ASSESSMENT AND CLASSIFICATION OF THE AREA OF DISPOSAL OF SOLID

WASTE WITH AN EMPHASIS ON POLLUTION CAUSED BY LIQUID EFFLUENTS.

CASE: LANDFILL CLOSED IN THE CITY OF JUIZ DE FORA - MINAS GERAIS -
BRAZIL

AUTHORS

Gisele Pereira Teixeira, DEMLURB/Municipal Urban Cleaning Department of Juiz de Fora – MG

Cláudio Fernando Mahler, PEC/COPPE/UFRJ
José Homero Pinheiro Soares, ESA/UFJF

CONTACTS

Gisele Pereira Teixeira, DEMLURB, Rua Palmares, 271 – Monte Castelo – Juiz de Fora - MG -
CEP: 36.081-030 - Brazil, Phone: (32) 3223-3614, Fax: (32)3690-3511, E-mail:
gisele@demlurb.pjf.mg.gov.br

INTRODUCTION

Cases in which society’s solid wastes are simply deposited on the land, in inadequate areas
denominated as dumps, causing impacts on soil and watercourses are not rare in developing
countries. Nevertheless, it is observed that even when waste disposal is carried out in well-designed
landfills, the measurement and control of liquid (leachate) and gas (biogas) emissions, as well as
environmental monitoring is of great importance to guarantee efficiency.

Schueler, A. & Mahler, C. (2007) cite that there are a large number of disabled dumps concealed
beneath topsoil without care for environmental protection in Brazil. These sites often have a
mysterious environmental liability in which there is no knowledge about the soil beneath the
landfill, the material disposed of in the landfill, and, in many cases, not even the time period the last
disposal occurred.

In this respect, between 2005 and 2007, Schueler, A. & Mahler, C. developed a classification
methodology to former dumps bond to its potential hazard relative to contamination caused by
leachate. Parameters that influence leachate production and flux in the landfill’s vicinity were
considered.

In the present article, the application of this methodology is proposed for Assessment and
Classification of the area in the former Dump and Sanitary “Salvaterra” Landfill located in Juiz de
Fora City, Minas Gerais State, Brazil. Subsequently, from the assessment of this classification it will
be possible to compare results from the environmental monitoring in the landfill’s catchment area
and verify the efficiency of the application of the proposed methodology.

METHODOLOGY FOR ASSESSMENT AND CLASSIFICATION OF SOLID WASTE

FINAL DISPOSAL SITE

The Methodology for Assessment and Classification proposed by Schueler, A. & Mahler, C.
(2007), suggests an assessment of landfills with closed or closing activities with the goal of
reintegration of the urban area. The characterization of risk is based on the contamination caused by
leachate and damage to the environment and to humans.
Four matrices were elaborated for site evaluations, which seek together guide risk assessment. The
sum of the values obtained in the matrices will achieve a score that will be used as an indicator of
the need for interventions and post-closure monitoring of the landfill. These matrices are:

Matrix Evaluation of Slurry Production

In this matrix, the total volume of leachate produced by the landfill and the age of the last waste
disposal were listed. The leachate is generated by the biological decomposition of waste. Three time
periods were considered:

- Up to 5 years: Carted pollutants in the slurry generally reach maximum values in the first years of
landfill operation (2-3 years) and decrease gradually during the following years. This tendency is
generally applicable to dissolved organic matter and key inorganic ions (heavy metals, chloride,
sulphate, etc.). (IPT/Cempre, 2000 and Andreotolla et al, 1997, cited by Schueler, A. & Mahler, C.,
2007);
- 5 to 30 years: The rate of decomposition of the residue, after it reaches its maximum, slowly
declines till 25 years or more (Tchobanoglous, 1997, cited by Schueler, A. & Mahler, C., 2007).
These values were obtained through gas measurement.
- More than 30 years: Analysis of concentrations of MSW leachate with more than 30 years was not
found in literature. Gas production in this time period is not significant, indicating a process of
waste stabilization, which influences in the diminishing of leachate production.

The assignment of values of Matrix 1 was performed from 1 to 30, linearly, so that for a same waste
volume, the oldest time period option received lower scores.

Table 1 Matrix of Slurry Production Assessment

Age of MSW (years)
Volume m³
Up to 5 5 a 30 More than 30
< 10.000 (3) (2) (1)
10.000-30.000 (6) (5) (4)
30.000 -50.000 9 8 (7)
50.000 -70.000 12 11 10
70.000 – 90.000 15 14 13
90.000 -110.000 18 17 16
110.000 -130.000 [21] [20] 19
130.000 -150.000 [24] [23] [22]
150.000 -170.000 [27] [26] [25]
> 170.000 [30] [29] [28]

Matrix for Assessment of Landfill Base

The permeability and unsaturated soil layer thickness beneath the landfill were related in this
matrix. The “Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas – ABNT” (Brazilian Association of
Technical Standards) establishes that the ideal condition for landfill installation is to have a soil
layer thickness of 3m with a coefficient of permeability of 1E-6 cm/s. Three ranges for soil
permeability values were considered, suggested by Brazilian standards. The value of k < 1E-6cm/s
was adopted for low permeability, mean permeability comprehends ranges from 1E-6 < k < 5E-4
cm/s, and high permeability is considered when k > 5E-4cm/s.
The assignment of values of Matrix 1 was performed from 1 to 30, linearly, so that lower
permeabilities received lower scores. Permeability was considered only as a property that influences
the capacity of the leachate to reach groundwater.

Table 2 Matrix for Assessment of Landfill Base

Soil Permeability (cm/s)
Unsaturated thickness (m)
k<1E-6 5E-4> k >1E-6 k>5E-4
> 10 1 11 21
5,0 a 10 2 12 22
4,0 a 5,0 3 13 23
3,0 a 4,0 4 14 24
2,5 a 3,0 5 15 25
2,0 a 2,5 6 16 26
1,5 a 2,0 7 17 27
1,0 a 1,5 8 18 28
0,5 a 1,0 9 19 29
< 0,5 10 20 30

Matrix of Leachate Plume Migration Assessment

Matrix 3 presents an evaluation of surface-water hydrology. The flooding or runoff potential, which
is referred to topography and water balance, and the location in relation to the landfill were related
to enable scoring of the capacity of the leachate natural condition drainage and of the surface water
runoff.

Areas with a low declivity are recommended for landfill installation, however with a natural slope
or elevation, to minimize infiltration of surface water to the interior of the landfill.

The Flooding Area is characterized by the condition of water logging due to topography, and has a
positive water balance in some periods of the year.
A) When this happens upstream of the landfill, the infiltration tends to serve as a refilling of the
aquifer with non-contaminated water, which, at first may be considered a positive aspect.
B) When this situation occurs over the landfill, the infiltration tends to increase its moisture, and,
consequently, increase leachate generation.
C) When this happens downstream of the landfill, the flooded area can be contaminated by leachate,
and, so forth, the liquid can infiltrate and cause soil and groundwater contamination or evaporate,
which is characterized as a negative factor.

Figure 1 Diagram of alternatives of the category – flooding area

The Area of Potential Flooding is similar to the previous situation (Flooding Area), however with a
negative water balance, making flooding unlikely. Items D, E e F, are similar to A, B e C in relation
to topography, differing by negative water balance which does not allow the presence of water.

Figure 2 Diagram of alternatives of the category – area of potential flooding

The Region Subject to High-Energy Surface Runoff is the one in which the water balance is positive
in some season of the year and the topographical declivity enables high surface runoff, leading to
erosion and allowing the carrying of sediment and transport of liquids to relatively large distances.
All situations present a negative aspect.
G) When this situation occurs upstream, there can be an increase in the amount of water reaching
the landfill, contributing to higher leachate generation.
H) When it occurs over the landfill there can be an increase of surface erosion.
I) When it occurs downstream, the surface water runoff may be contaminated by leachate and can
reach farther distances more quickly.

Figure 3 Diagram of alternatives of the category – region subject to high-energy surface runoff

The Region Subject to Possible Runoff is identical to the previous situation, Region Subject to
Runoff, however it presents negative water balance, making unlikely the occurrence of floods. Items
J, K e L are similar to items G, H e I in relation to topography, differing by negative water balance,
which makes runoff impossible.

Figure 4 Diagram of alternatives of the category – region subject to possible high-energy

surface runoff

The Region Protected Against Flooding or High Runoff is an area where topographic conditions
preclude flooding and runoff, even in the presence of water. Treatments upstream and downstream
of the landfill disable the contribution of water to the area.
 Table 3 Matrix of Topography and Pluviosity Assessment
Location in relation to landfill
Characteristic
Upstream On Downstream
Flooding area: FT / WB+ [18] [20] [12]
Area of Potential Flooding: FT / WB- 8 10 (2)
Region Subject to High-Energy Surface Runoff: FT / WB+ [14] [16] [20]
Region Subject to High-Energy Surface Runoff: FT / WB- (4) 6 10
Region Protected Against Flooding or Runoff, with WB+ 10 10 10
Region Protected Against Flooding or Runoff, with WB- (0) (0) (0)
WB – Water balance (+ positive / - negative)
FT – Favorable Topography

Matrix of Land Use Assessment in the Landfill Vicinity

Matrix 4 is evaluated from two tables, which assess urban zone characteristics in the landfill
surroundings. Land Use is presented in matrix 4A, where the proximity of the occupation and type
of population subject to contact with the effluent of the landfill are assessed. Three types of land use
were considered: agriculture, residential and industrial, relating to the residence time of the people
on site.

Urban zones in the vicinity of the landfill are vulnerable to contamination caused by waste leachate.
The contact may be either by groundwater, surface water and soil contamination, or by air. The
objective is to rate the capacity of the effluents to reach the exposed inhabitants of the region. For
areas with low-income housing, one point is added to the equivalent rating, since usually there is no
environmental care in these places, either because of ignorance or lack of resources by the residents.

Table 4A – Matrix of Urban Land Use Assessment

(A) Urban
Distance (m) Agriculture Residential/Parks/ Commercial/Industrial/
Gardens Services
< 100 [20] [19 (+1)] [18]
De 101 a 200 [17] [16 (+1)] [15]
De 201 a 400 14 13 (+1) 12
De 401 a 600 11 10 (+1) 9
De 601 a 800 8 7 (+1) 6
De 801 a 1.000 (5) (4 (+1)) (3)
> 1.000 (2) (1 (+1)) (0)

Matrix 4B assesses the natural resources potentially affected, for this it relates the proximity of the
landfill to environmental protection areas or water bodies. According to decree Minter n°. 124 of
20 of august of 1980, potentially polluting enterprises cannot be installed within 200 meters of
water bodies.
Environmental protection areas are being considered, according to Schueler, A. & Mahler, C.
(2007), as urban zones that by its characteristics and by the typicity of vegetation, earmarked for the
preservation and restoration of ecosystems in order to guarantee space for the maintenance of
species diversity and provide refuge for wildlife as well as protect springs and the headwaters of
watercourses. Protection Zones are considered as areas subject to special urbanistic criteria that
determine environmental care zones, in view of the public interest in this protection.

Table 4B – Matrix of Assessment of Natural Resources Potentially Affected

(B) Environmental
Distance (m)
Environmental Protection Area Water Bodies Protection Zones
< 100 [20] [19] [18]
De 101 a 200 [17] [16] [15]
De 201 a 400 14 13 12
De 401 a 600 11 10 9
De 601 a 800 8 7 6
De 801 a 1.000 (5) (4) (3)
> 1.000 (2) (1) (0)

Rating Obtained with the Utilization of the Methodology

The values were attributed to the matrices as follows, matrix 1 relative to the slurry generation
potential, and matrix 2 referent to the capacity of the leachate to reach an aquifer, contribute each
one with 30% of the total rate.
Matrix 3 refers to the natural drainage capacity of the slurry and surface-water runoff, contributing
with 20% of the total rate.

Matrix 4 (A+B) refers to the capacity of the leachate to reach natural resources and the exposed
population, contributes 20% of the total rate.
The total rate will be: Matrix 1 + Matrix 2 + Total Value Found In Matrix 3 + Maximum Value
Found In Matrices 4a + 4b

The result classifies the area in three categories, Green, Yellow and Red that are related to the level
of post-closure environmental care.

Table 5 Characterization related to potential danger of contamination by contact with leachate

Points Category Description Post-Closure Actions
Indicates landfills whose a) Quarterly monitoring of ground water
potential environmental with chemical analyzes for 1 year, to
contamination triggered by its identify critical periods in relation to the
leachate is considered low. possible presence of contamination

The confirmation is made by b) After this first year, the monitoring

Until 20 GREEN
chemical analyses of should be annual during 5 years.
groundwater that must meet
the Standards of the region.
 a) Quarterly monitoring of ground water
Indicates landfills whose with chemical analyzes for 1 year, to
environmental contamination identify critical periods in relation to
caused by leachate is contamination of the aquifer.
considered medium.
b) Monitoramento semestral, que deve
21 to 60 YELLOW
The confirmation is made by ser realizado até os resultados atingirem
chemical analyses of valores compatíveis as referências da
groundwater, whose results região.
exceed the Standards of the
region. c) After this proceeding, the monitoring
should be annual during 5 years.
Indicates landfills whose a) Monitoramento trimestral das águas
environmental contamination subterrâneas com análises químicas
caused by leachate is durante 1 ano, até que se alcancem
considered high. valores de contaminantes mais baixos do
que os determinados pela portaria 518 do
The confirmation is made by Ministério da Saúde para substâncias
61 to 100 RED chemical analyses of tóxicas presentes no lixiviado.
groundwater, whose results
present values greater than or b) After this proceeding, follow the
equal to the Maximum guidelines for category yellow b.
Allowable Values stipulated
by decree 518 of the Ministry
of Health.

RESULTADOS DA AVALIAÇÃO NO ATERRO SALVATERRA DO JUIZ DE FORA,

MINAS GERAIS, BRASIL

The old landfill in Juiz de Fora City, Salvaterra Landfill, began its activities in january of 1999 and
is located on the margins of Highway BR-040, Km 797+180 m. The history of occupation of Glebe
Salvaterra for their use as an area for final disposal of solid waste is not much different than most
dumps throughout Brazil. Since January 1999, all waste generated in the municipality, including
hospital and industrial, were deposited in this area and for a long time, was characterized as an
inappropriate procedure, which represented the beginning of 2005 an environmental liability of 6
(six ) years, totaling around 800,000 tonnes of waste disposed in the form of controlled landfill or
dump.

After the shutdown of the dump Salvaterra, a Plan of Recovery of Degraded Areas (PRDA) was
executed and later, in April 2005, began the operation of a sanitary landfill in the contiguous area.
This sanitary landfill was terminated in the year of 2010, with an approximate slurry production of
51,050 m³. Applying Tabel 1 – Matrix of Assessment of Slurry Production in the área of Salvaterra
Landfill, a rate of 11is obtained, equivalent to a MSW age of 5 to 30 years and a slurry volume of
50,000 to 70,000 m³.

According to SPT assays performed in the area where Salvaterra Landfill was deployed, in its worst
situation, the unsaturated depth was 7.8m, and the soil permeability in which as a whole is
composed by loamy sand and silty clay is in the order of 1E-7. So forth, in Table 2 - Matrix of
Landfill Base Assessment, the scoring obtained is 2, namely that which corresponds to an
unsaturated depth of 5.0 to 10 m and a soil permeability coefficient of 1E-6.
Observing the plani-altimetric survey the area of the Salvaterra Landfill and the rainfall patterns of
the region, Table 3 could be applied, yielding the results highlighted in Table 6 below.

As shown in Figure 5 (attached) within a radius of 1.00 km from the region of Salvaterra Landfill,
the presence of some rural residences and businesses are noted. From 1.00 km there are only farms
with small areas of crop and livestock production. Applying the Matrix of Urban Land Use
Assessment in Tabela 4 A, one obtains values highlighted in Table 7 below.

Table 6 Matrix of Topography and Pluviosity Assessment to Salvaterra Landfill

Location in relation to landfill
Characteristic
Downstream Over Upstream
Area of potential flooding: FT / WB- 8 - -
Region Subject to High-Energy Surface Runoff: FT / WB+ - - [20]
Region Protected Against Flooding or Runoff, with WB+ - 10 -

Table 7 Matrix of Urban Land Use Assessment for Salvaterra Landfill

(A) Urban
Distance (m)
Agriculture Residential/Parks/Gardens Commercial/Industrial/Services
De 401 a 600 - 10 9
> 1.000 (2) - -

There is also the presence of water resources in the area of the landfill and a Private Reserve of
Natural Heritage - RPPN over a greater distance of 1.00 kilometers, obtaining therefore from Table
4B the results highlighted in Table 8 bellow.

Table 8 Matrix of Assessment of Natural Resources Potentially Affected by Salvaterra Landfill

(B) Environmental
Distance (m)
Environmental Protection Areas Water Bodies Protection Zones
< 100 - [19] -
> 1.000 (2) - -

The total rate for the area of Salvaterra Landfill is 52, that is, the sum of the parts 11 (Matrix 1) + 2
(Matrix 2) + 20 (Maximum Value of Matrix 3) + 19 (Maximum Value of Matrices 4A + 4B).

Using the methodology proposed by Schueler, A. & Mahler, C. (2007), the Salvaterra Landfill was
classified in the yellow category, where the risk of leachate contaminating the environment is
average and there is no need for intervention, just monitoring as described previously.

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS OF THE ASSESSMENT ON SALVATERRA LANDFILL IN

JUIZ DE FORA, MINAS GERAIS, BRAZIL

Data from monitoring conducted in rivers and groundwater in Salvaterra Landfill, can validate the
results from the application of the methodology of matrices, since there was no significant
contamination that can be attributed to leachate from the landfill. Tables 9 and 10 show some results
of parameters measured in the water resources in recent years of operation of the landfill, as well as
the maximum allowed values (MAV) by current environmental regulations.
Although in Tables 9 and 10 there are no parameters that are not in accordance with the Maximum
Allowable Values (MAV), there is an increase in electrical conductivity between groundwater
upstream and downstream of the landfill.

Table 9 Monitoring of groundwater from a borehole downstream from Salvaterra Landfill

PARAMETERS UNITS 2007 2008 2009 VMP*
Total Cadmium mg/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.005
Total Lead mg/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.01
Dissolved Copper mg/L <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 2
Electrical Conductivity µS/cm 28 20.9 18.13 -
Chlorides mg/L 2 3 <1,0 250
Total Chrome mg/L <0.0040 <0.0040 <0.0040 0.05
E. Coli NMP <10 <1.0 <10 absent
Nitrates mg/L <2.0 <2.0 2.9 10
Total Ammoniacal Nitrogen mg/L <0.1 <1.0 <0.25 1.5
pH - 5.76 6 6.3 6.0 a 9.5
Total Zinc mg/L 0.03 <0.0030 <0.0030 5

Table 10 Monitoring of groundwater from a borehole upstream from Salvaterra Landfill

PARAMETERS UNITS 2007 2008 2009 VMP
Total Cadmium mg/L <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.005
Total Lead mg/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.028 0.01
Dissolved Copper mg/L <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 2
Electrical Conductivity µS/cm 40.1 38.1 31.8 -
Chlorides mg/L 3 2 <1,0 250
Total Chrome mg/L <0.0040 <0.0040 0.015 0.05
E. Coli NMP <10 <1.0 <10 absent
Nitrates mg/L <2.0 <2.0 2.4 10
Total Ammoniacal Nitrogen mg/L <0.1 <1.0 0.71 1.5
pH - 5.86 6 6.4 6.0 a 9.5
Total Zinc mg/L 0.07 <0.0030 0.022 5

After application of the methodology, measurements were also made of some parameters on surface
water under influence of the landfill (sampling date 10.03.2012). The sampling points were: 1- in
the reception box of the superficial drainage system from the contribution basins upstream of the
landfill; 2- in the reception box of the clean water drainage system at the landfill base; 3- In the
stream that rises in the downstream area of the landfill, Salvaterra Stream; 4- in São Mateus Stream
which receives the waters of Salvaterra Stream; 5 – in Peixe River upstream from the spring of São
Mateus Stream e 6- in Peixe River downstream from São Mateus Stream.
In this work we present in Table 11, the results of BOD for the six sampling points described above,
determined with the apparatus BOD-TRAK, after 5 days at a temperature of 20° C, at the
Laboratório de Hidráulica e Saneamento da Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora (Hydraulic and
Sanitation Laboratory of the Federal University of Juiz de Fora) .

Table 11 Monitoring of groundwater in the Area of Influence of Salvaterra Landfill

PARAMETER UNIT Sampling Points
1 2 3 4 5 6
BOD mg/L 3.6 10.4 4.0 6.8 4.4 5.6

From the data of Table 11, it is observed that both the points located within the landfill (points 1 and
2), as in Salvaterra Stream, São Mateus Stream and Peixe River located in their vicinity, there are
no high concentrations of BOD, confirming that there is no significant contamination by leachate
from the landfill.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

The final result of the Assessment Methodology for Salvaterra Landfill was in the category Yellow,
where the risk of leachate contaminating the environment is medium, which was validated, since the
analysis of surface and groundwater converge to the same evaluation.

Although there is no need for intervention in the area, stands out the importance of continuous
monitoring according to the periodicity defined in Table 5 or according to other current
environmental regulations. From historical data tracking, it will be possible to better understand the
dynamics and state and possible impacts caused by the final disposal of solid wastes in Salvaterra
Landfill.

It is also suggested that the Assessment Methodology be extended for risk analysis of other impacts
from areas of waste disposal such as, for example, atmospheric pollution caused by the generation
of biogas.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

Schueler, A. & Mahler, C. (2007). Nota Técnica: Sistema De Avaliação Para Classificar Áreas de
Disposição de Resíduos Sólidos Urbanos Visando a Remediação e a Pós-Ocupação. Revista
Engenharia Sanitária e Ambiental, Vol. 13 – Nº 3 – Jul/Set 2007, 249-254.

Teixeira, Gisele P. Et Al. Considerações Sobre a Remediação e Monitoramento Geotécnico e

Ambiental do Lixão de Salvaterra – Juiz de Fora – MG. 24º Congresso de Engenharia Sanitária e
Ambiental. Abes, Belo Horizonte-MG, 2007.