Phikkal Landfill

Survey ,Design and Cost Estimate of Phikkal Landfill site Illam
Acknowledgements
We would like to sincerely acknowledge Ministry of Local Development, Department of Local Infrastructure
Development and Agricultural Roads (DoLIDAR) for providing this opportunity.
We hope that the study truthfully reflect to solve the present solid waste problem of Phhhikal VDC, Illam District and
their desire to implement the proposed project. This Landfill site project will create better environmental condition
within the Area.
The Consultant would like to express their gratitude to Senior Divisional Engineer Kumar Thapa, Er. Raju Shrestha
for their valuable suggestion and cooperation. The Consultant would like to express their gratitude to, Local
Development Officer, District Technical Officer, Secretary of Phikal VDc and other members of Illam District office
for their kind support and cooperation during the field survey and providing additional data during design stage.
This report has been prepared and submitted by Engineering and Educational Services Pvt. Ltd. This report is an
outcome of the Detailed Survey, Design and Cost Estimate of Infrastructure Development Works at
Proposed Phikal Landfill Site at Illdam istrict. This report is produced from the team works of e2 services team
and hopes same in future. Special thanks for survey and design team members Dr. Shaphal Subedi, Er.Niranjan
Pudasaini, Er. Shambhu Sharan Baral and other team members for their great and sincere effort.
We anticipate your positive consideration in this regard.
On the Behalf of:

Engineering and Educational Services Pvt. Ltd.
Babarmahal, Kathmandu
……………..
Mr. Rajeeb Baral
Contents
Engineering and Educational Services Pvt. Ltd Page i

Acknowledgement ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….i
Table of Content ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….ii
Sailent Features........................................................................................................................................................v
1 THE PROJECT.........................................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background.....................................................................................................................................................1
1.2 Introduction to Solid Waste Management......................................................................................................1
1.3 Objective........................................................................................................................................................2
1.4 Specific Objective...........................................................................................................................................2
1.5 The Assignment..............................................................................................................................................2
1.6 Scope of Work................................................................................................................................................2
2 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA............................................................................................................................4
2.1 Project Description.........................................................................................................................................4
2.2 Profile of Phikkal.............................................................................................................................................4
2.3 Environmental profile of Phikkal.....................................................................................................................6
3 EXISTING SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE................................................................................................7
3.1 Solid Waste Generation..................................................................................................................................7
3.2 Solid Waste Composition................................................................................................................................7
3.3 Waste Collection, Transfer and Transport.......................................................................................................9
3.4 Reduce, Recycle, and d Re-use......................................................................................................................10
3.5 Composting Practices...................................................................................................................................10
3.6 Special Waste Management.........................................................................................................................10
3.7 Final Disposal................................................................................................................................................10
4 METHODOLOGY...................................................................................................................................................11
4.1 Literature review..........................................................................................................................................11
4.2 Data Collection.............................................................................................................................................11
4.3 Field Survey..................................................................................................................................................11
4.4 Design Procedures........................................................................................................................................11
4.5 Landfill Area Development...........................................................................................................................11
Engineering and Educational Services Pvt. Ltd Page ii

5 PORJECT DESIGN CONCEPT AND DETAILED ENGINEERING..................................................................................13
5.1 The Concept of Proposed Landfill Site..........................................................................................................13
5.2 Master Plan..................................................................................................................................................14
5.3 Landfill Area: Life Span and Usage................................................................................................................14
5.4 Access and Internal Service Roads................................................................................................................15
5.5 Hydrometerological analysis.........................................................................................................................16
5.5.1 Rainfall Analysis.....................................................................................................................................16
5.5.2 Hydrological Study.................................................................................................................................18
5.6 Waste Bordering Dams.................................................................................................................................19
5.7 Preparation of linear Basement and laying of Mineral Liners.......................................................................20
5.8 Leachate Underdrain....................................................................................................................................20
5.9 Laying of Jute Mat and Drainage Carpet.......................................................................................................20
5.10 Landfill Gas Vent.........................................................................................................................................20
5.11 Calculation of Leachate Quantity from the landfill Area.............................................................................21
5.11.1 Calculation Method.............................................................................................................................21
5.11.2 Leachate Collection Tank.....................................................................................................................22
5.12 Leachate Treatment....................................................................................................................................22
5.12.1 Quality of Landfill Leachate.................................................................................................................23
5.13 Subsurface wetlands for leachate treatment..............................................................................................25
5.13.1 Application of Constructed wetlands in Nepal.....................................................................................25
5.13.2 Constructed Wetlands for Landfill Leachate Treatment.......................................................................25
5.13.3 Treatment process mechanism............................................................................................................26
5.13.4 Physical Features of Subsurface Flow (SF) Constructed Wetlands (CW)..............................................27
5.13.5 Design..................................................................................................................................................27
5.13.6 Design Calculation and Dimension of Constructed Wetlands (CW......................................................29
5.14 Landscaping................................................................................................................................................30
5.15 Fencing.......................................................................................................................................................30
5.16 Entrance Gate/Guard House-cum-Counter.................................................................................................31
Engineering and Educational Services Pvt. Ltd Page iii

5.17 Water Supply..............................................................................................................................................31
5.18 Provision of Electric and Telephone Connection.........................................................................................31
5.19 Ecological / Environment Protection Measures..........................................................................................31
5.20 Environment Monitoring............................................................................................................................32
5.21 Precaution Measures for Bird Hazard Control at the SLF – site...................................................................33
5.22 Site Protection Works.................................................................................................................................34
6 PROJECT COMPONENT, RATE ANALYSIS AND PROJECT COST..............................................................................35
6.1 Component of the Project............................................................................................................................35
6.2 Rate Analysis.................................................................................................................................................35
6.3 Project Cost..................................................................................................................................................36
7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................................37
Sailent Features
 General :
o Project Name : Phikkal Landfill site

o Location: Phikkal , Illam
o Type : Sanitary landfill(semi aerobic ,level 3 +composite finer)
Engineering and Educational Services Pvt. Ltd Page iv

 Population and waste characteristics
o Base Year Population: 5000 in Phikkal and 9885 in VDC(base year 2011)
o Population for next 20 yrs : 12313
o 3days waste production(35 house): 71.5kg
o 3days waste production(hotel): 77.5kg
o 3days waste production(office): 7.5kg
o Waste generation: (156.5/317)=/0.16 kg/person/day.
o Daily Waste Production: 2 ton ( approax).
 Structure :
o Landfill area: 2465.53m2

o Surface water Cut-off Drain: 97.35m
o Retaining wall: 105.8m
o Lechate Collection Tank: 7mx7m
o Primary Lechate Treatment pond: 3mx2m
o Leachate collection drain: 229.78m(250mm hdpe pipe)
o Leachate collection drain: 58.12m
o Landfill Gas vents: 15 Nos
o Fencing: 220m
o Office and Guardhouse: 1Nos
Engineering and Educational Services Pvt. Ltd Page v

1 THE PROJECT
1.1 Background
Phikkal Bazar Village Development Committee is situated in Mechi Zone, Illam district in the mountainous region
of Eastern part of Nepal. It is one of the most Municipality oriented V.D.C.s of Nepal. Phikkal Bazar VDC covers an
area of 28.1 sq.km , and PhikkalBazar with area around 3.77 sq.km is one of the major town in Illam which is on the
process of gradual expansion. This town area with basic infrastructures comprises one out of nine wards of the
V.D.C.
Phikkal currently generates about 2 tons of wastes every day. Main ingredients of such wastes are organic wastes,
plastics and papers. Households and hotels are the key to generate the wastes. Because of absence of practice of
4-R (Refuse, Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle) activities almost all the collected wastes are transported to the dumping
site at Bandevi 2km from Phikkal bazar. Due to strong opposition from local residents and lack of enough area for
further dumping, Phikkalis currently facing a problem of solid waste disposal. Realizing this fact, district office had
identified the landfill site (LFS) at Phikkal-5 Dhode at a distance of 6.5 km from core town
Upon the request of Illam District, Department of Local Infrastructure Development and Agricultural Roads
(DoLIDAR), under the Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development is entrusted for planning and
management of solid waste including sanitary landfill site for disposal of solid waste of Phikkal. For this purpose,
DoLIDAR has initiated works of the solid waste landfill site with all mitigating measures regarding the environmental
aspects of the entire area. The purpose of this project is to develop a long-term sanitary landfill site within the
selected area of about 7 ropani at Fikkaal-5, Dhode, Illam including a leachate collection tank and primary treatment
plant (Constructed wetland) and other necessary infrastructures.
1.2 Introduction to Solid Waste Management
Since the beginning, human has been generating waste. With the progress of civilization, the waste generated
became of a more complex nature. The increase in population and urbanization was largely responsible for the
increase in solid waste. Each household generates garbage or waste. Items that we no longer need or do not have
any further use fall in the category of waste, and we tend to throw them away. The wastes generated in solid state
as a result of various human activities and normally described as useless and unwanted material are known as
solid waste. Solid wastes are those waste materials that are not easily carried by water or air flows (solid or semi
solid). Solid waste may be defined as any discarded material that is not especially of solid waste. Discarded means
that the material is abandoned recycled or considered inherently waste like. Solid waste is relative and subjective.
This is the most seeable and the ignored problem of today’s world. World is finite, if this uncontrolled pollution of
solid waste is not ratified in time, this is going to bring a big disaster in our society. The subject of Solid Waste
Management (SWM) is timely and important .Population growth, rapid urbanization, establishment of commercial
and industrial Sectors, change in living Standard, and several other factors have changed the solid waste status
and composition. Waste management involves the collection, transportation, processing (waste treatment) and
disposal of waste materials, usually ones produced by human activity, in an effort to reduce their effect on human
health, and natural world and its environmental balance .In recent decades waste management has been focusing
in recovery of resources from the wastes. Waste management practices differ for urban and rural areas and for
household, industrial, and commercial producers.
Solid wastes can be broadly classified into three types: municipal solid waste, Bio-medical solid Waste and
Industrial solid Waste. The different techniques practiced in solid waste management are crude dumping, controlled
dumping, sanitary land filling, incineration, and deep well disposal. Crude dumping is often seen in the
municipalities of the developing nation which has a harsh environmental impact. These all methods of the waste
management are the methods of managing the waste once it comes out from the household or commercial and
institutional periphery. Apart from the management of the waste at the disposal site, source reduction and utilization
is another prospect of management. There is a universal formula for the source reduction of the solid Waste
i.e. 4-R (Refuse, Reduce, Reuse, Recycle). Instead of buying new containers from the market, use the one that is
Engineering and Educational Services Pvt. Ltd Page 1
already in the house. Refuse to buy new items though you may think they are prettier than the one you already
have. This example easily illustrates the concept of refuse. Reduce refers to reduction of the waste at the source so
that the waste load at the disposal site get reduced. Composting is the best practice for the reduction of the organic
waste at the household level. The process of extracting resources or value from waste is variously referred to as
recycle. Reuse is the term for maximum utilization of the resource that otherwise be the part of the municipal waste.
Some waste management experts have recently incorporated a 'fifth R': "Rethink", with the implied meaning that the
present system may have fundamental flaws, and that a thoroughly effective system of waste management may
need an entirely new way of looking at waste.
In context of Nepal, Irrigation, River Control & Other Infrastructure Development Section of Department of Local
Infrastructure Development and Agricultural Roads (DoLIDAR) is also acting as the Governmental agency
responsible for solid waste management. However, The Local self-governance act 1999 allocated most of the
operational level function of solid waste management to the municipality and Solid Waste Management and
Resource Mobilization Centre (SWRMC) under the Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development (MoFALD) is
now responsible for developing policies, identifying and developing landfill/waste disposal site.
1.3 Objective
The main objective of the Project is to improve the overall urban environment and the sanitary living conditions of
people of the Phikkal.
1.4 Specific Objective
The specific objective of the Project is to develop a long-term sanitary landfill site at Dhode ward no-5 Phikkal Illam
for better management of the solid waste generated in the city area of Phikkal.
1.5 The Assignment
The core component of the project is to develop an environmentally safe sanitary landfill site and waste treatment
plant for the sustainable management of the solid waste generated in the Phikkal.
DoLIDAR has decided to develop a long-term landfill site at Dhode about 6.5km far from core city area of the
Phikkal. The landfill site is like a small bowl shaped basin with limited drainage catchment. Proposed landfill site is
surrounded by hard rock side slope from northern, eastern and western parts, hence it seems geologically stable.
Two retaining structures at southern and eastern part of landfill site are proposed to retain the wastes.
Major components of the project are:
 A sanitary landfill area with provisions of mineral liner basement.
 With the provision of leachate collection tank and primary leachate treatment pond, this will dry up the
landfill area..
1.6 Scope of Work
The major scope of work comprised developing of sanitary landfill site and a leachate collection tank at Dhode for
the sustainable management of the solid waste generated from the Phikkalas a long term alternate. The specific
areas of activities under the assignment were:
• Assessment of various mitigation measures as identified by the Initial Environmental comprising physical,
chemical. Biological. Socio-economic and cultural baseline conditions in the proposed development area.
• Field verification of topographical map and assessment of various components proposed preliminarily in the
Map.
• Detailed survey, design and cost estimate of LFS and leachate collection tank at Phikkal. Covering an area
of about 6 ropani 12 anna based on the data provided by Illam District office.

• Conducting Hydro geological study.
• Prepare detailed drawings of the various components proposed in the design.
• Prepare cost estimate reports.
Finalization of all components of the LFS required for long term solid waste management of the Dhode, ward
no-5, ,Phikkal, Illam.
2 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA

2.1 Project Description
Phikkal V.D.C. of Illam district is situated in Mechi zone of Eastern Development Region of Nepal. This is one of
PhikkalBazar
city oriented community in the hilly region of Nepal having an altitude of about 1100m.Out of 48 VDC and one
Municipality PhikkalVDC is one of rapidly growing VDC at a distance of 37km from Illam Headquarter. Rapid
development works, basic infrastructures and presence of various service organizations are leading Phikkal
towards the municipality from V.D.C.
Illam District
The sources of generation of wastages are household, hotels, offices, industries, hospitals, etc. Phikkalcurrently
generates about 2 tons of waste everyday which are collected from city area once in a day and disposed at
dumping site. The sources of generation of wastages are household, hotels, offices, industries, hospitals, etc.
Phikkalcurrently generates about 2 tons of waste everyday which are collected from city area once in a day and
disposed at dumping site. The Illam district office has provided solid waste collection services only in city area
which comprises three ward . The averarage per capita household waste generation rate in the city area of
Phikkalwas found as 0.16kg/persoon/day
Compositions of solid wastes in Phikkalare kitchen waste, plastics, papers, agriculture waste, metals, textile, wood,
bones, medical waste and others also. Throwing of waste elsewhere in road ,streets valley areas are likely to
cause nuisance and proper management of waste is most important in Phikkal.Some of the solid waste of the
health post is managed by them at small pit.
Solid waste management has e emerged as a major issue in the city area of Phikkal bazar. In present practice
wastes are disposed in haphazard way. The search for a well planned long g term sanitary land fill site for the final
disposal of wastes at Dhode was identified and surveyed.
2.2 Profile of Phikkal
Illam district is situated in Mechi zone of Eastern Development Region of Nepal. Phikkal a small growing city at
hilltop .It has nine wards among them three wards are connected with city area. Which is expanded to 9 hector is
increasing day by day. Now, Phikkal has fulfilled almost all criteria to be a municipality. About 9900 people lives in
PhikkalV.D.C. among them 5000 people with 800 households’ live in the city area. The Phikkal bazzar is 37km far
from districtt headquarter and there is paved road in three wards.

Figure 2: PhikkalVDC
Background Information:
PhikkalVDC
No: of wards: 9
wards Connected to city area: 4 (3,5,2,6)
Rural wards: 5
Population at city area: 5000
Population growth rate: 1.00%
Built up area of city: 4.5 Sq.km
Religions: Hindu, Buddhist ,Kirat, Christian
Occupation: Agriculture, Animalhusbandrybusiness, service
Principal language: Nepali, Rai , Tamang, Lepcha , Newari
Main rivers and ponds: Jogimai , Siddhi khola, Myau Khola
Solid waste produced/ day: 2 Tones
Radio station : 1 Nos
Local news papers: 1 Nos
Hospitals and clinics: 7(PSC +6 clinic +1 Private hospital) Nos
College: Under construction
Higher secondary schools: 1 Nos
Schools: 16 Nos
Banks: 3 Nos
Small industries: 5(Furniture, dairy, Tea etc.) Nos
Organic Tea industry: 1 Nos
Police camp 1 Nos
Traffic Police camp 1 Nos

2.3 Environmental profile of Phikkal
At Phikkal there is not any well established industries, only an organic tea factory is running till now. For the
management of waste water and human excreta every household at city has managed their own safety tank.
Relatively air and water pollution are not the major environmental problem. Only the current environmental problem
is due to the solid waste.
To talk about the solid waste management (SWM) in the Phikkal, So practices are under the conceptual phases
from the responsible institutions regarding the utilization of wastes such as alternative energy, recycling of papers,
organic wastes are utilized for pig farming at local level etc. Hospitals are somehow managing the wastes produced
by them. All these practices are only supportive for solid waste management but not the entire solution. Thus, to
maintain the environmental condition of city now as well as in future, Illam district has decided to develop the well
planned landfill area at new site at Dhode -5. However, people are not taking the SWM quite seriously, so lots of
awareness programs are needed to encourage them for better solid waste management.
Climate of the Phikkalis sub-tropical. Average annual temperature of site is about 25 0 C and precipitation is about
1622mm. Altitude of the landfill site is about 1130m. As a whole Illam district seems to be active to manage a good
Environment at Phikkal.
3 EXISTING SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE

3.1 Solid Waste Generation
The sources of generation of wastages are household, hotels, offices, industries, hospitals, etc. Hotels generate
more amounts of wastages. About 2 tons of daily wastes are collected in Phikkal. The average per capita household

waste generation rate in the city area of Phikkal was found as 0.16kg/person/day. The generation of the
biodegradable waste is less than the generation of non-biodegradable waste. Present practice of solid waste
management is haphazard. Weekly about 14 tons of solid wastes are dumped at site at Bandevi 2km from Phikkal
bazar.
3.2 Solid Waste Composition
Compositions of solid wastes in Phikkalare kitchen waste, plastics, papers, agriculture waste, metals, textile, wood,
bones, medical waste and others also.
The sample waste composition of 35 Houses in 3 days In Phikkalis presented in Table 1 and Figure .
Table 1: Waste Composition of 35 houses in 3 days

Waste Composition
s.no Description Amount(kg) Percentage
1 Plastics 8 11.19%
2 Papers 5 6.99%
3 Textile 4 5.59%
4 Medical Waste 0.2 0.28%
5 Metal 3 4.20%
6 Animal Waste 10 13.99%
7 Wood 0.3 0.42%
8 Lather 5.5 7.69%
9 Bones 3 4.20%
10 Sand dust 1.5 2.10%
11 Kitchen Waste 31 43.36%
Total 71.5 100.00%
Figure 3: Waste Composition of 35 houses in 3 days
The distribution of Hotels Waste in 3 Days is presented in Table 2 and Fig 4.

Table 2 :Hotel Waste in 3 days

1 Kitchen Waste 54.5 70.32%
2 Plastics 5 6.45%
3 Papers 7 9.03%
4 Textiles 2.5 3.23%
5 Bones 3 3.87%
6 Sand dust 1.5 1.94%
7 Metal 1 1.29%
8 Glases 3 3.87%
Total 77.5 100.00%
Fig :4 Hotel Waste in 3 days
The distribution of Hotels Waste in 3 Days is presented in Table 3 and Fig 5.
Table 3: Waste in office in 3 days

1 Paper and Cartoons 3 40.00%
2 Plastics 1 13.33%
3 Glases 2 26.67%
4 Textiles 0.5 6.67%
5 Sand dust 0.5 6.67%
6 Metal 0.5 6.67%
Total 7.5 100.00%

Figure 5; Waste from Office in 3 days
From above tables, the total generation in 3 days is 156.5kg from 317 waste generators. So the Waste generation
per capita is 0. 16 kg/person/day.
3.3 Waste Collection, Transfer and Transport
Wastes are collected in weekly basis from Phikkal city area which is transported through a single tractor to the
dumping site at Bandevi situated about 2km far from m the city area. Buckets are kept in various pa art of the city
for collecting wastes. Approximate weekly waste collection is about 14 tons. The s staffs involved and equipment
are given as follows
Table 4 : No Of Staffs Involved At Solid Waste Management
S.n Staff Nos.
1 Supervisor 1
2 Sweeper 5
3 Driver 2
Table 5 : No Of Equipment At Solid Waste Management
s.n Equipment Nos

1 Tractors 2
3.4 Reduce, Recycle, and d Re-use

There is no any practice yet done in this context. But some family are trying to use the bio degradable wastes
locally for farming
3.5 Composting Practices
Though importance of the composting is well known among local people it is not yet being practiced. But some
households are doing in conventional way. Some organizations are providing the awareness and training about the

Composting which may increase the level of sanitation in future.
3.6 Special Waste Management
There is no special waste management. It is just collected and dumped.
3.7 Final Disposal
The final disposal of the generated solid waste is done at Bandevi community area which is 2km far from the city
area.
4 METHODOLOGY
4.1 Literature review
The relevant literatures, regulations and laws were reviewed after signing the contract and based on the advanced
principals team was mobilized for further study. The previous reports of similar job were also reviewed.
4.2 Data Collection
Data were collected from primary as well as secondary source. The meteorological data were collected from
Department of Hydrology and meteorology.
4.3 Field Survey

Photo 2 : During topographic surveying
Field survey was carried out for topographic detail and other relevant data collection. The survey team was lead by
engineer with overseer and other helping member. Consultation with client was also carried out by the team.
4.4 Design Procedures

Following design parameters shall be considered during the detailed design of landfill site.
4.5 Landfill Area Development

Following are the components for the landfill area development
• Surface water Cut-off Drain
• Waste Bordering Dams (Retaining wall )
• Preparation of Liner Basement and Laying of Mineral Liners.
• Lechate collection pipe.
• Laying of Jute Mat and Drainage Carpet
• Landfill gas Vent
• Lechate Collection Tank.
• Primary Lechate Treatment pond (Constructed wetlands)
• landscaping
• Fencing
• Office and Guardhouse
• Water supply
• Entrance gate
• Provision of Electric and Telephone Connection

5 PORJECT DESIGN CONCEPT AND DETAILED ENGINEERING

5.1 The Concept of Proposed Landfill Site
The proposed landfill type is semi-aerobic in which the leachate of the waste deposit is collected in pond through
perforated pipes embedded in graded boulders. The outlet pipe of leachate collection pipe is kept at least 1.0m
above leachate full supply level. Fresh air is drawn into the layers thereby introducing an aerobic condition around
the pipes. The leachate collection pipes are connected to the number of vertical vent pipes, which are extended
beyond the waste deposit level so that the air could pass through the leachate collection pipes and semi aerobic
condition is maintained in landfill site. In order to prevent the leachate percolation to the ground water the entire
landfill site is sealed by the thick clay layer. The collected leachate will be retained in the leachate retention pond
and be pumped back on the surface of the waste deposit. The schematic presentation of Semi-aerobic System is
shown in Figure .
The main design concept for the proposed semi aerobic land fill site is presented in Table 6
Table 6: Concept Design Consideration
Sanitary landfill system Semi-aerobic, level 3 + (composite liner)
Geo-membrane (2 sheets) + clay (1.0 m) with

Horizontal liner groundwater drainage

Biological treatment (aeration and re-circulation)

Leachate treatment and natural reed bed)
Landfill gas Passive venting
Waste dams Reinforced concrete for Banchare Danda (25 m)

Basically maintain present slopes with slight
Perimeter slope adjustment
Source: CKV Study Team, 2005
Figure 6 : Schematic representation of Semi-aerobic landfill system

(Source: The Fukuoka Method, Fukuoka City Environmental Bureau)
5.2 Master Plan

After a detailed study of the existing situations on topographical, hydro-geological and ecological/ environmental
conditions of the selected site for long-term sanitary land filling, necessary field works such as verification of the
existing topographical map and site investigations such as geotechnical investigation, water samplings etc. were
carried out. With due consideration of the alignment of access road to the proposed long-term sanitary landfill site,
existing topographical/ hydro-geological conditions and adverse ecological/environmental impacts likely to be
caused by the site operation on future, a master plan has been prepared based on the existing topographical map
with all necessary area of about distributed as follows:
Table 7 : Landfill area distribution

Description Area(m2) Area (Ropani) Area (%)
Actual landfill area 2465.53 4.84 71.64%
Site protection/buffer zone and greenery 874.69 1.72 25.62%
Other infrastructures for waste management 95.00 0.19 2.81%
(e.g. office complex, building, internal service
road, treatment pond leachate collection tank
etc.)
6.75
Total Area used for Landfill site 3435.22 100.00%
The site has been designed for safe and environmentally sound disposal of the city waste (i.e. not
for special wastes of hazardous nature) by the method of sanitary land filling. The detailed master plan is shown in
Annex- VI Drawings
5.3 Landfill Area: Life Span and Usage
Life span of the proposed long-term landfill site shall be calculated with due consideration of the
existing waste collection figures provided by the local people of Phikkaland district office of Illam. Based on the
topographical, geotechnical condition and other consideration, the life span of the proposed landfill site is estimated
as 20 years. It is however to be noted that this calculation sets its basic assumption of managing the waste disposal
by the method of sanitary land filling and not by haphazard dumping.
Calculation of Lifespan:
Density of fresh Solid Waste = 0.5 t/m3

Density of Compacted Waste = 1 t/m3
Compaction of fresh waste = 50 %
of compacted volume
Quantity of covering material (assumed) = 20 % after landfilling
Landfill area (effective) = 2465.53 m²
Landfill capacity for filling up to retaining wall ht = 11075.89 m³
Basic assumption
Per capita waste generation ( Average) = 0.16 kg/person/day
Other industrial, Hospital, office, hotel waste etc = 400 kg/day
Annual Population growth rate = 1 % (taget for future city )
Base population (in year 2011)= 9885
Estimated Waste disposal capacity required up to year 2033
Volume of Accumulated
Waste Disposal
` Soil Cover Waste and soil Volume of Waste
Year Quantity
No cover and soil cover
Population
m³/y(density
t/d t/y m³/year m³ m³
= 1t/m³)
2012 9984 2 730 365 73 438 438
2013 10084 2.01 733.65 366.83 73.366 440.196 878.196
2014 10185 2.03 740.95 370.48 74.096 444.576 1322.772
2015 10287 2.05 748.25 374.13 74.826 448.956 1771.728
2016 10390 2.07 755.55 377.78 75.556 453.336 2225.064
2017 10494 2.08 759.2 379.6 75.92 455.52 2680.584
2018 10599 2.1 766.5 383.25 76.65 459.9 3140.484
2019 10705 2.11 770.15 385.08 77.016 462.096 3602.58
2020 10813 2.14 781.1 390.55 78.11 468.66 4071.24
2021 10922 2.15 784.75 392.38 78.476 470.856 4542.096
2022 11032 2.17 792.05 396.03 79.206 475.236 5017.332
2023 11143 2.18 795.7 397.85 79.57 477.42 5494.752
2024 11255 2.21 806.65 403.33 80.666 483.996 5978.748
2025 11368 2.22 810.3 405.15 81.03 486.18 6464.928
2026 11482 2.24 817.6 408.8 81.76 490.56 6955.488
2027 11597 2.26 824.9 412.45 82.49 494.94 7450.428
2028 11713 2.28 832.2 416.1 83.22 499.32 7949.748
2029 11831 2.29 835.85 417.93 83.586 501.516 8451.264
2030 11950 2.32 846.8 423.4 84.68 508.08 8959.344
2031 12070 2.33 850.45 425.23 85.046 510.276 9469.62
2032 12191 2.36 861.4 430.7 86.14 516.84 9986.46
2033 12313 2.37 865.05 432.53 86.506 519.036 10505.5
2034 12437 2.39 872.35 436.18 87.236 523.416 11028.91
2035 12562 2.41 879.65 439.83 87.966 527.796 11556.71

The proposed capacity 11075 m3 capacity is sufficient for the required capacity of 10505.5 m3 at the end of 2033
.The life span of landfill site is estimated as 20 years.
5.4 Access and Internal Service Roads

The access road from city area to the landfill site is about 6.5km in length. About 2km road section from Phikkal
bazaar to Dhode is earthen. Earthen road is the section of local village road .
5.5 Hydrometerological analysis
5.5.1 Rainfall Analysis
For the purpose of rainfall analysis, monthly rainfall data of Illam tea state shall be used. The maximum monthly
rainfall at these stations shall be collected from the Department of Hydrology and Metrology.
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
2001 0 24.5 0 34.5 97.2 168.4 254.2 230 188.5 333.4 0 0
2002 23.6 0 13.4 65.6 92.8 303 584.1 347.4 83.2 28.6 0 0
2003 16.6 41.2 33.4 79.8 73.6 387.1 784.2 297.4 101.9 148.8 0 36.6
2005 0 0 30 50.4 119.9 285.4 290.6 247.7 41.9 60.2 0 0
2006 0 1.2 31.1 67.5 156.6 183.7 327.7 197.9 121.2 11.6 5.6 14.6
2007 0 87 8 27.3 51.4 250.8 206.6 54.6 86.5 60 5.6 14.6
2008 0 0 33 0 176 317.9 186.3 338.6 100 90 0 10
2009 0 0 10.2 0 271.1 96.1 297.8 439.1 8.2 120.5 0 0
2010 0 0 0 42.8 261 200 503.2 468.3 155.7 0 48 3
FREQUENCY ANALYSIS FOR RAINFALL DATA:
RESULTS FROM ARITHMATIC MEAN
Year Average y
2001 110.892 2.045
2002 128.475 2.109
2003 166.717 2.222
2005 93.838 1.972
2006 93.225 1.97
2007 71.033 1.851
2008 104.317 2.018
2009 103.583 2.015
2010 140.167 2.147
average 112.472 2.039

Standard Deviation of the Z variate Sample, Sd= 0.1094
0.0612
Coefficient of skew of Variate Z, Cs =
Return
Periods p w Log-Normal Log-Pearson III
T z y X KT y X
1 1 0 -2.516 1.764 58.076 -2.462 1.77 58.884
2 0.5 1.177 -0.001 2.039 109.396 -0.011 2.038 109.144
5 0.2 1.794 0.841 2.131 135.207 0.838 2.131 135.207
10 0.1 2.146 1.282 2.179 151.008 1.288 2.18 151.356
20 0.05 2.448 1.646 2.219 165.577 1.663 2.221 166.341
50 0.02 2.797 2.054 2.264 183.654 2.087 2.267 184.927
80 0.013 2.947 2.226 2.282 191.426 2.266 2.287 193.642
100 0.01 3.035 2.327 2.294 196.789 2.372 2.298 198.609
200 0.005 3.255 2.576 2.321 209.411 2.576 2.321 209.411
300 0.003 3.409 2.749 2.34 218.776 2.816 1.632 42.855
500 0.002 3.526 2.879 2.354 225.944 2.954 2.362 230.144
1000 0.001 3.717 3.091 2.377 238.232 3.179 2.387 243.781
1
p
t
 1 
w ln 2 
p 
( 2.51557  0.802585w  0.010328w 2 )
Z  w
(1  4.32788w  0.189269w 2  0.001308w3 )
y  y  z
x  10 y
Figure 8: Calculation of flood using Log Normal Method

1
p
t
 1 
w  ln 2 
p 
( 2.51557  0.802585 w  0.010328 w 2 )
Z  w
(1  4.32788 w  0.189269 w 2  0.001308 w 3 )
2 3 4 5
KT  Z  Z 2
 1
C
s
6

1 3
3

C 
 C 
 C  1C 
 Cs  6  s   Z 2  1  s   Z  s    s 
 6   6   6  3 6 
y  y  K T
x  10 y Figure 8: Calculation of flood
using Pearson III Method
The summary of maximum rainfall of return period 1 to 1000 years is presented in table 8
Table 8 : Different return period Maximum rainfall
Log- Adopted Rainfall Intensity

Year Log-Normal Pearson III Mean (mm) mm/hr
1 58.076 58.884 58.48 2.437
2 109.396 109.144 109.27 4.553
5 135.207 135.207 135.207 5.634

10 151.008 151.356 151.182 6.299
20 165.577 166.341 165.959 6.915
50 183.654 184.927 184.291 7.679
80 191.426 193.642 192.534 8.022
100 196.789 198.609 197.699 8.237
200 209.411 209.411 209.411 8.725
300 218.776 42.855 130.816 5.451
500 225.944 230.144 228.044 9.502
1000 238.232 243.781 241.007 10.042
5.5.2 Hydrological Study
Hydrological study of the area has been done to design the surface water cut-off drain, which is anessential
component of the landfill site to divert the surface run-off of the uphill from landfill area. Flood Flow For diversion
purpose it is required to know the maximum flood discharges that flow on the uphill side of the Landfill site. One of
the most common methods of qualifying run-off from small watersheds is with empirical formula widely known as
the rational formula, which is based on the criterion that for storms of uniform intensity, distributed evenly equal to a
certain percentage of therainfall intensity occurs when the entire basin area is contributing at the outlet. In the
equationfrom the quantity of flood flows is expressed as follows:
Q = 278 CIA
Where,
Q : Design discharge in l/s
C : Runoff coefficient, which can be taken as 0.4 here,
A : Catchment area in sq.km
I : Rainfall intensity in mm/hr
Catchment Area of Drain (A) = 0.010 Km2
Runoff coefficient (C) = 0.4
Rainfall Flood
Intensity Discharge
S.n Year mm/hr L/sec
1 1 2.437 2.71
2 2 4.553 5.063
3 5 5.634 6.265
4 10 6.299 7.004
5 20 6.915 7.689
6 50 7.679 8.539
7 80 8.022 8.92
8 100 8.237 9.16
9 200 8.725 9.702
10 300 5.451 6.062
11 500 9.502 10.566

12 1000 10.042 11.167
Design of drain
Design Discharge Q = 7.689 l/sec

Starting RL of Drain = 1138 m
End Point RL of Drain = 1133 m
RL Difference = 5 m
Length of Section of Drain L = 56.81 m
Try,
Breadth B = 0.25 m
Depth D = 0.25 m
Area of drain A = 0.0625 m²
Parimeter P = 0.75 m
0.08333
Hydraulic Radius R = 3 m
0.08801
Bed Slope So = 3
0.08801
So = 3
Considering Mannings Equation
Mannings Coefficient (For stone masonary canal)
n = 0.02
1
velocity(V )  * R 2 / 3 * S 1/ 2
n
Velocity (V)= V = 2.83 m/s

0.17687
Discharge carrying capacity Qopt = 5 m³/s
= 176.88 l/s
Where,
Hence
The discharge carrying capacity > Design Discharge ok
Hence , Adopt
Breadth of the canal B = 0.25 m
Total depth of canal D = 0.25 m

The catchment area of the land fill site is so small that’s why the size of 0.25m width and 0.25m depth is sufficient
for drain on both bed slope
.
5.6 Waste Bordering Dams
Two waste bordering dams (Retaining wall) of stone masonry have been proposed at southern and eastern part of
landfill site. In between these two walls there is a block of rock which will act as a retaining wall reducing the length
of retaining wall. Southern the dam has a height of 5.0m with 0.6m top width and 3.7m bottom width. . Eastern the
dam has a height of 7m with 0.6m top width and 4.7m bottom width Both retaining wall has outward slope is 1:2 and
inward slope is vertical. Length of the dam located at southern part of the land fill site is 58.11m and another dam
located at southern east part of landfill site is 47.68m. The dam shall not only retain the waste mass but one of them
also separates the leachate treatment ponds/collection tanks from deposited waste. Location at site and design of
both the dam is shown in the drawings. Dam shall be constructed in such a way that shall close the landfill area and
make it like a pond by connecting the adjacent hard rock slopes and block of the rock.
5.7 Preparation of linear Basement and laying of Mineral Liners

Cutting and filling of earth from the original ground levels to the reduced levels at the basement of the valley shall
give different longitudinal slopes (min 2%) depend upon the stretch under consideration. Liner basement shall be
prepared by excavating the sub soil.in average to about 0.85m down, giving two way cross slope of 3% to the
centre line of the valley(gutter) and compacting (together with water sprinkling as required) with road roller till full
consolidation to a proper density of 97%
Local material shall be used for the construction of the mineral liners. For this purpose, at first the clay –like
material, which will later be necessary for the top-layer of the mineral liner, shall be pushed aside and stored. Then
the soil in the bearing surface shall be excavated by (ca. 30cm deep) to get a more or less homogeneous material.
This liner material shall be compacted in-situ (proctor density Dpr>95%). Upon this “bottom layer” with uniformly
defined density, a second mineral liner (top-layer) shall be brought and compacted as well as the lower one. For this
second layer the stored clay like material is to be used. Each of the layers should have a thickness of 30cm after
compaction.
5.8 Leachate Underdrain

The main leachate collection drain is laid diagonally as shown in drawing. The main leachate collection drain of
600mm diameter perforated hume pipe shall be laid over the compacted clay layer. The main leachate collection
drain is covered with the filter material. The leachate generated shall be collected and drain it out of the landfill area
through the waste bordering dam down to the leachate treatment pond. The branch collection drain is provided of
250mm diameter HDPE pipe. The HDPE perforated pipe is also covered with the filter material for easy collection of
the leachate.
5.9 Laying of Jute Mat and Drainage Carpet

Two layer of jute mat of standard quality (bottom layer) is placed in between compacted cover soil layer and base
clayey compacted layer by enclosing the HDPE sheet as the protective mat. Over the leachate collection pipe the
filter material covered by layer of coarse gravel (river bed strangles of grain size: 20-40mm) forming a “drainage
carpet”. Another layer of jute mat of standard quality (top layer) is placed on top of this drainage carpet, which shall
protect the drainage system firm clogging to be caused by the possible washing away of the line sized waste
materials into the drainage carpet.

5.10 Landfill Gas Vent

Landfill gas generation can be expected to be high; simply because organic components of waste have also to be
dumped until the proposed compost plant shall be operated. At least controlled diffusion of the landfill gas is
necessary. A very economic and simple but effective way of controlling landfill gas shall be to use vertical cylindrical
gabion crate (diameter 1000mm) filled with stone boulder/gravel. Locations of these vents shall be distributed
throughout the landfill area at an average distance of 50 m from each other. After every 2m layer of waste filling
around the gas vents, the exposed height of 50cm shall be joined with another 2.5m high crates of the same size
and filled with stone boulder/gravel as before prior to filling of the next 2m waste layer.
For each and every GI mesh wire crate, a gas vent with simple flare (i.e. steel cap to be removed from waste layer
to waste layer) is recommended.
5.11 Calculation of Leachate Quantity from the landfill Area

The volume of leachate in a sanitary landfill depends on the following factors:
• Rainfall in the landfill area
• Surface runoff and/or groundwater filtration
• Evapotranspiration
• Natural moisture of the Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)
• Degree of compaction.
Field capacity (Capacity of the soil and the MSW to retain moisture) The volume of leachate depends basically on
the rainfall. Leachate is produced not only by runoff but also by rainfall in the area of the landfill, which increases
the quantity, either by direct precipitation on the waste deposited there or by increasing the amount of filtration
through cracks in the terrain
Owing to the different conditions of operation and location of each landfill, the expected rates can vary, so they will
need to be calculated for each individual case. Since it is difficult to obtain local climatologic information, the volume
of leachate produced is often determined by using coefficients that correlate the previously mentioned factors.
5.11.1 Calculation Method

The Swiss Method8 , enables us to make a simple, quick estimate of the flow of leachate or percolated liquid by
using the equation:
Q =l/t P x A x K…………….[1]
8 Adapted from: Lima, Luiz Mario Queiroz. Tratamento do lixo. São Paulo. Hemus. 1991.
Where:
Q = Mean flow of leach ate (l/s)

P = Mean annual precipitation (mm/year)
A = Surface area of the landfill (m2)
t = Number of seconds in a year (31,536,000 s/year)

K = Coefficient that depends on the degree of compaction of the waste,
The recommended values of which are the following:

 For weakly compacted landfills with a specific gravity of 0.4 to 0.7 t/m 3, the estimated production of
leachate is between 25 and 50% (K = 0.25 to 0.50) of the mean annual precipitation for the landfill area.
 For strongly compacted landfills with a specific gravity > 0.7 t/m 3, the estimated Production of
leachate is between 15 and 25 % (K = 0.15 to 0.25) of the mean Annual precipitation for the
landfill area.
Observations made at several small landfills have confirmed that leachate generation occurs chiefly during rainy
periods and for several days afterwards, and stops during dry periods. It would therefore be a good idea to use an
adaptation of the above method to calculate leachate generation from precipitation during the rainy months and not
during the whole year. This criterion is important when estimating the leachate drainage or storage system for
manual sanitary landfills. Therefore, it is suggested that in equation [1] the precipitation records used be those of
the month of maximum rainfall, expressed in mm/month. This method will give a good approximation of the flow:
Qlm =PmxA xK [2]
Where:
Qlm = Mean leachate flow generated (m3/month)
P = Maximum monthly precipitation (mm/month)
A = Surface area of the landfill (m2)
K = Coefficient that depends on the degree of waste compaction
P = 165.959.0 mm/month
A = 2465.53 m2
K = 0.2 (average of 0.15 and 0.25)
Qlm = 2.73m3/day
Therefore, maximum leachate production = 3m3 per day.
5.11.2 Leachate Collection Tank
Assume Retention time of the tank to be 2 days

Q =3m3
HRT (Hydraulic Retention time) = Volume of tank / Discharge
Depth of tank =1 m
Surface Area of the tank = 3 *2= 6 m
Assume Length = 3 m and Breath = 2 m
5.12 Leachate Treatment

Infiltration of precipitation and migration of water through city sanitary waste landfills produces a leachate containing
varying quantities of undesirable and even toxic organic and inorganic substances. It has long been a source of
groundwater and surface water contamination. Landfill leachate due to its toxic nature has to be classified as

problematic wastewater and represents a dangerous source of pollution for the environment. Its purification is
difficult and often insufficient, they seriously endanger the quality of the surface and underground waters. Difficulties
with landfill leachate treatment increase with expansion of landfill sites and remain also after their closing. The
worldwide trend is restriction of landfill sites and their rapid clean up
( Trautmann et al,,, 1987; Staubitz et al,, 1989). Due to its toxic nature, discharge into inland surface water without
treatment restricted. In the United States of America, Leachate effluent must meet discharge permit limits of BOD5
and TSS less than 30 mg/L, and pH of 6 to 8). Leachate must also pass a toxicity test and must mot cause the
turbidity of the nearby river: to exceed 50 NTU (Sloop et al,, 1996).
High technology usually means expensive construction and operation. Therefore, development of alternative
technologies as CW for treatment of landfill leachate treatment was initiated Maehlum, 1995). Field and laboratory
studies have been conducted using CW to treat leachate, but with widely variable results (Gaal and Janwadkar,
1993 ; Surface et al,, 1993; Maehlum, 1995; Marin et all,, 1993; Reis et al,,. 1994; Urbanc-Bercic, 1994; Bernard
and Lauve, 1995; Sloop et al.., 1996; Bulc et al,., 1997). Inconsistent results can be attributed to the variable nature
of the leachate ( Martin et al.,. 1993 ) and lack of universally accepted design standards for CWs (Hammer and
Kinght,1994).
Besides other several advantages explained in earlier chapters, CW system can carry out their function even after
closing of the landfill site ( Surface et all.. 1993).
A pilot scale CW for treatment of highly organically loaded landfill leachate from a communal landfill site was
developed (Bule et all,,. 1997). Landfill site was filled with 60,000 m3 of unsorted wastes and 2000 m3 of
destabilized sludge ware brought to the landfill site of1.6 ha. Pilot plant with two interconnected subsurface
horizontal flow beds, covering of 450 m2 (average hydraulic loading 3 cm/d) was established in 1992 for treatment
of leachate. The results showed sufficient removal of COD (68%). BODS5 (46%). NH3-N (81%) and Fe (80%)
although it was very difficult to determine the proper area especially because of specific hydraulic and pollution
fluctuations. Study also found the concentrations of pollution with the age of the landfill site.
Combination of conventional and natural system for the treatment of landfill leachate was tried in Norway as a pilot
scale in July 1993. A three staged integrated system with an anaerobic pond (400m3) and aerobic lagoons
(4000m3) followed by two parallel HF CW system and free water surface CW was designed for treatment of approx.
12 m3/d leachate. The overall removal for organic matter (COD, BOD, TOC), N,P, Fe and pathogens (E. coli) was
promising (60 to 95%). The effect of the efficient treatment stage.It was expected that the oxidation of organi9c
matter as well as nitrification / gentrification processes in the CWs will increase as vegetation developed and root
systems mature.
5.12.1 Quality of Landfill Leachate

The chemical quality of landfill leachate differs greatly from one landfill to another and fluctuates seasonally within
an individual landfill (Staubitz et al,1989). Leachate composition is waste-and site-specific depending on the waste
type, landfill age, and amount of infiltrating water. The quality of a landfill leachate depends on several factors, for
example: the type of waste, the climate, the land filling technique, the degradation state of waste and where and
when samples are taken (Kylefores et al,1994). Lagarkvist and Kylefors, 1993 performed preliminary investigations
on leachate from different wastes. The origins of the leachate were:
• Wet compostable fraction from source separation in households
• Dry residual fraction from source separation in households
• Digested municipal sludge from a waste water treatment plant
• Ashes from incineration of 80& wood and 20% coal
• Dry fraction from industrial waste, to a dominating part cardboard paper.

Characteristics of leachate from above sources are tabulated in the Table 9. Leachate composition is characterized
by relatively low BOD, TSS and heavy metals and high TDS and Ammonia nitrogen (Sloop et al, 1996) Leachate
also may have high concentrations of heavy metals, pesticides, chlorinated and aromatic hydrocarbons, and other
toxic chemicals, depending on what materials were originally placed in the landfill (Staubitz, 1989).
Table 9 : Composition of the Leachate (Lagerkvist and Kylefors, 1993)
Variable 1 2 3 4 5
pH 6.8 6.8 7 8 6.7
Ms/
Conductivity cm 2180 165 452 525 20
Dry susbstance g/ l 21.6 2.1 4029 6.18 0.59
Volatile solids Mg/L 12.9 1.36 1.99 0.36 0.39
BOD 7 Mg/L 24000 58 49 <3 46
COD Mg/L 35000 668 1181 <30 165
TOC Mg/L 11200 170 375 1 44
Phosphate-P Mg/L 22 2.6 0.41 0.53 0.003
Tot-P Mg/L 30 4 3 0.56 0.107
Ammonia-N Mg/L 1600 32 470 0 <0.08
Nitrite-N Mg/L 0.12 17.6 0.014 0.015
Nitrite-N Mg/L 0.073 200 3.5 0.008
Tot-N Mg/L 2000 51 690 5.2 1.2
Ca Mg/L 1600 71.6 504 403 22
K Mg/L 2250 170 58.6 958 3.28
Mg Mg/L 292 12.4 59.3 443 3.35
S Mg/L 54.5 23.6 482 1210 4.03
Table 10 : Quality of Leachate from different countries ( Source : Sherstha,1999)
Bule et al
(1997) Urban-Beric O. Sloop et al, Shuckrow et
Parameters Slovenia 1994, Slovenia (1996) USA al,. (1980)
Average daily flow (m3) 26
TSS mg/L 400 173 27.2
TSS mg/L 3944
pH 8 3-7.9
N-NO3 mg/L 89.4
N-NH3 mg/L 88 113 0.01-1000
TKN mg/L 35.5
TN mg/L 245
BOD5 60 98 32.6 42-10,900
COD mg/L 1264 849 484
5.13 Subsurface wetlands for leachate treatment

In developing countries, the majority of the water pollution problems are created by the direct disposal of unwanted
materials into the water bodies. Sophisticated technology based on the conventional treatment schemes is more
complex and expensive in operational and maintenance. Constructed wetland (CW) is that which uses the aquatic
plants for the treatment of municipal, landfill leachate and industrial wastewater. It is a simple natural, biological
alternative techniques used for pollution control and waste management (Luise, 1996). This system uses the
natural components such as wetland plants, solids to remove the contaminants present in wastewater. Vegetation in
the wetland provides a substrate (roots, stems and leaves) upon which microorganisms that break down organic
material can grow (USEPA, 1988). The natural treatment technology was introduced in Nepal in 1997 by
establishing a CW unit in Dhulikhel Hospital. There are two types of the horizontal flow constructed wetlands, one is
horizontal flow CWs and other is vertical flow CWs. The Horizontal Flow (HF) system contains the porous medium
in which the wastewater is fed at the inlet and flows slowly in the media within the surface of the bed in the
horizontal path until it reaches the outlet zone. In HF type the wastewater travels along the bed. The HF systems
are dosed continuously. During the passage wastewater gets into the contact with the aerobic, anoxic and
anaerobic zone. The treatment efficiency of wastewater in Constructed Wetland on Total Suspended Solids,
Chemical oxygen demand, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, Total Phosphate and Fecal Coliform were 83.8%, 73.8%, 38.8%,
40.4% and 89.8% for HF planted bed under HLR 0.0388 cu.m/sq.m.d (Subedi, 2007). The advantages of
constructed wetlands than conventional treatment systems are,
• Less mechanical equipment used
• System is more Energy efficient, no environmental reduction that occurs due to extraction of
nonrenewable resources
• Use of natural wetlands plants
• No need of high skilled labor
• Less Cost required (Capital Investment, Maintenance)
• More life than conventional treatment plants (25-30 years)
• Simple construction techniques
• No Odor and Nuisance produced
• Local Material Used
5.13.1 Application of Constructed wetlands in Nepal

Constructed wetland technology is still unknown in Nepal despite its great potential for wastewater treatment in
developing countries. Need of onsite and decentralization system for wastewater treatment technologies has
already been described in earlier sections.
5.13.2 Constructed Wetlands for Landfill Leachate Treatment

Leachate is generated when water percolates into a landfill and leachates out water soluble compounds and
decomposition products. The composition of the leachate with respect to the type of pollutants and the content
varies with the age of landfill, the character of the disposed waste and the degree of dilution with surface and
ground water. It is a common practice in many countries to transport landfill leachate in to a municipal wastewater
treatment plant for treatment. Various hazardous substances in the landfill leachate can affect the biological
processes of represents a risk it is best to treat landfill leachate on site.
Use of on-site, conventional treatment is generally avoided due to high construction and operation costs and
requirements for continuous monitoring by licensed operator. This is a serious problem after the landfill is closed

and personnel are not on-site. Because conventional methods of waste treatment are poorly suited for long-term
treatment of landfill leachate, alternative methods need to be investigated (Staubitz et al,. 1989).
The ideal method would treat a wide range of chemical constituents, be able to accept varying quantities and
concentrations of leachate, and be inexpensive to construct an easy to maintain with low energy and manpower
requirements. CW used as treatment systems have the potential to meet these criteria since CW used as treatment
domestic and industrial wastewater and acid mine drainage (Gersberg et al,.,. 1984; Grits and Kleinmann. 1986)
Although concerntrations are different, these wastes have chemical constituents common for landfill leachate.
Field and laboratory studies have been conducted using CW systems to treat leachate but with widely variable
results ( Geel and Janeadkar, 1993; Surface et al,, 1993; Maehlum,1994; Martin and Moshiri, 1994; Urbanc-Bercic,
1994; Bernard and Lauve, 1995; Sloop et al,, 1996; Bule et all, 1997;. Inconsistent results can be attributed to the
variable nature of the leachate (Martin and Moshiri , 1994; Pohland and Harper : 1986) and lack of university
accepted design standards for CW (Hammer and Knight;1994).
5.13.3 Treatment process mechanism

The removal of pollutant in a subsurface flow constructed wetland is believed to be in the following ways:
• Filtering of large particles through root and root masses
• Wetland detention time allowing for natural die-off of pathogens
• UV radiation and excretion of antibiotics by plant to remove pathogens
• Direct uptake of pollutants by the plants
• Plants providing large surface area on which microbial degradation occurs
• Adsorption of nutrients (such as nitrates and phosphates) by soil and substrate media
Basically the design models are characterized by BOD or COD removal of biodegradable organic matters for the
both FWS and SF system constructed Wetlands (USEPA, 1988). The model are designed as an attached growth
biological reactor using the plug flow equation
Ce
 e (  ktT )
Co .......................................(i) Where Ce are effluent BOD or COD concentration Co is the influent BOD
or COD concentration K is the temperature dependent first order rate constant T is the hydraulic retention time
The temperature dependence of the rate constant in eq (i) can be defined as
Kt= K20 (θ) T-20
Where K20 is the rate constant at 20o C. USEPA proposed 1.104 per day value for the rate constant. θ is the
temperature constant. USEPA proposed 1.06 value for the temperature constant. Its value has been found to vary
1.056 in the temperature between 20-30 o C to 1.135 in the temperature rang 4-20 o C (Metcalf and Eddy, 1999).
5.13.4 Physical Features of Subsurface Flow (SF) Constructed Wetlands (CW)

Important physical features of SF wetlands include inlet and outlet structures, bed media and bed liner.
Inlet Structures:
The inlet system is designed so that the influent flow is distributed uniformly over the length of the entry zone. The
typical devices used for influent distribution are gate pipes, slotted pipes or trough with V-notch weir. In the first few
feet of the entry zone is usually filled with large rock (2 to 4 inches or 50 to 100 mm) to minimize clogging. If the
step feed operation is desired, a second influent distributor can be placed parallel to the entry zone distributor at a
distance (50 ft or 15 m or more) down of the flow path (Crites and Tchobanoglous, 1998).
Outlet Structures:
Outlet device should consist of perforated pipes submerged to the bottom of the bed with valves or adjustable-level
outlet pipes to control the water depth (Crites and Tchobanoglous, 1998).
Bed liners:
If the soil is permeable, a bed liner will usually be required to prevent loss of water to ground water. The liner may
consist of native clay bentonite, asphalt or geomembrane liners. A smooth surfaced 30-mil plastic membrane liner is
used typically (Crites and Tchobanoglous, 1998).
Bed Media:
The Subsurface flow wetland medium is usually gravel although in early systems sand is usually used. The gravel
size has varied from 0.12 in to 1.25 in (3 to 32 mm), with inlet zone gravel size as large as 2 in (50 mm). The inlet
zone usually has the largest-diameter medium to minimize the clogging potential (Crites and Tchobanoglous, 1998).
Pradhan (2005) reported that there would be no significant change in performance of CWs for removal of BOD with
the change in media size. Significant change in performance would be found with the small change in media size
for removal of COD in HF bed and there will be decrease in performance for removal of COD with decrease in
media of Vertical flow bed. Significant change in performance would be found with the small change in media size
for removal of NH4-N, NO2-N both in HF bed and VF bed.
The depth of media selected will depend on design intentions for the system. If the vegetation is intended as a
major oxygen source for nitrification in the system, then the depth of the bed shouldn't exceed the potential root
penetration depth of the plant species to be used. This will ensure availability of some oxygen throughout the bed
profile, but many require management practices, which assure root penetration to these depths (USEPA, 1988).
5.13.5 Design
1.0) Existing Design Models:
The principle design parameter for the Constructed Wetland system includes organic loading rate
(OLR), Hydraulic loading rate (HLR) and Hydraulic retention time (HRT) and water depth (for
FWS only). The typical design criteria and expected effluent quality for SF constructed wetlands
are shown in Table 11.
Table 11 : Typical design criteria and expected effluent quality for SF constructed Wetlands
Item Unit Values
Design Parameter
Detention time d 04-Mar
BOD loading rate lb/ac.d <100
TSS entry loading rate lb/ft2.d 0.008

Water depth ft 02-Jan
Mosquito control Not needed
Harvest Schedule Not needed
Expected Effluent quality
BOD 5 mg/L <20
TSS mg/L <20
TN (Total Nitrogen) mg/L <10
TP mg/L <5
(Source: Crites and Tchobanoglous, 1998)
Basically the design models are characterized by BOD or COD removal of biodegradable organic
matters for the both FWS and SF system constructed Wetlands. (USEPA, 1988)The model are designed as an
attached growth biological reactor using the plug flow equation
Ce
 e (  ktT )
Co …………………………………………..(i)
Where Ce are effluent BOD or COD concentration
Co is the influent BOD or COD concentration
K is the temperature dependent first order rate constant
T is the hydraulic retention time
The temperature dependence of the rate constant in eq (i) can be defined as
Kt= K20 () T-20
Where K20 is the rate constant at 20o C. USEPA proposed 1.104 per day value for the rate constant.
is the temperature constant. USEPA proposed 1.06 value for the temperature constant. Its value
has been found to vary 1.056 in the temperature between 20-30 o C to 1.135 in the temperature rang 4-20 o C
(Metcalf and Eddy, 1999). Short-circuiting and dead zones are common phenomena in constructed wetlands
causing the non-ideal plug flow conditions and the void fraction of thebed, the maturity of the bed and the chosen
background concentration influence the rate constant(Rousseau et al., 2004).
According to USEPA (1988) the surface area of the bed (As) required to achieve the necessarylevel of BOD5 or
COD removal could be get by the following equation
 C 
Q ln( o )
Ce 
As  L * W  
K t dn
Where d- Average depth of liquid in bed, m (ft)
Q-Average flow through the bed, m³/d (ft³/d)
n- Effective porosity of media
The UK model of design of CWs
The simplest of the design model for treatment of domestic wastewater is adopted in UK where the
CWs is mostly designed as Subsurface flow system. For horizontal flow system, the surface area
(Ah) is calculated using the cooper model.

Qd  ln(Co )  ln(Ce )
Ah 
K BOD
Where
Qd- Average daily flow rate of wastewater, m3/d (ft3/d)
Co- Average influent BOD or COD (mg/L)
Ce- Average effluent BOD or COD (mg/L)
KBOD - Reaction rate constant (m/d)
The factor KBOD has been adopted 0.083 ± 0.017 (Brix et al., 1989), 0.067 to 0.1 in UK (Cooper,
1999)
2.0) Estimation of Hydraulic Retention Time
The hydraulic retention time (HRT) of Leachate in the wetland bed is defined as useable wetland
volume to flow rate of Leachate. Theoretically, HRT can bed estimated by using the average flowthrough the
system, the system dimensions and the porosity of the media.
L *W * D * n
HRT 
Q
Where,
HRT- hydraulic retention time (days)
L- Length of bed (m)
W- width of bed (m)
D- depth of bed (m)
n- porosity of filter media (as decimal fraction)
Q- discharge (m³/d)
5.13.6 Design Calculation and Dimension of Constructed Wetlands (CW
Q max: 3 m³/day
Wastewater Quality
Average BOD5 of landfill leachate = 3500 mg/ L (Analysis performed with Gokarna Landfill leachate by NESS,
1996)
Excepted effluent of BOD5 (Ce) = < 100 mg/L
Sizing of CW
A= Q (ln Ci – ln Ce) / KBOD

A= Surface area of bed (m2)
Q= Average Flow (m3/d)
Ci= Influent BOD (mg/L)
Ce=Effluent BOD (mg/L
KBOD is considered as 0.1 to 0.2 m/d (Summerfelt et al., 1996)
Assume that 30% of BOD is removed by the Primary Collection Tank (Subedi, 2007)
Remaining BOD before entering the Horizontal Constructed Wetlands
Ci= (3500 mg/L – (30*3500/100)) = 2450 mg/L
Excepted effluent of BOD5 (Ce) = < 100 mg/L
Area = 3 * (ln 2450 – ln 100)/ 0.2 =47.98 m2
Recommended length =7m and Width= 7m
The Landfill will consist of one unit of Horizontal Flow (HF) bed CW of size 7m*7m*0.6m (Length*Breath *Height). In
both unit of horizontal flow wetlands Phragmitis Karka (local reed) will be planted. The leachate will be tapped from
the leachate collection tank of the Landfill System. The plants (Phragmitis Karka) will be placed in the HF
rectangular bed at the rate of 9 to10 plants per m2.
5.14 Landscaping
For stabilization of the waste mass, topping of outside slopes of the waste bordering dams with clayey soil in 2
layers of 25cm thickness each has been proposed. With the view of making the site more environmental friendly,
about 1 Ropani of the land will be planted with local species of trees. They will also act as a buffer zone around the
site. The species that will be planted ate bamboo, “Chilaune/ sissoo”, “Khaniyo” and eucalyptus. After the landfill
area is complete,“khaniyo” and chilaune/ sisoo” will be planted on top of the landfill. The subjective of planting
eucalyptus is that the fragrance emitted from it will help neutralize the odor emanating from the landfill area.
5.15 Fencing
Because of the cost factor, simple barbed wire fencing has been designed for a length of about 220m to demarcate
the office. 2 m long wooden post of 100×75 mm will be erected at an interval of 3-m c/c with 0.65 m under the
ground. The underground portion of the wooden pole will be painted with bitumen for safety. 5 layers parallel and 2
diagonal barbed wire will be hooked along the wooden post to serve as fence for the complex.
5.16 Entrance Gate/Guard House-cum-Counter

Entrance Gate
An entrance gate has been proposed for the landfill Area. The vehicles carrying solid waste are to be passing
through this entrance gate to dump the solid waste in the Landfill Area. As the vehicles entering the Landfill Area are
to be recorded and levies paid at the counter. The entrance gate is essential, So that the drivers stop their vehicles
at the entrance gate and take necessary clearance from the counter to dump the solid waste in the Landfill
Area.Two stone masonry pillars and a gate fabricated at the workshop have been proposed for the entrance gate. A
separate gate for the access of pedestrians has also been proposed
Guard House-cum-Counter
One room, single storey building has been designed and the guard house-cum,-counter room. The average plinth
area of the proposed room is 4.5×4.4m. The walls will be constructed the brick masonry and CGI roofing. The
design criteria of the foundation and walls of the building is the same as per the standard practices.

5.17 Water Supply
It was found that there is no water supply source around the landfill area. So water to the landfill area will be
supplied from the nearby source. Water will be carried with 25mmø HDPE pipe laid under the ground (with a trench
section of 0.35×0.9m). One tap will be provided near the guard house building and to fulfill the drinking water
requirements. One overhead tank is proposed in the guard house for continuous supply of water.
5.18 Provision of Electric and Telephone Connection

There is yet no electric and telephone connections in the area near the proposed landfill site. Electric line has to be
extended from the nearest electric pole which is about 500m from the landfill site. But, as the telephone and electric
supply are essential components for the landfill operation, it is suggested that DoLIDAR has to make necessary
arrangement to extend electric and telephone connection with cooperation of Nepal Electricity Authority and Nepal
Telecommunication Corporation. The cost of telephone and electric supply is therefore not included in the project
cost. However, provision of electric wiring and necessary fittings required of different infrastructure within the landfill
site are included in the design and cost estimate.
5.19 Ecological / Environment Protection Measures

Wind Littering
Littering of plastics and paper in the neighborhood shall not be a problem because of the 50-100mthick site
protection/ buffer zone around the site. However, sorting out of such littering wastes at the tipping area by 2
sweeper staff (working under SLF-operation unit for this purpose) before compaction and covering of delivered
waste will control with wind littering with the site. Providing mobile nets because of site condition shall not be
appropriate.
Animals
Entering the site by the animals, e. g. cattle, dogs, etc. will be prevented by the security personnel of the site.
Besides, the fencing around the site combined with bush/tree plantation shall automatically restrict the entry of
animal.
Fires
Fires at the landfill site may be caused by careless use of open fires, hot ashes etc. The best prevention measure
against fire at the landfill site is the proper compaction of and daily covering
of waste
Noise and Dust
Operation of SLF-equipment (e.g. dozer, shovel, plate vibratory) and waste collection / transportation vehicles may
occasionally cause noise and dust on the approach road and inside the SLF, specially during the dry season.
Recultivation of the site (from time to time as per operational plan) with tree plantation will be especially helpful as a
preventive measure against dust.
Bad Odours
Although bad odours at the SLF site shall be in general reduced by rapid covering of active fill area with good
compaction, there may be occasionally bad odours in and around the site due to various conditions. In such cases,
disinfecting materials such as phenol, lime powder, natural deodorant, odour-off etc. shall be used in and around
the site as per necessity.
Landslides
The site is topographically and geologically stable, due to the presence of hard rock. So, there is least danger of
landslides. However, efforts are made in the design concept to stabilize the site through preventive measures such
as by selecting the appropriate landfill area in order to avoid the cut and fill, plantation in site protection / buffer
zone. To prevent landslides which may occur during site operation period, cutting of trees and bushes anywhere in
and around the SLF shall be strictly prohibited. Taking soil from the hills at the boundary of the SLF inside or outside
without special permission shall also be prohibited.
Surface Water
The surface water cut-off drain (174m) constructed in the upper terrain next to the landfill area not only cuts off the
surface run-off from entering into the landfill area and thus preventing the relatively pure water from getting polluted,
but also diverts it through a surface water collection basin to the existing natural drain line.
Leachate Treatment Plant Effluent

The leachate from landfill site shall be collected in leachate collection tank then passes through the sand drying
bed. The leachate passes through the reed beds (constructed wetland plant) in 1 stageand then drains out to
natural drain.
Ground water
The basement sealing of the landfill area and construction of leachate drainage system over the basement with filter
layer prevents the leachate from seeping through sub-soil into ground water. The ground water is thus protected
from being polluted by the landfill leachate.
Landfill Gas
The anaerobic microbial decomposition of organic matter after few months of waste filling produces the so-called
landfill gas, which may contain more than 60% methane gas and may catchwire if not controlled properly. The
landfill gas vent system constructed from vertical cylindrical bolsters of GI mesh wire (dia. 1 m.) distributed over the
landfill area in specified location andextended above the ultimate landfilling height by filling with gravel/ stone
controls the diffusion ofbiogas developed within the landfill- protection the site from possible dangers.
5.20 Environment Monitoring
Surface Water in Upstream and Downstream
Surface water quality at the upstream and downstream shall be monitored regularly(recommended: before and after
rainy season) and by taking samples from before mixing theleachate and after mixing the leachate.
Treatment Plant Effluent
Quality of leachate effluent shall be monitor regularly, (recommended: before and after rainy season) by taking
samples from various strategic points being discharged into Kholsi.
Stream Water
Stream water of the nearby stream should be monitored regularly.
Solid Waste Samplings
Quality of landfill waste shall be monitored by taking samples of the wastes being delivered at t
the site.
Landfill Gas
All the gas vents shall be monitored regularly.
5.21 Precaution Measures for Bird Hazard Control at the SLF – site
Besides proper treatment of the municipal garbage by communication, compaction and leveling, following
precaution measures will be taken for the control of bird hazard at the SLF –site.
 No entry for special wastes of hazardous nature such as laughter wastes, dead animals, hospital waste etc
ensured by checking of the incoming waste vehicles by strained sanitation supervisor at the entrance gate for

permitting or rejecting entry to the site.
 Rapid covering of the active fill area with waste covering materials + ensured by continuous dozer operation,
keeping waste covering material always in stock and proper covering of waste under the supervision of a trained
sanitation supervisor.
 Involvement of a permanent staff ( whip man)A person with a red safety vests moving around the active tipping
area with a stock whip to be regularly cracked, simulating the use of a firearm.
Special Remark:
As innovative methods for the control of bird hazard at waste landfill sited are still being investigated at various
landfills in the world, the Phikkalis eager to adapt any other appropriate measure, which shall prove to be more
effective.
Notes :
 Door to door collection of household waste by municipal waste collection vehicles practically minimizes the
possibility of such wastes being collected. However, private vehicles carrying such wastes, after being
rejected for entry to the landfill site shall be strictly instructed either to get special occasional service offered
by the metropolis or to recycle/ manage themselves in their own premises without polluting the
surroundings (e.g. without attracting birds) , but never to dispose of in public open space. Enforcement as
per recently approved sanitation by-laws of municipality shall be strictly followed.
 Additionally, big and thick plastic sheets shall be kept ready to cover the active area in emergency cases;
 It is reported that out of many innovative methods tested so far at various landfill sites in
the world (e.g. spraying refuse with a foul tasting vegetable extract, foam cover in the active face, using a whipman,
use of toxic chemical " 4 amino pyridine"), the best result in reducing the number of birds at the landfill is expected
when using a person at the active face (whipman) man baiting as reinforcement.
5.22 Site Protection Works

The topography of the landfill site is sloppy from north to south with hard rocks. Accordingly two retaining walls of
height 5m and 7m are proposed for only to retain the wastes. The following calculations should be considered
during the construction of retaining wall.
Check for Slides
This check is made with reference to a horizontal plane. Specifically, for gabion walls, the
stabilizing forces (FS); resisting sliding are Friction (FN) and Cohesion (CB) at the sliding surface :passive pressure
(SP) at the toe of the wall and anchorage forces (SR) at the heel of the wall.The formula used is FS = FN +CB +Sp
+Cos_ +SR
Check for Overturning

The overturning moment has been calculated using MI = SaLa and restoring moment is calculated using
M s  Wtot * LW  S p * l p
Where Wtot is the resultant of the wall's weight and the weight of the 'boxed" soil above the heel
and la, lw, lp are the lever arm for the forces Sa Wtot and Sp respectively.
The safety factor against overturning is given by n1 = Ms/M1 and its minimum value is taken to be 1.5.
Check on Overall Stability
A retaining wall may fail on semi-circular slip surface located within soil below and behind the wall. The condition
has been checked for a minimum valve of 1.2 check on foundation bearing pressure. The bearing pressure on the
soil beneath the foundation is computed using the relevant values of M and N, and eccentricity -M/N
For e< B/6 the maximum pressure is
N 6e 
 max  1  
B B
When e > B/6 part of the section adjacent to the back will be in tension and
where u = B/2-e,
The value of max is lower than the braking pressure. So the proposed design is safe for both the revetment and
spur.
6 PROJECT COMPONENT, RATE ANALYSIS AND PROJECT COST

After finalizing the project components, rate analysis is done on district approved rates of labor and materials of
Illam district and then the total construction cost is estimated.
6.1 Component of the Project
The following components have been proposed for the landfill site:
Table 12 : Components of the Project
S.No. Discription Dimension Unit

1 Total landfill area 2465.53 m2
2 Guard House including toilet block 20.25 m2
3 Entrance gate and Barbed Wire Fencing
a) Entrance gate (1 main gate with separate pedestrian gate) 1 nos
b) Barbed Wire Fencing 220 rm
4 Leachate Collection Tank (2m * 3m* 1.15m) 1 no
5 Leachate Treatment Pond ( 7*7*0.9m) 1 no
6 Water supply connection from Spring Source 50 m
97.35
7 Surface Water Cut-off Drain m
9 Actual landfill area with effective depth of filling 4.5m 2465.53 m2
10 Landfill Gas Vents 15 nos
11 Wastewater/leachate Collection Drain ( Branch -250mm dia HDPE) 229.78 m

Wastewater/leachate Collection Drain ( Main -600mm dia Hume
12 Pipe) 58.12 m
13 Retaining wall at the base m
a) Retaining wall-1 at Eastern part(5.5m high) 47.68
b) Retaining wall -2at South eastern part (4.4m Height ) 30
c) Retaining wall -3at South eastern part (5.75m Height ) 20
d) Retaining wall -3at South eastern part (8m Height) 8.12
6.2 Rate Analysis

Rate analysis has been on district approved rates of labor and materials of Illam district.Government standard
norms have been used to calculate the rates. Details rate analysis is presented in Annex- III.
6.3 Project Cost

The total construction cost of landfill area with the lifespan 20 years is Nrs. 21,204,811.96. It has been divided
into two parts short term Nrs 7,435,053.49 and long term 13,769,758.47 -. The component wise breakdown is
presented in the Table 13.
Table 13 : Summary of Cost

Short Term Long term
S.N. Components Amount Nrs. (1-3 yrs) (3-7yrs)
Office and Guard House
1 732,529.31 732,529.31
Carhouse for washing of vehicles
with water collection tank and
pump required for injection
2 washing 350,000.00 350,000.00
Entrance Gate and Barbed Wire
3 Fencing 443,545.55 443,545.55
Surface Water Cut-off Drain
4 332,788.25 332,788.25
Land Fill Area Development
5 5,570,025.96 5,570,025.96
Retaining Wall
6 12,784,758.47 12,784,758.47
Leachate Collection Tank
7 140,044.43 140,044.43
Primary Leachate Treatment Pond
8 (Constructed wetland) 216,119.99 216,119.99
Insurance and Engineer's Facilities
9 635,000.00 635,000.00
Total Cost 21,204,811.96 7,435,053.49 13,769,758.47
35% 65%

7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposed landfill site for PhikkalV.D.C. ward no. 5 Dhode Illam district has been designed after a detailed
study of the existing site situation on topographical, hydro-geological and ecological/environment conditions and
given constraints. The life span is estimated as 20 years and estimated total cost of the project is Nrs.
21,204,811.96 . Infrastructures for the landfill area development have been proposed so as to make optimum use
of the site for a safe and environmentally sound disposal of municipal waste. It is therefore to be seen as a
municipal sanitary landfill, which means that it is not suitable for special wastes of hazardous nature, e.g.hospital
waste, industrial waste, slaughter waste, dead animals etc. The site should be constructed under strict
supervision, with due consideration of its sensitivity to maintain its quality.Following recommendation however
deserve due consideration for Landfill site at Phikkal:
1. All infrastructures such as retaining wall at bottom side, side earth bund, guard house, road and drain are to
be complete before start of the land filling. However, it is advisable to lay the jute mat ( top layer ) during
operation period only, but necessarily before the start of dumping waste in the completing the total
construction work at a time, following options could be followed:
a. The retaining wall can be constructed as per drawings.
b. The landfill basement has to be prepared in defined line and slope at a time. As the land filling
starts from the lowest point i.e. from the waste bordering dam and proceeds upwards, other landfill
area development items such as laying of mineral liners; construction of under drain; laying of
gabion mat, drainage carpet, jute mat, etc. could be completed step-wise, depending upon its
requirement so as to cover the landfill area to be filled within a stipulated time period. But however,
it is to be strictly noted that all required items have to be completed prior to the start of land filling of
the area under consideration.
2. For a safe and environmentally sound waste disposal management an operation manual is a must, which
should be strictly followed by the operation unit in charge of the site. Daily waste recording and
environmental monitoring has to be carried out on routine basis.
3. Buffer zone with appropriate plantation/greenery in and around the site is a must and so far the site
protection is concerned, bio-engineering measures have to be preferred to substitute the massive physical
structures wherever possible.
4. It is worthwhile to be noted that any landfill, however good as expected unless and until it is properly
operated, no matter how simple operation and maintenance might be.
5. The landfill waste is transported only by tractors at present. Additional tippers should be arranged for easy
transporting of the waste and to meet the future demand.
6. Social issues should be incorporated from the initial stage of the project construction and operation for
smooth operation of the landfill site.

Phikkal Landfill

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Phikkal Landfill

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Survey ,Design and Cost Estimate of Phikkal Landfill site Illam

We anticipate your positive consideration in this regard.

On the Behalf of:

Engineering and Educational Services Pvt. Ltd Page i

Table of Content ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….ii

1.2 Introduction to Solid Waste Management......................................................................................................1

1.4 Specific Objective...........................................................................................................................................2

1.5 The Assignment..............................................................................................................................................2

1.6 Scope of Work................................................................................................................................................2

2 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AREA............................................................................................................................4

2.1 Project Description.........................................................................................................................................4

2.2 Profile of Phikkal.............................................................................................................................................4

2.3 Environmental profile of Phikkal.....................................................................................................................6

3 EXISTING SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE................................................................................................7

3.1 Solid Waste Generation..................................................................................................................................7

3.2 Solid Waste Composition................................................................................................................................7

3.3 Waste Collection, Transfer and Transport.......................................................................................................9

3.4 Reduce, Recycle, and d Re-use......................................................................................................................10

3.5 Composting Practices...................................................................................................................................10

3.6 Special Waste Management.........................................................................................................................10

3.7 Final Disposal................................................................................................................................................10

4.1 Literature review..........................................................................................................................................11

4.2 Data Collection.............................................................................................................................................11

4.3 Field Survey..................................................................................................................................................11

4.4 Design Procedures........................................................................................................................................11

4.5 Landfill Area Development...........................................................................................................................11

Engineering and Educational Services Pvt. Ltd Page ii

5 PORJECT DESIGN CONCEPT AND DETAILED ENGINEERING..................................................................................13

5.1 The Concept of Proposed Landfill Site..........................................................................................................13

5.2 Master Plan..................................................................................................................................................14

5.3 Landfill Area: Life Span and Usage................................................................................................................14

5.4 Access and Internal Service Roads................................................................................................................15

5.5 Hydrometerological analysis.........................................................................................................................16

5.5.1 Rainfall Analysis.....................................................................................................................................16

5.5.2 Hydrological Study.................................................................................................................................18

5.6 Waste Bordering Dams.................................................................................................................................19

5.7 Preparation of linear Basement and laying of Mineral Liners.......................................................................20

5.8 Leachate Underdrain....................................................................................................................................20

5.9 Laying of Jute Mat and Drainage Carpet.......................................................................................................20

5.10 Landfill Gas Vent.........................................................................................................................................20

5.11 Calculation of Leachate Quantity from the landfill Area.............................................................................21

5.11.1 Calculation Method.............................................................................................................................21

5.11.2 Leachate Collection Tank.....................................................................................................................22

5.12 Leachate Treatment....................................................................................................................................22

5.12.1 Quality of Landfill Leachate.................................................................................................................23

5.13 Subsurface wetlands for leachate treatment..............................................................................................25

5.13.1 Application of Constructed wetlands in Nepal.....................................................................................25

5.13.2 Constructed Wetlands for Landfill Leachate Treatment.......................................................................25

5.13.3 Treatment process mechanism............................................................................................................26

5.13.4 Physical Features of Subsurface Flow (SF) Constructed Wetlands (CW)..............................................27

5.13.6 Design Calculation and Dimension of Constructed Wetlands (CW......................................................29

5.16 Entrance Gate/Guard House-cum-Counter.................................................................................................31

Engineering and Educational Services Pvt. Ltd Page iii

5.17 Water Supply..............................................................................................................................................31

5.18 Provision of Electric and Telephone Connection.........................................................................................31

5.19 Ecological / Environment Protection Measures..........................................................................................31

5.20 Environment Monitoring............................................................................................................................32

5.22 Site Protection Works.................................................................................................................................34

6 PROJECT COMPONENT, RATE ANALYSIS AND PROJECT COST..............................................................................35

6.1 Component of the Project............................................................................................................................35

6.2 Rate Analysis.................................................................................................................................................35

6.3 Project Cost..................................................................................................................................................36

7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................................37

o Project Name : Phikkal Landfill site