external finance demands of the municipalities.G

• Iller Bank (Bank of Provinces) : Assisting municipalities in preparing solid waste projects since 1997.G

• Other Role PlayersGo Waste Producers (industrial and big size): To obey the quota system for

the packages and implement recycling projects/operate recycling facilities.

o Scavengers : Illegal/irregular collection /recycling. But, for the current situation, their advantage to the sector dominates the handicaps they create.

o Private Operators/constructors : A few operators / constructors for landfill, a few recycling contractors but not in big and organized scale.

o CEVKO (Foundation for packaging waste recovery and recycling systems in Turkey) & CAMSIAD (Glass recycling Industrialists and businessmen association) : On March 31, 2005, Turkish Ministry of Environment and Forestry has designated ÇEVKO& CAMSIAD as the "Authorized Recovery Organizations" according to the Regulation on the Control of Packaging and Packaging Waste. The activities of ÇEVKO are:

• " Helping municipal authorities in setting up separate packaging waste collection and recovery systems, G

• “ Implementing education and awareness raising programs to improve public participation in environmental programs,

• Coordinating the industrial responsibility in packaging waste recycling. G

• On the other hand the activities of CAMSIAD are : • " Implementing education and awareness raising programs to

improve public participation in environmental programs, G• Coordinating the industrial responsibility in glass packaging

waste recycling. G

• NGOs : There are many environmental NGOs, who has activities in the field of training and awareness raising regarding solid waste management and recycling of wastes.



Istanbul Case : Organizational Structure Istanbul as Province is administered by a Governor as the representative of the State Government. As a city, Istanbul is administered on a two-tier basis with the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM) overseeing a set of 32 lower level District Municipalities (DMs). IMM is responsible for management of all citywide services and infrastructure whereas DMs are primarily in charge of local matters. Most municipal services are provided through municipally owned commercial companies. Like all municipalities in Turkey, IMM has a relatively limited decision-making autonomy in both revenue generation and expenditure management. Within the limits set by the national legislation, IMM has managed to become financially viable, however, and it remains, at this point, the only of sixteen metropolitan municipalities in Turkey with a significant borrowing capacity and a recognized creditworthiness for external borrowing supported by the Government. Organizational structure in municipalities emerges as a strategic factor that affects and directs the management in the process of informed strategy development. For this purpose the organizational structure of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality was examined under the following titles: organs of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality, hierarchical structure, changes in organizational structure and norm positions. Organs of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality The organs of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality consist of Metropolitan Municipal Assembly, Metropolitan Municipal Committee and Metropolitan Mayor. The Metropolitan Municipal Assembly is the decision making body. The Assembly is made up of delegates from district and first degree municipalities at 1/5 rate and members directly elected by the people. The Metropolitan Mayor is the chairman of the Municipal Assembly. Other mayors within the metropolitan municipality are natural members in the Municipal Assembly. While the number of members in the Metropolitan Municipal Assembly was 207 in 2003, it went up to 347 in 2006 due to the expansion of the Metropolitan Municipality boundaries. Duties of the assembly according to the Metropolitan Municipality Law no.5216 are as follows:

• Discuss and adopt the strategic plans and working and investment programs as well as the performance criteria of the municipality’s activities and staff,

• Adopt the budget and final accounts, make transfers in the budget between the institutional coding units and the first level of functional classification,

• Discuss and approve development plans, adopt provincial environment plans in metropolitan and provincial municipalities,

• Decide on borrowing,

• Permit the purchase, sale, exchange, allocation, change of allocation style of an immovable property or lifting the allocation of an allocated immovable if it is no more needed for public service; decide on the renting of an immovable property for more than three years and the establishment of in-kind rights onto such for a maximum period of thirty years,

• Set tariffs to be applicable for services that have not been subjected to taxes, duties and charges in the laws, based on the application of concerned parties,



Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality has a hierarchical structure consisting of the mayor, secretary-general, assistant secretary-generals, division heads, directors, deputy directors, chiefs, officials and workers (see the organizational chart provided in Annex-1). However, some directorates have no chiefs, and some directorates are directly under an assistant secretary-general without being attached to any division. Division heads are in charge of carrying out affairs at tactical level and directorates at operational level. The mayor, secretary-general, assistant secretary-general, municipal assembly and municipal committee constitute the top management, in other words, the higher echelon where strategic decisions are made and directions to implement are issued.

Another important factor in terms of organization is that subunits under units should be kept at optimum. The number of subunits to be managed by a manager are limited. While there are several approaches on the matter, it is generally accepted that there should be at most seven subunits under a manager. For Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality, the fact that a division has at least two directorates, and on the average four directorates indicates the institutionalization. Administratively, the territory of Istanbul represents both a State province and a metropolitan municipality. IMM provides an umbrella for a total of 32 subordinated DMs. IMM is responsible for all matters that affect the city as a whole. It is, in particular, responsible for the delivery of municipal services as well as financing and maintenance of all main infrastructures (other than those pertaining to and operated by State agencies such as interregional highways, power transmission lines, etc.) IMM is also responsible for urban planning and the definition of urban development options and policies. Delivery of municipal services by IMM is carried out various ‘municipal economic enterprises’. All of these enterprises, in which IMM is the majority shareholder, operate under the oversight of the IMM Department of Economic Enterprises as commercial companies and are managerially and financially autonomous. DM involvement in service delivery is minimal with the exception of residential solid waste collection. Residential solid waste is collected by DMs by either their own services or, in several cases private sub-contractors, and transported to transfer stations from where it is taken up by �STAÇ.

IMM Municipal Service Companies Water supply and sewerage �SKI Solid waste collection/disposal �STAÇ Urban transport

Metro ULA� IM Bus transport �ETT Water transport �DO

Natural Gas Distribution �GDA�Road maintenance �SFALT Traffic management �SBAK Trees and parks A� AC Car parks �SPARK



III. ISTANBUL MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT (IMIP) DESCRIPTION

The objectives of the proposed IMIP are to assist IMM in (a) improving its environmental management, especially in the area of solid waste disposal and (b) increasing its preparedness in the event of a possible earthquake. The scope of the proposed IMIP responds to two IMM priority areas. The project would be the first step in the successful development of a partnership with the Bank that might lead in the coming years to the preparation of a series of successive other operations that could target and alleviate problems in the municipal sector. The definition of meaningful outcomes has been limited to measuring the improvement of the environmental management of IMM under IMIP. IMIP’s preparedness and the seismic resistance of infrastructure are measured during earthquakes and do not lend themselves to continuous monitoring. Those indicators that can be measured include:

• Incremental quantities of municipal and industrial waste collected and treated by IMM as a result of IMIP;

• Closure of wild dumps sites; • Degree of satisfaction of the population in selected neighborhoods with

reduction of illegal disposal as measured through periodic surveys; and • Completion of the Urban Seismic Redevelopment Plan.

The IMIP would consist of the following four components: A. Improvements in environmental management B. Strengthening of municipal services and infrastructure C. Pilot urban transformation program D. Engineering services and audits Component A: Improvements in environmental management (IMM: US$30 million; World Bank: US$96 million) Objective of Component A: to assist IMM in (i) remediating uncontrolled disposal sites for municipal solid waste (MSW); (ii) improving the operational performance of solid waste services, operating MSW transfer stations, transporting solid waste from transfer stations to landfills, operating a compost facility and managing landfills; and (iii) improving the efficiency of waste collection from vessels either docking in the port of Istanbul or transiting through the Bosporus and the Sea of Marmara. Component A includes the following sub-components:



(a) Closure of existing uncontrolled disposal sites and illegal dumps: environmental site investigations; design; civil works and equipment required for the closure and rehabilitation of landfills; and rehabilitation of landfills as needed. A detailed feasibility study including prioritization and an integrated plan for closure, rehabilitation and post-closure management of the uncontrolled waste disposal sites will be undertaken as part of project implementation.

The closure of the existing waste disposal sites will be based on the following options: - Excavation of all the waste material from the disposal site and disposal in a sanitary

landfill. This option of full removal of the waste is financially viable up to a certain volume and also depends on the distance to the sanitary landfill and the quality of the waste. Environmental aftercare could still be required for this option if the subsoil is heavily polluted and/or causes risks for nearby population or water resources. The rehabilitation will be based on the placement of clean soil fill and re-vegetation via seeding with crabgrass or trees. - Partial removal of the waste to a sanitary landfill could be most appropriate for larger disposal sites to reshape the disposal area so that it is sustainable. The area can then be covered with an adequate cover material of gravel/clay/topsoil sequence to prevent infiltration of precipitation and tailored to the anticipated landfill gas production. In this case, the disposal site’s subsoil needs to include a sufficiently thick layer of naturally impermeable material to enable leachate containment and treatment. This option would mostly apply to waste disposals in clay pits. - If the quantity of the waste in the waste disposal site is very large and becomes too

costly to remove, then in-place closure of the landfill may be considered. This option is similar to the partial removal option with a top cover and landscaping. However, under this option the subsoil may not always consist of a fully impermeable (clay) layer. The design of this option will therefore be based on detailed site investigations and a risk assessment of anticipated mobility of pollution and exposure paths of sensitive receptors (mainly population and water resources). The closure and adequate coverage of the disposal site will stop infiltration of precipitation and in time the generation of leachate. The design will also include leachate extraction and treatment and landfill gas monitoring (possibly, landfill gas drainage and/or use for energy) and continuous maintenance of the closed and rehabilitated site. For all sites adequate environmental site investigations will be conducted to test the quality of adjacent surface waters, leachate, the subsoil and local groundwater. The results will be used to prepare the closure and rehabilitation design and to prepare the monitoring plans. In addition, the component will also include a risk management plan after the closure of all sites for maintenance and restricted access has to be established for the partially removed or unremoved waste sites. (b) Waste collection and emergency response vessels: the purchase of two new

vessels that can handle multiple waste streams from ships and would also be able



to provide emergency response to oil spills in the Bosporus and the adjacent area of the Sea of Marmara.

Component B: Strengthening of municipal services and infrastructure (World Bank: US $130 million) Objective of Component B: to assist IMM in further preparing the city for a possible earthquake, including funding of priority investments in the most vulnerable earthquake prone areas. Component B includes the following sub-components:

(a) Preparing a detailed risk assessment for all major municipal systems; (b) Developing a Municipal Infrastructure Risk Mitigation Plan. This plan would

prioritize and select projects for strengthening based on importance and cost effectiveness; develop a list of equipment needed for optimal response following a major earthquake; and develop a long term plan for strengthening and associated maintenance of municipal infrastructure;

(c) Retrofitting selected key buildings, fire stations and municipal infrastructure; (d) Providing needed equipment; and (e) Develop a training program.

A Task Force will be organized, consisting of representatives of municipal government agencies that would be affected by a major earthquake and organizations responsible for the above facilities. Each organization will rank its own facilities according to life-safety risk and critical need, with emphasis on optimizing emergency response following a major earthquake and minimizing service/business interruptions. Because of limited resources, it will not be possible to both evaluate in detail and strengthen all facilities. This project component will address only the most critical facilities given limited funding. It would consist of detailed earthquake engineering risk studies and strengthening designs that will be carried out on the selected systems and their facilities, as recommended by the JICA study and other recent studies. The program would consist of three phases: a risk audit, a cost-benefit analysis, and various forms of implementation such as earthquake retrofitting and contingency planning. A brief summary is presented below. Phase I – Risk Audit. The first step is to understand the risk by developing a scenario of what would happen if a strong earthquake were to occur. This Risk Audit would be conducted by highly trained earthquake engineers who visit the facilities and make surveys to identify principal sources of risk and estimate all potential losses –buildings, equipment, piping, business interruption, etc. Typically, the losses are presented as probabilistic numbers in terms of direct financial impact (damage and loss) and service or business interruption. Most frequently, the expected damage is expressed as Probable Maximum Loss. The results are summarized in a table for each system, its critical structures and their contents. Recommendations are made for further cost-benefit analyses based on the importance and extent of the expected damage. Phase II – Cost-Benefit Analysis. Seismic structural analyses would be performed of selected important municipal systems and their components (for example, a specific



water treatment plant or a specific pumping station in the water system) to specifically identify all significant earthquake vulnerabilities. In the cost-benefit analysis detailed evaluations are made of high-risk facilities to confirm Phase I findings and develop mitigation options and project costs. This evaluation of buildings, equipment, etc., will provide information concerning strengthening details to achieve the desired earthquake risk reduction. This information can then be used to finalize the appropriate level of strengthening (Implementation) based on both cost and overall risk reduction objectives. Phase III – Implementation. This phase would include development of final design drawings of strengthening features (to buildings, equipment, piping and other system components), construction documentation, actual construction, and emergency response planning. Component C: Pilot urban transformation program (World Bank: US$ 50 million) Objective of Component C: to assist IMM in further developing its urban transformation program in high risk information system for real-time disaster coordination and data sharing and to undertake pilot urban transformation studies and investments throughout the metropolitan area. Component C includes the following subcomponents: (a) Pilot Urban Transformation: prepare and further develop existing feasibility

studies for pilot citywide urban transformation projects and implement selected investments. The investments would include city center revitalization, harbor area transformation, building stock surveys and rehabilitation in earthquake prone areas, identification of areas where construction should/should not take place based on seismic vulnerability, natural resources that must be protected, residential areas prone to flooding and measures to protect them, and creation of open areas in the districts most vulnerable to earthquakes. These areas will be equipped with necessary basic services and serve as parks or green spaces during non emergency times.

Component D: Engineering Services and Audits (IMM: US$14 million; World Bank: US$0.15 million) Objective of Component D: to assist IMM in the efficient and expeditious implementation of the project in accordance with World Bank project management requirements. Component D includes the following subcomponents: (a) Engineering Services: preparation of technical design studies, tender

documents, review of strengthening and other design and related social, environmental, and legal assessments, unforeseen technical surveys and studies, as well as preparatory studies for possible follow-up projects; and

(b) Audits of project accounts: the annual external audits of the project accounts in compliance with World Bank guidelines.



IV. CLOSURE OF EXISTING ILLEGAL WASTE SITES Areas used for unregulated disposal of waste are considered as “wild dumps”. Such areas are generally the “out of sight of the public”, either a gravel pit/quarries or a topographical valley or a hillside where the sloped down area is out of easy access of the public. Such wild dumps in the Istanbul region have/had been operated by the local municipalities. The Metropolitan Municipality Law No.5216, passed on July 23, 2004 expanded the geographical area of IMM to include all the municipalities within Istanbul Province. After taking over the administrative responsibility of the peripheral municipalities, IMM has identified 28 of such wild dumps on the European side listed in the following table.

Wild (Unregulated) Dump Sites (European Site) No Municipality Location 1 Silivri By Bo� luca creek 2 Selimpa�a A�a� �dere (500m to E-5)

3Celaliye-Kamiloba

Macar creek upstream (1 km to TEM highway)

4 Çanta Çanta creek and Karaköy creek slopes 5 Gümü�yaka By Ere� li creek (1.5 km to Tekirda� -Istanbul highway) 6 De� irmenköy1 100 m to Kaz�mp�nar creek 7 De� irmenköy2 Upstream Bo�naklar creek 8 De� irmenköy3 Branch of Karaköy creek 9 De� irmenköy4 Karaköy creek source section 10 Büyükçavu�lu Within De� irmenköy irrigation pond preservation area 11 Kavakl� Treasury land by TEM highway 12 Ortaköy On old winery building and by Ortaköy creek 13 Çatalca Treasury land, on branch of Ko� ukdere near source

14 Had�mköy Treasury land B.çekmece lake potable water basin, 1 km to Beylik creek branch

15 Durusu Mine pit 16 Çiftlikköy Çiftlikköy creek upstream 17 Karacaköy By Bink�l�ç creek, within Terkos lake potable water basin 18 Bink�l�ç Forest land, within Terkos lake potable water basin 19 Haraçç� Forest land, Han creek upstream, Sazl�dere dam preservation area 20 Ka� �thane Hasdal 21 Küçükçekmece Halkal� 22 Büyükçekmece By Büyükçekmece lake 23 Kumburgaz Güzelce quarters 24 Tepecik Mand�ra hill, old quarry 25 Gürp�nar Yakuplu-Kavakl�-Gürp�nar border 26 Gürp�nar 27 Selimpa�a By TEM highway



28 Silivri municipality

Regular landfill

Environmental Assessment Criteria for Wild Dumpsites Due to the investments proposed, this sub-component is rated as category B as per the World Bank guidelines. In planning of closure of the wild dumpsites, a systematic reassessment of each site would be needed for the following general criteria: Key Potential Negative Impacts

• Risk of contamination of water resources • Loss of employment at existing dump sites • Dust from construction activities • Operational noise • Increased traffic congestion

Key Potential Positive Impacts

• Return of land to productive use (post restoration) • Creation of local employment opportunities (low-semi skilled) • Wider economic and employment benefits • Reduction of socio-economic impact of uncontrolled dumping • Reduced health risk from uncontrolled dumping • Reduced risk of water resource contamination from uncontrolled dumping • Effects from emission of greenhouse gases

A checklist for site assessments is given below:

Potential Impact Positive/ Negative

Potential Significance

Resettlement of population directly displaced by the cleanup

Loss of productive land Return of land to productive use (postrestoration) Creation of local employment opportunities (low-semi skilled)

Creation of local employment opportunities (skilled)

Wider economic and employment benefits Loss of employment at existing dump site Change in socio-economic status in the vicinity Change in local recreational use

Socio-Economic and Cultural

Increase/Reduction in local property values Reduced risk of water resource contamination from rehabilitation

Increased risk of flooding downstream of site Contamination of water resources by suspended solids

Hydrology, Hydrogeology and Water Quality Contamination of water resources by

rehabilitation activities



Local community health impacts Health and Safety Risk of exposure to/explosion of landfill gas

Odour impacts from site cleanup/rehabilitation activities

Current dust generation and potential increase during rehabilitation

Vehicle exhaust emissions from on-site vehicle movements

Air Quality

Effects from emission of greenhouse gases (mainly, methane)

Noise Construction noise from rehabilitation at nearest sensitive receivers

Creation of flora and fauna habitats, protected or endangered species

Ecology

Impact on wildlife corridors Increased traffic congestion along the haulage routes

Air quality impacts along haulage routes Traffic noise along the haulage routes

Off-site Traffic Impacts

Littering during waste transit Visual impact of site restoration Visual

Impacts Windblown litter impacts during site restoration

Following completion of the site assessments and prioritization of the sites for closure, IMM is to prepare a closure and rehabilitation plan for each wild dump site. In this phase, the activities, at a minimum, should include:

(a) Collection of a reasonable historical information on operational duration, sources of waste (residential/industry); operators/owners of the site;

(b) Preparation of a base map of the dumpsite (1/5000 or 1/10000 scale) and identify the adjoining landuse, residential/industrial developments (on air/space photos);

(c) Preparation of at least two schematical/scaled cross-sections of the dumpsite, showing the thickness of the waste material and soil cover (if any);

(d) Identificatiom of the local geologic setting, soil quality around the dumpsite; (e) Undertaking investigations to determine the properties and characteristics and

estimated quantity of the waste material at the dumpsite. Field work may include leachate, surface water, spring and well water sampling (if any) and their analyses for indicator chemicals for health protection (if any);

(f) Assessment of the extent of leachate from the dumpsite to adjoining ground water and surface watercourses. Identify the level of contamination in any drinking water wells (if any);

(g) Assessment of the probability of future impacts to ground and surface water from the dumpsites; and

(h) Assessment of bio-degradation of organic material and the methane generation potential;

(i) Assessment of the status of odor, factors (rodents, birds, etc);



(j) Preparation of a preliminary human health risk assesment for residential setting, and

(k) Preparation of a closure, mitigation and restoration plan, including conceptual engineering design and ToR for site rehabilitation.

Wild dump site assessment teams should include: (a) the team leader should have 10-15 years experience in designing sanitary landfills

and leading a multi-disciplinary team of professionals. In addition, the team leader should have good project management skills. He/she also should have a good understanding of environmental assessment and public consultation.

(b) The members of the team should have expertise in: geotechnical engineering and

geology (site investigations); chemical engineering, civil and environmental engineering (process engineering, project design, pollution control and environmental monitoring and quality); landuse planning (landuse and topography), biology (fauna, flora, water and air quality), chemistry (waste analysis and environmental monitoring), hydrogeology and hydrology (surface and ground water, leachate control), sociology (socio-economic survey, community participation), economics, financial analysis (costing), legal (contract and agreements), institutional specialist (organisation and systems).

Applicable cleanup techniques for wild dumps are the following:

1. Excavation of all the waste material in the dumpground and disposal at a regulated landfill. Here, the constraints are the volume of the waste in the dumpground, distance to the regulated landfill, decision on “How Clean is Clean”/Cleanup criteria. And placement of clean soil fill and revegetation via seeding with crabgrass or trees. Cost is the major limiting issue in this alternative.

2. Partial removal of the waste to a regulated landfill to a level that can be left in place and covering the area with an adequate cover material of gravel/clay/topsoil sequence. In this case, the wild dump bottom needs to be naturally impermeable material with no leachate release to the environment and the quantitity of waste is too large to feasibly remove all the waste (usually clay pits).

3. If the quantitity of the waste in the dump site is prohibitively large for apparent cost and requirement of available regulated landfill airspace for the removed waste, then in-place closure of landfill may be considered. Closure is similar to the partial removal case with a top cover and landscaping. However, in-place closure of such wild dumps require long-term leachate and landfill gas monitoring (possibly, landfill gas drainage and/or use for energy) and continuous maintenance of the closed and rehabilitated site.

After closure of all sites, a risk management plan has to be in place and maintenance and restricted use access has to be established for the partial/unremoved waste sites.



Regulatory aspects of decision making on selection of the feasible cleanup /rehabilitation methodologies As is the case in the developed countries, there is no regulatory criteria on “How Clean is Clean” issue in Turkey. Selection of the available clean-up methodologies rely on cost-benefit evaluation based on environmental risk assessment and administrative decision making process (EIA) as given in detail in Annex 10 (SSSafeguard Policy Issues). “Soil Pollution Control Regulation” as revised on 31.05.2005, is an applicable relevant regulation on clean up/rehabilitation of the dump sites together with the” Water Pollution Prevention Regulation” of 31.12.2004 and related water quality legislation. Clean up/rehabilitation of municipal wild dump sites are not explicitly identifies as “activities requiring an EIA Report” in the current Turkish EIA regulation. In respect to due diligence, EIA related WB Safeguard Policies are to be fulfilled prior to initiation of of any clean up/rehabilitation activity. Baseline Conditions The project includes all the existing wild dumps within the boundaries of Istanbul. IMM’s current rehabilitation priority of the sites that pose risk for the environment are given in the last column of the following table.

Wild (Unregulated) Dump Sites

Municipality Location Status Rehabilitation Priority

Silivri By Bo� luca creek To be closed 1Selimpa�a A�a� �dere (500m to E-5) To be closed 1Celaliye-Kamiloba

Macar creek upstream (1 km to TEM highway)

To be rehabilitated 1

Çanta Çanta creek and Karaköy creek slopes

May be rehabilitated 2

Gümü�yaka By Ere� li creek (1.5 km to Tekirda� -Istanbul highway)

To be closed 1

De� irmenköy1 100 m to Kaz�mp�nar creek To be closed 2 De� irmenköy2 Upstream Bo�naklar creek To be closed 2 De� irmenköy3 Branch of Karaköy creek To be closed 2 De� irmenköy4 Karaköy creek source section To be closed 2

Büyükçavu�lu Within De� irmenköy irrigation pond preservation area

To be closed 2

Kavakl� Treasury land by TEM highway To be closed 1

Ortaköy On old winery building and by Ortaköy creek

To be closed 1

Çatalca Treasury land, on branch of Ko� ukdere near source


Had�mköy Treasury land B.çekmece lake potable water basin, 1 km to Beylik creek branch


Durusu Mine pit status unknown 3Çiftlikköy Çiftlikköy creek upstream May be closed 3

Karacaköy By Bink�l�ç creek, within Terkos lake potable water basin

May be closed 3



Bink�l�ç Forest land, within Terkos lake potable water basin

May be closed 3

Haraçç� Forest land, Han creek upstream, Sazl�dere dam preservation area

To be closed 2

Ka� �thane Hasdal TBD 3Küçükçekmece Halkal� TBD 3Büyükçekmece By Büyükçekmece lake No fill, covered 2 Kumburgaz Güzelce quarters May be rehabilitated 2Tepecik Mand�ra hill, old quarry To be rehabilitated 1

Gürp�nar Yakuplu-Kavakl�-Gürp�nar border

May be rehabilitated 2

Gürp�nar May be rehabilitated 3Selimpa�a By TEM highway May be closed 3Silivri Regular landfill Not used 1

These sites serve to 26 different municipal settlements whose list are given below. Accordingly, there are around 530.000 people living in these settlements permanently and during summer the population may go well beyond this figure. The total waste produced is ranged between 566 and 862 tons. These municipalities can be listed into the following categories according to their sizes and waste produced:

1. Bigger municipalities: Silivri, Büyükçekmece and Esenyurt: Over 60 tons waste per day.

2. Mid-size Municipalities: Selimpa�a, Celaliye-Kamiloba, Çanta, Gümü�yaka, Kumburgaz-Güzelce, Tepecik, Mimarsinan, K�raç, Yakuplu, Kavakl�, Gürp�nar, Çatalca, Had�mköy, and Haraçç�: Between 6- 60 tons waste per day

3. Smaller Municipalities: Ortaköy, De� irmenköy, Büyükçavu�lu, Muratbey, Durusu, Çiftlikköy, Karacaköy and Bink�l�ç: between 2-6 tons waste per day.

4. No Data: Kavakl�

Information and data available for these wild dumps are presented in Annex A.


Istanbul Municipal Infrastructure Project Annex A 24

ANNEX A - BASELINE INFORMATION ON THE EUROPEAN SIDE WILD DUMPS



ANNEX A - Baseline information on the European side Wild DumpsMUNICIPALITY POP.

(person,permanent)

DAILY WASTEQTY (ton/day)

winter – summer

NUMBER OFVEHICLES

(count)

VEHICLECAPACITY

(m3)

WASTECOLLECTIONFREQUENCY

NUMBEROF RUNS

PERSONNELCOUNT

STORAGE AREA

1. Silivri 45000* 60-120 7 (1 sweeper) Daily 2-3 42 Own site2. Selimpa�a 9500* 10-30 4 10 Daily 2-3 12 Own site3. Celaliye-

Kamiloba8000* 8-25 3 Daily 2-3 12 Own site

4. Kavakl� - Own site5. Ortaköy 3200 4-6 1 8 1-2 4 Own site6. Çanta 4915* 5-20 2 11 5 days a week 1-3 6 Own site7. Gümü�yaka 5665* 6-20 3 8 (2x4) Daily 1-2 11+3 Own site8. De� irmenköy 5130 5 2 11x4 Once a week 3 3 Own site9. Büyükçavu�lu 3160 3 1 4 3 days a week 2 3 Own site10. Büyükçekmece 60000* 80-150 6 Halkal�11. Kumburgaz-

Güzelce12000* 12-30 4 Daily 1 16 Güzelce-Halkal�

12. Tepecik 22000 22 3 5 Daily 2-4 8+7 Own site13. Mimarsinan 28000* 30 3 Daily 19 Halkal� – Yenibosna14. K�raç 26000 26 2 Daily 2 Halkal�15. Esenyurt 154000 100-115 10 6, 5x10 Daily 2-3 4 Halkal�16. Yakuplu 23500 45-50 3 13, 15 Daily 3 Kemerburgaz17. Kavakl� 40488 60 Halkal�18. Gürp�nar 31000* 30-50 3 Daily 2 26 Own site19. Çatalca 15000 25 4 Daily 2 17 Own site20. Muratbey 2066 2 1 4 Every other day 1 2 Çatalca-Tepecik-Halkal�21. Had�mköy 10000 10 2 Daily 2 4+3 Own site22. Durusu 2200 2 1 4 2 days a week 2 4 Private mine pit23. Çiftlikköy 3000 2 1 4 Every other day 1 3 Own site24. Karacaköy 2817 2 1 4 2 days a week 2 3 Own site25. Bink�l�ç 3000 2 Own site26. Haraçç� 12000 15 1 Daily 2 4 Own siteTOTAL 531641 566-862



* Those population values reach 3-4 times the normal in summer time.



Site-specific available information for the above sites are given below: S�L�VR� MUNICIPALITY

Population 45.000 persons Daily waste quantity 60 ton/day (winter) – 120 ton/day (summer) Vehicles and capacity 5 vehicles 13 m3

1 vehicle 11 m3 1 vehicle 9 m3 1 sweeper

Waste collection frequency (winter) daily at the center, weekly at summer houses (summer) daily at the center, 3 days a week at summer houses

Number of runs 1-2 (winter) 2-3 (summer)

Personnel in cleaning services

42 persons

Cleaning services are provided by the municipality Owner and status of the waste storage site

Wild storage is being made on the Treasury land. The site is by Bo� luca creek which passes through Silivri center, on the base land, and 260 m to mass housing area.

Problems caused • Intensive odor • Flies, pests etc. breeding • Risk of diseases carried by birds • Leak water from waste forming ponds • Leak water from waste carried into sea by the creek • Risk of surface water pollution • Risk of ground water pollution • Methane explosion risk • Waste drifted around by wind •

Medical waste is being collected separately and transported to the IBB Medical Waste Incineration Facility. The project of sorting and collecting packaging waste at source is being implemented in pilot areas.

SEL�MPA� A MUNICIPALITY

Population 9.500 Daily waste quantity 10 ton/day (winter) – 30 ton/day (summer) Vehicles and capacity 4 vehicles 10 m3 Waste collection frequency Daily Number of runs (winter) 1

(summer) 2-3 Personnel in cleaning services

12 persons

Cleaning services are provided by the municipality Owner and status of the Wild storage is being made on the Treasury Land. The



waste storage site site is by A�a� �dere (creek) which passes through summer houses at Selimpa�a town, on the base land, and 500 m to habited areas and E-5 highway

Problems caused • Intensive odor • Flies, pests etc. breeding • Risk of diseases carried by birds • Leak water from waste forming ponds • Leak water from waste carried into sea by the creek • Risk of surface water pollution • Risk of ground water pollution • Waste drifted around by wind

Medical waste is being collected along with domestic waste.

CELAL�YE-KAM�LOBA MUNICIPALITY

Population 8.000 persons Daily waste quantity 9 ton/day (winter) – 25 ton/day (summer Vehicles and capacity 3 vehicles Waste collection frequency Daily Number of runs 1 (winter)

2-3 (summer) Personnel in cleaning services

12 persons


Wild storage is being made on the Treasury land. The site is 2 km far from the town center, 1 km to the TEM highway, and at the source of Macar creek which passes through summer houses.

Problems caused • Intensive odor • Flies, pests etc. breeding • Risk of diseases carried by birds • Leak water from waste flowing into the creek • Risk of surface water pollution • Risk of ground water pollution • Waste drifted around and to the creek by wind and

rainfall • Site is also used as discharge site for cesspit

emptiers, about 200 m3 of cesspit is discharged daily

• Leak water from waste and waste waters reach the sea directly or by rainfall and creeks




ÇANTA MUNICIPALITY

Population 4.915persons Daily waste quantity 5 ton/day (winter) – 20 ton/day (summer) Vehicles and capacity 2 vehicles 11 m3 Waste collection frequency (winter) 5 days a week

(summer) daily Number of runs (winter) 1

(summer) 3 Personnel in cleaning services

6 persons


Wild storage is being made in an old gravel quarry inside the forest. The site is still being used by Çanta Municipality as a gravel quarry. It is 500 m to the abandoned old Çantaköy. One slope of the site which is situated on a hill opens to the valley that feeds Karaköy creek on which De� irmenköy Municipality operates water wells, and the other slope opens to Çanta creek on which Çanta Municipality operates water wells.

Problems caused • Intensive odor • Risk of air pollution due to incineration of waste

dumped at pits from where gravel material is removed

• Particular risk of ground water pollution because the ground is highly permeable.


GÜMÜ� YAKA MUNICIPALITY

Population 5.665 persons Daily waste quantity 6 ton/day (winter) – 20 ton/day (summer) Vehicles and capacity 3 vehicles 8 m3 and 2 x 4 m3 Waste collection frequency Daily Number of runs (winter) 1


11 persons and 3 persons temporary


Wild storage is being made on land. The site is 2-2.5 km to habited areas and Tekirda� -Istanbul highway, and 1.5 km to Çorlu-Istanbul highway, by Ere� li creek which flows into Gümü�yaka shore.

Problems caused • Intensive odor • Flies, pests etc. breeding • Risk of diseases carried by birds and stray animals • Risk of waste and leak water from waste flowing

into the creek and sea by rainfall • Risk of surface water pollution



• Risk of ground water pollution • Risk of waste drifted around by wind


DE� �RMENKÖY MUNICIPALITY

Population 5.130 persons Daily waste quantity 5 ton/day Vehicles and capacity 2 vehicles 11m3 and 4 m3 Waste collection frequency Once a week Number of runs 3 Personnel in cleaning services

3 persons


There are four storage sites.

1st site It is on the road to Büyükçavu�lu, 100 m to Kaz�mp�nar creek which passes through the town center. Wild storage on Treasury land. No longer used.

2nd site It is at the source of Bo�naklar creek which passes through the town center. Wild storage on Treasury land. No longer used.

3rd site It is on the branch of Karaköy creek which passes through the town center. It is an old sand-gravel quarry on the Treasury land. Application has been filed to get a ÇED report for this site.

4th site It is at the source of Karaköy creek which passes through the town center. Land has been taken from the Treasury land, and wild storage is being made. Lawsuits have been instituted against the municipality for this site.

Problems caused The creek beds that pass from the said 4 sites merge the main creek which passes through the town center. On this creek, De� irmendere Municipality operates water wells. • Risk of surface and ground water pollution at all

sites • Risk of waste and leak water from waste drifted

into the creeks • Intensive odor • Flies, pests etc. breeding • Risk of diseases carried by birds and stray animals • Risk of waste being drifted around.




BÜYÜKÇAVU� LU MUNICIPALITY

Population 3.160 persons Daily waste quantity 3 ton/day Vehicles and capacity 1 vehicle 4 m3 Waste collection frequency 3 days a week Number of runs 2 Personnel in cleaning services

3 persons


Wild storage is being made in the forest land. The site is 500 m to the TEM highway, by the creek bed which flows into De� irmenköy irrigation pond, within the pond basin preservation area. The water from the pond and creek that flows into the pond is given as potable water to summer houses at Çanta and Silivri coast by Water Association of Silivri Coast and Villages.

Problems caused • Intensive odor • Flies, pests etc. breeding • Risk of diseases carried by birds and stray animals • Risk of waste and leak water from waste drifted

into the pond by rainfall and wind • Risk of surface water pollution • Risk of ground water pollution


KAVAKLI MUNICIPALITY (Waste transferred to IMM sanitary landfill)

Population 40.488 persons Daily waste quantity 60 ton/day Vehicles and capacity - Waste collection frequency - Number of runs - Personnel in cleaning services

-

Cleaning services are provided by a private company. Waste storage site Waste is transported to the IBB Halkal� transfer station.

ORTAKÖY MUNICIPALITY

Population 3.200 persons Daily waste quantity 4 ton/day (winter) – 6 ton/day (summer) Vehicles and capacity 1 vehicle 8 m3 Waste collection frequency Daily Number of runs (winter) 1


4 persons

Cleaning services are provided by the municipality



Owner and status of the waste storage site

Wild storage is being made at the land of the old winery by Ortaköy creek which passes through the town center. Its distance to habited areas is zero.


into the creek and sea by rainfall • Risk of surface water pollution • Risk of ground water pollution • Risk of waste spread around the town by wind and

stray animals Medical waste is being collected along with domestic waste.

ÇATALCA MUNICIPALITY

Population 15.000 persons Daily waste quantity 25 ton/day Vehicles and capacity 4 vehicles – 2x4 m3, 9m3, 13m3 Waste collection frequency Daily Number of runs 2 Personnel in cleaning services

17 persons


Wild storage is being made on the Treasury land. The site is at the quarry on the branch meeting Ko� uk creek which feeds the lake at the ISKI-Büyükçekmece Lake Potable Water Basin. There is a hill held by the military between the site and the town center, and the site is 1 km to the town.

Problems caused • Intensive odor • Flies, pests etc. breeding • Risk of diseases carried by birds and stray animals • Risk of air pollution due to incineration • Risk of ground water pollution • Waste drifted around by wind • Risk of waste being carried to the creek by rainfall

Medical waste is sometimes collected separately and transported to the IBB Medical Waste Incineration Facility, and sometimes duped at the existing dump site due to problems experienced with IBB.



DURUSU MUNICIPALITY

Population 2.200 persons Daily waste quantity 2 ton/day Vehicles and capacity 1 vehicle 4 m3 Waste collection frequency 2 days a week Number of runs 2 Personnel in cleaning services

4 persons


Waste being filled in a private mine pit is immediately covered by soil.

Problems caused • Risk of ground water pollution Medical waste is being collected along with domestic waste.

Ç�FTL�KKÖY MUNICIPALITY

Population 3.000 persons Daily waste quantity 2 ton/day Vehicles and capacity 1 vehicle 4 m3 Waste collection frequency Every other day Number of runs 2 Personnel in cleaning services

3 persons


Wild storage is being made in the forest land. The site is within the ISKI-Sazl�dere Dam potable water preservation area, at the source of Çiftlikköy creek which feeds the lake. It is 1.5 km to habited areas.

Problems caused • Odor • Flies and pests etc. breeding • Risk of diseases carried by • Risk of air pollution and forest fire due to

incineration • Risk of waste being drifted to the creek by wind

and rainfall • Risk of ground water pollution • Risk of surface water pollution

KARACAKÖY MUNICIPALITY

Population 2.817 persons Daily waste quantity 2 ton/day Vehicles and capacity 1 vehicle 4 m3 Waste collection frequency 2 days a week Number of runs 2 Personnel in cleaning 3 persons



services Cleaning services are provided by the municipality Owner and status of the waste storage site

Wild storage is being made in the forest land. The site is within the ISKI-Sazl�dere Dam potable water preservation area, on a small quarry on the branch of Bink�l�ç creek which feeds the lake. It is 2 km to habited areas.

Problems caused • Odor • Flies • Risk of ground water pollution • Risk of surface water pollution • Waste drifted around by wind • Risk of waste being drifted to the creek by rainfall • Risk of forest fire


B�NKILIÇ MUNICIPALITY

Population 3.000 persons Daily waste quantity 2 ton/day Vehicles and capacity - Waste collection frequency - Number of runs - Personnel in cleaning services

-


Wild storage is being made at a small site taken from the forest area. The site is 2.5-3 km to habited areas, but within the ISKI-TERKOS (DURUSU) Lake potable water basin.

Problems caused • Intensive odor • Flies, pests etc. breeding • Risk of ground water pollution • Risk of forest fire

HARAÇÇI MUNICIPALITY

Population 12.000 persons Daily waste quantity 15 ton/day Vehicles and capacity 1 Waste collection frequency Daily Number of runs 2 Personnel in cleaning services

4 persons


Wild storage is being made at the old quarry inside forest area. The site is 800 m to habited areas, and within the ISKI-Sazl�dere Dam potable water



preservation area, and at the source of Han creek that feeds the dam.

Problems caused • Intensive odor • Flies, pests etc. breeding • Risk of diseases carried by birds and stray animals • Risk of ground water pollution • Waste drifted around by wind • Risk of air pollution due to incineration


BÜYÜKÇEKMECE MUNICIPALITY

Population 60.000 persons Daily waste quantity 80 ton/day (winter) – 150 ton/day (summer Vehicles and capacity 6 vehicles Waste collection frequency - Number of runs - Personnel in cleaning services

-


Waste has been being dispatched to the IBB Halkal� transfer station for two years. The old site is not used any more because it is within the ISKI-Büyükçekmece Lake potable water basin preservation area. • Risk of surface water pollution from the closed site • Risk of ground water pollution from the closed site

Medical waste from hospitals are collected by �STAÇ and transported to the Medical Waste Incineration Facility.

KUMBURGAZ MUNICIPALITY

Population 12.000 persons Daily waste quantity 12 ton/day (winter) – 30 ton/day (summer Vehicles and capacity 4 vehicles Waste collection frequency Daily Number of runs 1 Personnel in cleaning services

16 persons


The storage site at Güzelce quarters is partially used. Waste is transported to the IBB Halkal� transfer station. The site is 1 km to habited areas and E-5 highway, and 50 m to the river bed. The surface of the storage site has been graded; however waste is out in the open on the slopes.




into the creek and sea by rainfall • Risk of waste drifted around by wind • Risk of surface water pollution • Risk of ground water pollution


TEPEC�K MUNICIPALITY

Population 22.000 persons Daily waste quantity 22 ton/day Vehicles and capacity 3 vehicles – 3x5 m3 Waste collection frequency Daily Number of runs 2-4 Personnel in cleaning services

15 persons


Wild storage is being made at the old quarry at Mand�ra hill near Büyükçekmece Lake. The site is within the ISKI-Büyükçekmece Lake potable water preservation basin and within absolute and intermediate distance preservation site. It is 1 km far from habited areas.

Problems caused • Intensive odor • Flies, pests etc. breeding • Risk of diseases carried by birds and stray animals • Risk of surface water pollution • Risk of ground water pollution • Air pollution due to waste incineration • Risk of dust and smoke polluting environment and

lake • Risk of waste spreading around and lake surface

MURATBEY MUNICIPALITY

Population 2.066 persons Daily waste quantity 2 ton/day Vehicles and capacity 1 vehicle 4 m3 Waste collection frequency Every other day Number of runs 1 Personnel in cleaning services

2 persons


The municipality does not have its own waste storage site. It dumps its waste in the storage sites of nearby municipalities and does wild storage.

GÜRPINAR MUNICIPALITY



Population 31.000 persons Daily waste quantity 30 ton/day (winter) – 50 ton/day (summer) Vehicles and capacity 3 vehicles Waste collection frequency Daily Number of runs 2 Personnel in cleaning services

26 persons


Wild storage is being made. It is on the border of Yakuplu-Kavakl�-Gürp�nar, 150 m to the river bed, and 750-1000 m to houses. The old site is 1-1.5 km to E-5 highway, and 100 m to houses. Its top has been graded and covered partially by soil. However, waste is still out in the open at the slopes and problems persist.

Problems caused • Intensive odor • Flies, pests etc. breeding • Risk of diseases carried by birds and stray animals • Risk of waste drifted around by wind and rainfall • Risk of waste being carried to the creek and land

by rainfall • Risk of surface water pollution • Risk of ground water pollution

YAKUPLU MUNICIPALITY

Population 23.500 persons Daily waste quantity 45-50 ton/day Vehicles and capacity 3 vehicles – 13 m3 and 15 m3 Waste collection frequency Daily Number of runs 3 Personnel in cleaning services

-

Cleaning services are provided by a private company. Waste storage site Waste is transported to the IBB Kemerburgaz Regular

Storage Site.

ESENYURT MUNICIPALITY

Population 154.000 persons Daily waste quantity 100-115 ton/day Vehicles and capacity 10 vehicles – 6.5x10 m3 Waste collection frequency Daily Number of runs 2-3 Personnel in cleaning services

4 persons

Cleaning services are provided by a private company. Waste storage site Waste is transported to the IBB Halkal� transfer station.



M�MAR S�NAN MUNICIPALITY

Population 28.000 persons Daily waste quantity 30 ton/day Vehicles and capacity 3 vehicles Waste collection frequency Daily Number of runs - Personnel in cleaning services

19 persons


The municipality does not have its own storage site. Waste is dispatched to the dump sites of the nearby municipalities or the transfer stations of IBB at Halkal� or Yenibosna.

Medical waste is being collected along with domestic waste. The project of collecting packaging waste separately at the source is being implemented.

KAVAKLI MUNICIPALITY (S�L�VR�)

Population - Daily waste quantity - Vehicles and capacity - Waste collection frequency - Personnel in cleaning services

-


Random storage is made on the Treasury land. The site is by the TEM highway and 500 m to habited areas. Waste accumulated in this site which has been in use years are graded, pits of 1-1.5 m in depth opened and waste buried

Problems caused • Intensive odor • Flies • Risk of ground water pollution • Risk of waste drifted around • Methane gas risk because pits are randomly closed.



Istanbul Municipal Infrastructure Project Annex B 39

ANNEX B

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR CLOSURE OF EXISTING ILLEGAL WASTE SITES



B1. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT Environmental Impact Assessment Requirements: Clean up/rehabilitation of municipal wild dump sites are not explicitly identified as “activities requiring an EIA Report” in the current Turkish EIA regulation. However, within the context of due diligence, EIA related WB Safeguard Policies are to be fulfilled prior to initiation of of any clean up/rehabilitation activity.

Existing Environmental Situation: The above listed dumps are in common jeopardizing the environment and hence careful analyses of the current situation of each dump site and then providing urgent proper solutions for each site is essential. The solution in general operational aspects may ask for closure with rehabilitation, or rehabilitation of the site only. The below list can give us a brief description upon the existing reported risks and environmental and public health problems associated with the subject sites:

¾ Intensive odor ¾ Flies, pests etc. breeding ¾ Risk of diseases carried by birds ¾ Leak water from waste forming ponds ¾ Leak water from waste carried into sea by the creek ¾ Risk of surface water pollution ¾ Risk of ground water pollution (especially No.4 very permeable soil) ¾ Methane explosion risk ¾ Waste drifted around by wind ¾ Medical waste is collected together with domestic waste

(2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,12,13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 23) ) ¾ Site is also used as discharge site for vacuum pumps of cesspits, about 200 m3

of cesspit is discharged daily (special to No.3) ¾ Risk of air pollution due to incineration of waste dumped at pits from where

gravel material is removed (No.4) ¾ Risk of air pollution and forest fire due to incineration (No. 15 Ciftlikkoy, 16,

17 ,18) ¾ Risk of dust and smoke polluting environment and lake (No 24) ¾ Risk of waste spreading around and lake surface (No 24)

Expected Impact: Rehabilitation of the above mentioned illegal/wild dumps is expected to have positive benefits to human health and to reduce above mentioned adverse environmental impacts of waste disposal. In addition to help mitigating potential environmental impacts, the rehabilitation will allow the lands to be reused.

B2. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES There exist the following alternatives for the concerned illegal/wild dumps:

(a) Upgrade (Rehabilitate and continue to operate): This option may be applicable to 11 of the sites as noted above. Such sites should possess



necessary topographical characteristics in terms of soil permeability, groundwater and wind as well as proper operational (size of land, waste composition, neighboring environment, etc) and accessibility features so that they will be continued for operation after rehabilitation. The sites should have permission and positive environmental impact assessment from the provincial environment directorate to continue to receive wastes.

(b) Close (Rehabilitate and Close): This may be applied to 11 sites with probable

4 additional sites. In this case, there is negative EIA for dumping to the site, or the dump has ceased its economic life.

(c) Remove: This mean extract the material currently deposited at a given site,

dispose of it somewhere else and restore the site. This also has special criteria. The dump site should be very sensitive and the amount of dump is manageable.

(d) “Do Nothing”: In this case, the outcome can be reasonably foreseen. The

wild dumpsites, and the poor operation of landfills affects the aesthetic look, environment and health of the region, as well as the attitude of general local population. The potential for contamination of water supplies is great in the “do nothing” alternative. Besides, being open, this waste can often be propelled by the wind. The pollution of sea and lakes and creeks will give rise to many subsequent problems such as public health, jeopardizing the social and economical activities, jeopardizing the urban and rural life, risks for tourism, etc.

B3. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN Landfills can impact upon the environment many years after the completion of filling activities. It is important that all landfills are rehabilitated and that an after-care management program is implemented upon completion of filling activities. This will help mitigate potential environmental impacts, and allow the land to be reused. Once a landfill is rehabilitated, it is important that monitoring of the site continues and that rehabilitation measures, for example leachate extraction and collection systems, are maintained for an appropriate period of time. This is commonly referred to as landfill ‘after-care’. Rehabilitation consists of both ongoing and final phases. Ongoing rehabilitation of a landfill should occur throughout the life of the landfill as various landfill cells / areas are completed. Final rehabilitation works can commence after an allowable time for each sub-site/lot of the site concerned. The EMP should describe procedural steps and standards for site investigations, design, Environmental Impact assessment, Construction, Monitoring and after-care to address environmental concerns (most importantly soil and ground water pollution, leachate generation and landfill gas production).



B3.1 Site Investigations

A detailed survey for each site will be required for rehabilitation of the sites to to get concrete data and records for better understanding the situation of the dumps and plan/design the rehabilitation measures more appropriately. Some of the issues that needs to be considered with such study includes :

1. Groundwater contamination 2. Gas emissions 3. Medical wastes and composition of the waste 4. Waste compaction 5. Scavenging practices 6. Soil covering. 7. Leachate monitoring; 8. Open burning 9. Management capacity (operation, security, monitoring) 10. Isolation of the dumpsite 11. Awareness of neighbor community 12. Nuisance 13. Still under operation or not. 14. Life-span and extendibility of the landfill 15. Waste compaction practices 16. Soil covering.

The basic surveys in the fields can be listed as follows:

• Topographical Survey: Area, waste dump area, average depth of dumped waste, perimeter, underlying geology, etc.

• Water Situation: Depth of water table and risk of leachate contamination • Leachate: Samples to measure leachate amount • Gas amounts and emissions: analyses of samples of dumps for gas amounts to

design measures for gas emissions • Waste Composition: waste composition is crucial to design appropriate

measures??

The result of the studies should also clearly put which measure is the best for the concerned site, i.e. upgrade/rehabilitate, close, remove, etc.

B3.2 Planning and ConstructionBefore final rehabilitation starts adequate planning should be undertaken for each site. The planning should include as minimum :

• removal of site structures • additional compaction; • completion of capping; • completing of vegetation establishment; • leachate management; • landfill gas management; and



• surface water controls. In addition, after-care plan should also be decided before any planning for proper planning, rehabilitation and post-use of the site.

B3.2.1 Removal of site structures All structures that are not compatible with the intended final use of the site must be removed from landfill sites.The site should be cleared of structures that may impede the rehabilitation process or are incompatible with the intended final use of the site. Fences may be retained during rehabilitation, as they are useful for site security and may keep out browsing animals.

B3.2.2 Additional compaction

Before final capping and rehabilitation, waste should be compacted as much as possible to minimize instability due to the presence of voids. Bulky waste that was improperly buried or protrudes from the edges of filled areas may need to be removed and disposed of correctly.

B3.2.3 Completion of capping

Site capping and re-vegetation must ensure that the final surface provides a barrier to the migration of water into the waste, controls emissions to water and atmosphere, promotes sound land management and conservation, prevents hazards and protects amenity.

Site caps must ensure that water infiltration through the cap is no more than 75% of the anticipated seepage rate through the landfill liner. Moisture within the cap must remain sufficiently stable to prevent cracking or other deformation. The capping layer must be shaped to allow lateral drainage. Steep slopes must be battered with the overall gradient being a maximum of 1 vertical to 3 horizontal.

Final capping and re-vegetation should be applied only after deposited refuse has settled and the area has become stable.

A range of landfill cap designs should be considered to determine the configuration that is most suitable to the site. In general, designs may include clay capping and/or use a composite of clay and a geo-membrane.

Clay and composite landfill caps consist of one or a number of layers. A gas drainage layer should have a minimum thickness of 300 mm. To prevent encrustation, the calcium carbonate content of the layer should not exceed 10% by weight. Clay should match the properties for that utilized for liner construction.

A clay cap should not be left exposed for prolonged periods of time, as this will probably lead to cracking, which will increase infiltration rates. Clay will need to be replaced if cracking or desiccation occurs



Geo-membranes or geo-synthetic composite liners should be considered as an additional moisture barrier for putrescible / decayable landfills, if clay material is unavailable or not suitable. Secure landfills require a geo-membrane or a geo-synthetic composite liner. A drainage layer comprised of coarse sand, pebbles or gravel directly above the clay layer will allow more rapid shedding of water and will reduce percolation through the cap. The drainage layer should be designed so that sufficient moisture remains in the final layer to support vegetation and prevent the cap from drying out and cracking. Water balance calculations incorporating local rainfall data should be used to confirm that these parameters will be met. The final layer of the landfill cap should consist of clean fill and topsoil. Ideally, topsoil from local sources should be used. As new areas of the landfill are developed, top soils should be stripped and stockpiled separately to be used as the final layer. The depth of soil to be provided depends on the vegetation intended for the site. It is proposed to have minimum 100 mm depth for grasses and sedges and 250 mm for shrubs. Compaction of the topsoil should be avoided as this will restrict vegetation growth by reducing water penetration and root growth. Loose tipped soils will encourage deeper roots, providing wind stability, water and nutrient availability, and most importantly shoot growth.

All recyclable materials like plastic, tin and glass would be collected and transported out of area. These components are not bio-degradable and thus need the removal.

The following final capping is proposed as an alternative for the sites concerned:

Final Cover of the Site

Vegetation Soil Cover 100 cm

Coarse Material for Drainage thickness � 20 cm

Two Layers of Clay 15 – 20 cm

Foundation Layer 20 cm (Soil)

Solid Waste



B3.2.4 Vegetation Vegetation must be selected with regard to the particular area and appropriate native species utilized. Vegetation must be selected after consideration of the following;

• local climate (e.g. rainfall, wind) and soil conditions; • long-term viability; • ongoing maintenance requirements; • design of landfill cap; • capacity to prevent erosion of the landfill cap; and • final site use.

B3.2.5 Leachate, Gas and Surface Water Management Landfill rehabilitation must ensure that leachate, landfill gas and surface water emissions do not cause environmental harm.

Surface Water Managementi. forming of a drainage so as to route any runoff away from the intended

site. ii. Construction of drains around proposed site of areas. iii. Arrangement of storm water removal from the excavated or clay lined

area with the help of portable pumps.

Surface Water Control SystemAs the surface water is the major contributor of leachate, following aspects can be incorporated in the design: -

i. Appropriately graded and properly designed drainage facility. ii. To avoid accumulation of storm water, clay liner will be laid gradually in

cells. iii. To minimize downstream flooding storm water storage basins would be

constructed to contain the diverted storm water flows.

In addition, the following issues would be essential to be taken into account during planning and construction:

• To divert the surface runoff, drains could be constructed on either sides of the proposed site.

• To provide sufficient subsistence to the native soil to resist heavy rains / flooding thick tree plantation could be carried out along access roads and on site.

• To collect surface runoff impounding reservoirs could be constructed inside the site. These reservoirs could serve to store the water during excess stream flow and to supply water to meet the demand of water for sprinkling etc.

• Leachate was to be collected in leachate collection tank through leachate flow already existing in the dump.



B3.3 After Care

Landfill after-care typically lasts up to 25 to 30 years after a landfill ceases toaccept wastes. After-care must continue until the Regulatory Authority approves cessation of such activity. The requirements of after-care vary, generally reducing over time. Landfill after-care consists of two main activities – monitoring and maintenance of a closed landfill.

B3.3.1 Maintenance A post-closure maintenance program must be established to ensure that the landfill does not cause environmental harm after site closure. The program should focus on preventing emissions to water, emissions to the atmosphere, and protection of land use and local amenity. Maintenance must continue until the Regulatory Authority approves cessation. Maintenance of the landfill cap may include:

• maintaining design contours (i.e. adding fill material / topsoil in depressions); • sealing any cracks to prevent water infiltration; and • restoration of vegetation to prevent erosion.

Regular maintenance of the leachate collection and treatment systems, landfill gas extraction system and surface water sediment controls will minimize the risk of failure of these systems / controls. A maintenance schedule should be developed that defines what maintenance will be conducted and the frequency of such maintenance (e.g. servicing pumps).

Additional maintenance may be required if the monitoring regime identifies any failures.

B3.3.2 Monitoring

Ongoing monitoring of closed landfills must ensure that the potential impacts of a landfill are scrutinized to the same degree of certainty as during the life of the landfill. Monitoring must identify failure of any environmental protection measures in a timely fashion, and must continue until no longer required by the Regulatory Authority. Monitoring should address the following issues:

• groundwater; • surface water; • leachate; • landfill gas; • surface settlement; and • vegetation.

Groundwater : Regular, representative sampling of groundwater must be conducted to ensure early detection of any contamination by leachate and to demonstrate compliance with any statutory requirements. A network of groundwater monitoring bores should be installed. The parameters, frequency and duration of the sampling and testing should be agreed with the related authority.



Surface water : Surface water must be monitored on a regular basis to detect and respond to any pollution from the landfill and to demonstrate compliance with any statutory requirements. Monitoring points should be established at the point(s) of discharge from the landfill. The parameters, frequency and duration of the sampling and testing should be agreed with the related authority.

Leachate : Leachate must be regularly monitored to establish its quality and assess suitable management options. Monitoring locations should be established in the leachate collection sump at the base of the landfill liner and, if required, at points upstream anddownstream of the landfill in any receiving waters.

Landfill gas : Where landfill gas collection systems have been installed, regular monitoring of gas composition, combustion efficiency and flow rate should be undertaken to enable annual reporting of emissions from the system. Alternatively, stack emissions can be measured directly following flaring.

Where landfill gas is not collected, regular monitoring should be undertaken to detect whether landfill gas presents a source of odour or an explosion or toxicity hazard, and to estimate greenhouse gas emissions.

Landfill gas monitoring should include both surface and subsurface programs.

Monitoring should be conducted on at least quarterly frequency and should measure methane concentrations as a minimum. Where odours are of particular concern, surface monitoring should also measure hydrogen sulphide. The landfill operator may apply to vary the frequency of sampling five years after closure of the tipping area if it can be demonstrated that there have been no emissions.

Land settlement should be monitored on a regular basis.

Vegetation should be inspected quarterly during the first two years following closure to identify areas of stunted growth or dieback, successful species, soil condition, soil moisture levels, and other parameters as required.

B3.3.3 Site closure

IMM must ensure that waste materials are not received for disposal by the facility after landfill operations cease. Any waste materials that are accepted for use in the rehabilitation must be strictly documented and reported in the same fashion as for an operating site. The landfill operator should provide adequate public notification, including signage and media notices, of the closure of the landfill. The site should be secured to prevent unauthorized dumping.

IMM should advise neighbouring residents of a contact person to discuss any issues. A record of complaints (e.g. odour) must be maintained in the same manner as during operation.

VII.3.4 Site sign-off



IMM must clearly demonstrate that the landfill does not pose a threat to the environment before ceasing after-care activities. Generally, landfills should be monitored up to 30 years after their closure, however this timeframe may be decreased if the landfill is designed, operated and rehabilitated to a high standard. It is imperative that sufficient information from an extended period of time is provided before applying to the Regulatory Authority to cease after-care activities. Approval for the cessation of after-care activities may only be considered where:

• gas concentration levels fall to less than 1.5 % carbon dioxide at surface level for a period of 12 months;

• waste is stabilized and there has been no settlement of the waste in the previous two years. This could be determined by the composition of leachate changing to a low level of contamination posing no environmental hazard;

• groundwater monitoring indicates no contamination of groundwater; • surface assessments demonstrate stable and effective surface water

drainage; and

• documentation that the approved rehabilitation and after-care plans have been fully implemented.



ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

A. MITIGATION PLAN

Cost (US$ x 106) Institutional Responsibility

Phase IssueMitigatingMeasure

Install Operate Install Operate

Planning andConstruction

• concrete data being collected forproper planning and implementation

• Site investigations 0,3 -ExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms

IMM/Solid WasteOperator


• After care use is not known causingdifficulties in planning

• The after-care-use of the sites should bedecided in advance.

- -ExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms


Planning &Construction

• Some structures are not compatiblewith the intended final use of the siteas well as they impede therehabilitation process.

• The site should be cleared of structures thatmay impede the rehabilitation process orare incompatible with the intended finaluse of the site.

0,5 -

ExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms



• Instability of the capping / dump dueto the presence of voids.

• Before final capping and rehabilitation,waste should be compacted as much aspossible to minimize instability due to thepresence of voids. Bulky waste that wasimproperly buried or protrudes from theedges of filled areas may need to beremoved and disposed of correctly.

0,75 -




• Water migration contributes toleachate, causes instability, createspollution etc.

• Proper capping and vegetation as describedin Section VII.2.3.

15 0,5/yearExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms



• The gas emissions to atmospherecauses risks and pollution

• Proper capping and gas collection/ controlsystem should be implemented.

GasCollection/

Control : 1,5-




• Moisture within the cap must remainsufficiently stable to prevent crackingor other deformation.

• Site caps must ensure that water infiltrationthrough the cap is no more than 75% of theanticipated seepage rate through thelandfill liner.

Included Included









• The capping layer must be shaped toallow lateral drainage.

• Steep slopes must be battered with theoverall gradient being a maximum of 1vertical to 3 horizontal.

Included Included




• Instability of the site due to earlyapplication of capping and vegetation

• Final capping and re-vegetation should beapplied only after deposited refuse hassettled and the area has become stable.

Included IncludedExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms


Planning andConstruction • Encrustation occur at the gas drainage

layer

• To prevent encrustation, the calciumcarbonate content of the layer should notexceed 10% by weight.

Included IncludedExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms


Planning andConstruction • Cracking in the clay cap

• A clay cap should not be left exposed forprolonged periods of time, as this willprobably lead to cracking, which willincrease infiltration rates. Clay will need tobe replaced if cracking or desiccationoccurs

Included Included




• Excess drainage cause restrictedgrowth of vegetation as well ascracking of the cap.

• A drainage layer comprised of coarse sand,pebbles or gravel directly above the claylayer will allow more rapid shedding ofwater and will reduce percolation throughthe cap. The drainage layer should bedesigned so that sufficient moistureremains in the final layer to supportvegetation and prevent the cap from dryingout and cracking. Water balancecalculations incorporating local rainfalldata should be used to confirm that theseparameters will be met.

Included Included




• Compacted top soil restrictsvegetation growth

• Loose tipped soils will encourage deeperroots, providing wind stability, water andnutrient availability, and most importantlyshoot growth.

Included Included



Planning andConstruction • Surface Water contributes to leachate

• A proper surface water drainage system tobe established

5,2 -ExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms








• Restricted disposal of leachateaccumulated in leachate tank causeoperational and environmentalproblems

• Proper solutions for each specific site mayinclude treatment; or transport to atreatment plant; or recycling by wateringthe cap.

Leachatetreatment forall sites : 5,2

-



After-Care

• Emissions to water, emissions to theatmosphere, and protection of landuse and local amenity after siteclosure/rehabilitation.

• A proper maintenance program should beimplemented to avoid any such risks.

- 0,25/year



Operation • Residual waste on the collectiontrucks poses a threat to health andaesthetics

• Cleaning of vehicles after dumping ofwaste

- 0,25/yearExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms


Operation • Poorly maintained vehicles pose anadditional air pollution threat

• Utilize newer vehicles and ensure propermaintenance

- TBDExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms


Operation • The landfill site is a health threatthrough its accessibility to animalsand scavengers

• Placing a fence around the premises, andhaving security at the site



Operation • Large number of birds act as diseasevectors

• Increasing the number of cover up layers - TBDExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms


Operation • Lack of a methane collection systemcauses a fire hazard

• Using a gas torch to burn off the generatedgas

2,6 TBDExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms


Operation• Operation of the landfill causes a

noise, aesthetic and health threat tothe nearby local population andenvironment

• Placing a buffer zone around the site - -



Operation• Potentially hazardous solid and liquid

(contained) waste poses a biggerthreat to groundwater

• Placing special containers on collectionsites designated for such waste.



Operation • The landfill and its operationalfacility may be aestheticallyunpleasing

• Placing a buffer zone around the site - -ExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms







Operation • Seasonal variations cause an increasein odor in summer time

• Decreasing the interval between protectivelayers

- -ExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms


Site Closure • Still waste receiving after operationscease.

• Should be prevented• Any waste materials that are accepted for

use in the rehabilitation must be strictlydocumented and reported in the samefashion as for an operating site.

• The landfill operator should provideadequate public notification, includingsignage and media notices, of the closureof the landfill.

- TBD



Site Closure • Unauthorized dumping• The site should be secured to prevent

unauthorized dumping. - TBDExternalSpecialists/EngineersFirms


TBD : to be determined.

TOTAL $31.81M $1M/yr



B. MONITORING PLAN

Cost Responsibility

PhaseWhat parameter is tobe monitored?

Whereis theparameter tobe monitored?

Howis the parameterto be monitored/type ofmonitoringequipment?

Whenis theparameter to bemonitored-frequency ofmeasurementor continuous?

WhyIs the parameter to bemonitored (optional)?


Baseline

Operation

After Care

Groundwater quality-Contamination-Groundwater flow-Quantity variations

Downstream ofsite

Sampling andanalysis

MonthlyTo observe the effect on GW,and to determine any leaks inthe protective layers

0,5ExternalEngineeringFirms

IMM/ISAAC

Baseline

Operation

After Care

Surface water quality-contamination-flow

Downstream ofsite

On the basis ofgroundwatersampling.

Monthly

To observe the effect of theexisting dump on SW, and todetermine any leaks in theprotective layers

IncludedExternalEngineeringFirms

IMM/ISAAC

Baseline

Operation

After Care

Leachate

Collectionpool-circulatingsystem


Monthly

To prevent pollution of theenvironment, to determinethe composition of theleachate and its potentialrisks


IMM/ISAAC

Baseline

Operation

After Care

Released gasAt the exit endof the pipe


Monthly

To prevent release ofpollutants, Green housegasses to atmosphere, todetermine possibility ofelectricity production


IMM/ISAAC



Cost Responsibility







OperationAmount of wastedeposited

Upon entranceof the landfill

Weighing bridgein the accessroad

Continuously atentrance oftrucks

To determine the speed atwhich the site is being filled.To predict the life span of thesite.


IMM/ISAAC

OperationClassification of thewaste


Sampling andAnalysis


-ExternalEngineeringFirms

IMM/ISAAC

OperationLiquid Content


Sampling,Analysis andweighing


The liquid/leachate contentof the waste should be lessthen 65% for landfilling


IMM/ISAAC

Construct

DustNoiseSolid wastesWater runoffSoil excavationSoil compactionTraffic disturbancesRemoval of plants

At allconstructionsites

Observations,andmeasurements

Duringconstruction,periodical( weekly) visitsto the site

To reduce pollution hazards,to reduce the magnitude ofthe effect on beings andplants in the area


IMM/ISAAC

After Care

Atmospheric watercollection

On site Observation

After majordeposition ofwaterOnce a month

To prevent increase in liquidcollection and possiblespreading of pollution.


IMM/ISAAC



Cost Responsibility







After CareLandslides On site Observation

Monthly-during the otherroutineobservations

To prevent re-opening of thesite. -

ExternalEngineeringFirms

IMM/ISAAC

After CareLeachate seepage

On site,Downstream ofthe landfill

Groundwaterbore holes,sampling andanalysis

Bimonthly, lessfrequently thanduringoperation

To observe the variationsafter the site has been closed 0,25

ExternalEngineeringFirms

IMM/ISAAC

After CareGroundwater quality-Contamination-Groundwater flow-Quantity variations

Downstream ofthe landfill

Groundwaterbore holes,sampling andanalysis


To observe the variationsafter the site has been closed,to monitor contamination


IMM/ISAAC

After CareSurface water quality-contamination-flow

Downstream ofthe landfill

SamplingDownstream oflandfill


To observe the variationsafter the site has been closed,to monitor contamination


IMM/ISAAC



Cost Responsibility







After Care Landfill Gas* /Released gas

On siteOn release endof the pipes


To observe the variationsafter the site has been closed,to monitor contamination.Where landfill gas is notcollected, regular monitoringshould be undertaken todetect whether landfill gaspresents a source of odour oran explosion or toxicityhazard, and to estimategreenhouse gas emissions.


IMM/ISAAC

After Care Land Settlement On SiteVisual and or byinstallments

Regular basis,and morefrequent duringheavy rains andstorms

Precautions to prevent biglandslides and deformationof the cap

TBDExternalEngineeringFirms

IMM/ISAAC

After Care VegetationTopsoil/vegetation

VisualRegularlywithin first 2years

to identify areas of stuntedgrowth or dieback,successful species, soilcondition, soil moisturelevels, and other parametersas required.


IMM/ISAAC

• Landfill gas monitoring should include both surface and subsurface programs and should measure methane concentrations as aminimum. Where odours are of particular concern, surface monitoring should also measure hydrogen sulphide. The landfilloperator may apply to vary the frequency of sampling five years after closure of the tipping area if it can be demonstrated that therehave been no emissions.



C. INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING Considering twelve years of experience on operation of two sanitary landfills and managing over daily 10,000 tons of solid waste by its Environmental Unit and its service company ISTAC, IMM has significant expertise in solid waste management. During the last decade, IMM has reportedly implemented in-house closure of numerous wild dumps in Istanbul. In as much as those actions definitely improved the aesthetics and public health conditions, there is no public documentation on environmental assessments of those sites. After enlargement of the IMM’s jurisdictional boundaries in 2004, IMM has identified the wild dump sites in operation and prioritized their closures. IMM has adequate infrastructure and staff to manage solid waste management tasks; however, certain level of training would be necessary regarding:

• Regulatory issues and WB safeguard policies, • environmental assessments, • cost/benefit analyses, • decision making process, • design/construction – QA/QC, and • and public participation, consultation and disclosure

aspects of closure/rehabilitation of the wild dumps. The training will be aimed towards several groups of stakeholders including administrative and technical management, technical staff and monitoring staff. ISTAC staff should also be included in these training programs. Inclusion of interested citizens and NGOs in special training sessions on public relations would also be necessary. The training programs can be prepared by national consultants in cooperation with an international expert in rehabilitation/closure of landfills. A two-phased training program is anticipated, namely:

1. Phase I : • regulatory issues and WB safeguard policies, • environmental assessments, • decision making process, • public participation, consultation and disclosure

2. Phase II :

• decision making processes, • cost/benefit analyses, • design/construction – QA/QC, and • and public participation, consultation and disclosure

Employment of an expert and two staff for training, consultancy and oversight of the design and construction QA/QC of the landfill rehabilitation/closure projects would be necessary. Estimated total cost of institutional strengthening is estimated at US$250,000.



D. SCHEDULE

• Mitigation Activities : Starting from Project Planning Stage to the life of the project.

• Monitoring Activities : Starting from Construction throughout the life of the project

• Training Activities : Starting from project planning Stage until Operation commences.



E. INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS Responsibilities for mitigation and monitoring : Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality as the investing and management party is responsible from overall mitigation and monitoring activities. In case of outsourcing the operation of the facility, the operator keeps the responsibility to collect, analyze, report the data. The data will be classified in accordance to the their importance and the date to submit the data will vary from daily reporting to weekly and monthly reporting. The municipality receives the related data and supervises the facility. The data is also send to the provincial environment directorate who is responsible for overall regulation and supervision of the facility and management system. In case of necessity, the municipality or the provincial directorate my shutdown or change the operations. The operator can make changes with the prior consent of the municipality and the directorate.

Legislation for role and responsibilities in solid waste management As described before, the role and responsibilities of each party set in the related regulation for Solid Waste Management. Accordingly:

• Ministry of Environment and Forestry:Go Regulation of the sector; determination of rules and standards; o Preparation of regional waste management plans and environmental

master plans o Licensing for recycling and eliminating facilities o Encouraging regional waste management unions o Funding o Community Training and Awareness Rising

• Municipalities / Union of Municipalities : It is encouraged by the Ministry of

Environment to form union of municipalities to manage the waste in regional/basin base. This is a very efficient and cost-effective approach if implemented with other tools of the solid waste management techniques (recycling, transfer stations, composting, re-use facilities, etc.) in a proper way. The roles of the municipalities or unions can be listed as below:

o Overall responsibility of preparation, implementation and management of the solid waste programs

o Collection, transportation, dumping, etc of solid waste and operation of landfills or related facilities (waste reduction or elimination);

o Outsourcing to private operators; o Licensing to Private Operators with prior consent of the Ministry of

Environment and Forestry; o Monitoring and Supervision of Private Operators together with

environmental directorates; o Community training and awareness rising; o Fee collection, financial and overall management of the sector in local.

• Metropolitan Municipalities: In case of Metropolitan municipalities the

responsibilities are divided as follows:Go Metropolitan Municipality is responsible for overall planning and

management of the solid waste system in the boundaries of the



metropolitan. However, district municipalities within the boundaries of the metropolitan have the responsibility to

o Collect and transport the waste to the landfill operated by the Metropolitan Municipality;G

o To collect related fees from the citizens/customers but through the water bills collected by metropolitan municipality’s water authority (SKIs).

o Training and awareness programsGo Waste reduction or recycling measuresG

The regulation describes aldo principles and criteria for landfill operation. Recalling the related section:

Section 5 is for dumping/landfilling of the solid waste : This section draws a framework of principles for a sanitary landfill establishment and operation including the sub-topics of :

i) The wastes to be dumped in sanitary domestic landfills and exceptions

ii) The disposal of the excavated earth iii) Selection of sanitary landfill site iv) Landfill facilities v) Leachate Collection vi) Removal of Gas vii) Dumping treatment plant effluent sludge within domestic landfill viii) Precautions to prevent negative impact on environment ix) Landscaping at landfills x) Licensing for landfills: In urban areas Municipalities or

metropolitan municipalities and in rural areas provincial governors are authorized for licensing provided that they have obtained prior consent of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (for population above 10.000) or of local environment directorate (for population below 10.000).

xi) Principles of landfill operation and supervision

In principle, the relations of the institutions to manage the project can be shown as follows:

Organizational Hierarchy in respect to Monitoring, Supervision and Regulating

the Industrial Waste Management Facilities

SWM Regulation

MoEF Administrator

Provincial Env. Dir.

Operator/Constructor

Municipality



F. CONSULTATION WITH LOCAL NGOs AND PROJECT-AFFECTED GROUPS

Provide documentation of the following:

• Date(s) consultation(s) was (were) held

February 5, 2007.

• Location(s) consultation(s) was (were) held Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Florya Social Facilities • Who was invited

Name, Organization or Occupation, Telephone/Fax/e-mail number/address (home and/or office) Municipalities, Village and Neighborhood Chiefs, NGO’s, Associations

• Who attended Name, Organization or Occupation, Telephone/Fax/e-mail number/address (home and/or office)

Municipalities, Village and Neighborhood Chiefs, NGO’s, Associations (Attached)



• Meeting Program/Schedule



•What is to be presented and by whom




Environmental Protection and Control Department – Environmental Protection Branch AGENDA: Closure of Wild Landfills

MEETING MINUTES

The informative meeting on the closure of wild domestic waste disposal landfills identified

within the boundaries of first level municipalities of districts of Silivri, Çatalca, Büyükçekmece and GOP, and within districts of Tuzla and � ile was held on 05.02.2007 at 14:00 Florya Social Facilities, under the chairmanship of �brahim DEM�R, Head of Environmental Protection and Control Department.

A presentation was made by �brahim DEM�R, Head of Environmental Protection and Control

Department, in the meeting on adverse effects of wild landfills on the environment and works to be carried out on existing landfills.

Participants asked about:

- Scope of works, - Environmental risks, - How the closed areas would be used, - Research to be carried out on irregular landfills - Cost of project - When the project would be completed, - What parameters would be monitored after the project is completed.

It was explained that the works would include such phases as the laying of an impermeable

layer over the waste, creating a green area by laying a vegetative layer, building a drainage system to collect leachate, and installing gas collection shafts and that adverse effects of wild landfills were stated as surface water pollution, ground water pollution, methane gas explosion, leachate ponds formation, heavy odor, fly colonies, pest invasion, epidemics mediated by birds, waste being flown around by winds; some examples of closed wild landfills were shown; and it was indicated that detailed works were to be done to identify the topographic structure, waste components, gas emissions, leachate pollution and the depth of ground water layer, and that the project cost would be estimated after the feasibility study, that such parameters as surface water quality, ground water quality, gas outlets, leachate water would be measured after the project is completed, and that the project was intended to be completed in 2009.

After the meeting, the participants expressed that the project would contribute environmental

cleaning, and management, increase the quality of life, and also stated that they were happy to see that such a project would be implemented.

Summary Meeting Minutes (Comments, Questions and Response by Presenters) Attached.

Ali OKTAR Manager, Environmental Protection




Environmental Protection and Control Department – Environmental Protection Branch

AGENDA: Closure of Wild Landfills

MEETING MINUTES The informative meeting on the closure of wild domestic waste disposal landfills identified

within the boundaries of first level municipalities of districts of Silivri, Çatalca, Büyükçekmece and GOP, and within districts of Tuzla and � ile was held on 05.02.2007 at 14:00 Florya Social Facilities, under the chairmanship of �brahim DEM�R, Head of Environmental Protection and Control Department.

A presentation was made by �brahim DEM�R, Head of Environmental Protection and Control

Department, in the meeting on adverse effects of wild landfills on the environment and works to be carried out on existing landfills.

Participants asked about:

- Scope of works, - Environmental risks, - How the closed areas would be used, - Research to be carried out on irregular landfills - Cost of project - When the project would be completed, - What parameters would be monitored after the project is completed.

It was explained that the works would include such phases as the laying of an impermeable

layer over the waste, creating a green area by laying a vegetative layer, building a drainage system to collect leachate, and installing gas collection shafts and that adverse effects of wild landfills were stated as surface water pollution, ground water pollution, methane gas explosion, leachate ponds formation, heavy odor, fly colonies, pest invasion, epidemics mediated by birds, waste being flown around by winds; some examples of closed wild landfills were shown; and it was indicated that detailed works were to be done to identify the topographic structure, waste components, gas emissions, leachate pollution and the depth of ground water layer, and that the project cost would be estimated after the feasibility study, that such parameters as surface water quality, ground water quality, gas outlets, leachate water would be measured after the project is completed, and that the project was intended to be completed in 2009.

After the meeting, the participants expressed that the project would contribute environmental

cleaning, and management, increase the quality of life, and also stated that they were happy to see that such a project would be implemented.

Ali OKTAR Manager, Environmental Protection

“closure of existing illegal waste sites”...scavenging, reuse or recycling and sanitary disposal...

Documents