REPORT ON THE CROSS-BORDER IMPACT FROM ILLEGAL … · 2018-12-02 · EUROPEAN UNION REPORT ON THE...

EUROPEAN UNION

REPORT ON THE CROSS-BORDER IMPACT FROM ILLEGAL

DUMPS ON THE TERRITORY OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF VIDIN

Project CB007.1.31.304 “Prevention and mitigation of consequences of

man-made cross-border disasters in the region Vidin-Zajecar”

The project is co-funded by the EU through the Interreg-IPA CBC

Bulgaria–Serbia Programme.

2018

П Project CB007.1.31.304 "Prevention and mitigation of consequences of man-made cross-border disasters in the

region Vidin-Zajecar” concerning Interreg-IPA CBC Bulgaria–Serbia Programme 2014 — 2020

The project is co-funded by EU through the Interreg-IPA CBC Bulgaria–Serbia Programme 2014 — 2020 2

Contents

List of figures ................................................................................................................... 3

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 6

1.1. The aim and the scope of the study .................................................................... 6

1.2. The Cross-Border Context .................................................................................. 7

1.3. Geographical and demographic characteristics of Vidin municipality ................. 9

1.4. Geographical and demographic characteristics of Zajecar municipality ........... 13

2. Past experience and problems with illegal dumpsites in the municipality of Vidin ... 14

2.1. Review of the municipal waste management program of municipality of Vidin . 15

2.2. Past experience of the municipality Vidin with the illegal dumpsites................. 25

2.3. Identified illegal dumpsites on the territory of Vidin municipality ....................... 26

3. Waste-related disaster risks in the municipality of Vidin .......................................... 37

3.1. Akatsievo village ............................................................................................... 43

3.2. Antimovo village ............................................................................................... 43

3.3. Bela rada .......................................................................................................... 44

3.4. Botevo .............................................................................................................. 45

3.5. Bukovets ........................................................................................................... 46

3.6. Gaytantsi .......................................................................................................... 47

3.7. Gomotartsi ........................................................................................................ 48

3.8. Gradets ............................................................................................................. 49

3.9. Dinkovitsa ......................................................................................................... 50

3.10. Dunavtsi ........................................................................................................ 51

3.11. Zheglitsa ........................................................................................................ 52

3.12. Ivanovtsi ........................................................................................................ 53

3.13. Inovo ............................................................................................................. 53

3.14. Kalenik .......................................................................................................... 54

3.15. Kapitanovtsi ................................................................................................... 55

3.16. Koshava ........................................................................................................ 56

3.17. Kutovo ........................................................................................................... 57

3.18. Novoseltsi ...................................................................................................... 58

3.19. Pokrayna ....................................................................................................... 59

3.20. Ruptsi ............................................................................................................ 60




3.21. Sinagovtsi ...................................................................................................... 60

3.22. Slana Bara .................................................................................................... 61

3.23. Slanotran ....................................................................................................... 62

3.24. Tsar Simeonovo ............................................................................................ 63

4. Waste-related disaster risks in the Bulgaria-Serbian cross-border area ................. 64

4.1. Floods in 2013 .................................................................................................. 64

4.2. Floods in 2014 .................................................................................................. 65

4.3. Conclusions ...................................................................................................... 70

5. Environmental effects on the CBC area from the illegal dumps on the territory of the municipality of Vidin ....................................................................................................... 71

5.1. Air quality .......................................................................................................... 71

5.2. Surface and ground waters .............................................................................. 72

5.3. Soils .................................................................................................................. 72

5.4. Plants and wildlife ............................................................................................. 72

5.5. Aesthetic impact ............................................................................................... 72

5.6. Fires ................................................................................................................. 73

6. Health effects on the CBC area from the illegal dumps on the territory of the municipality of Vidin ....................................................................................................... 75

7. Economic effects on the CBC area from the illegal dumps on the territory of the municipality of Vidin ....................................................................................................... 77

8. Map of the illegal dumpsites on the territory of the municipality of Vidin ................. 80

9. Recommendations .................................................................................................. 82

10. Literature .............................................................................................................. 83

11. Annexes ............................................................................................................... 84

Annex 1- Tool for monitoring, control and reduction of the risk ...................................... 84

Annex 2- Map of illegal dumpsites ................................................................................. 87

List of figures

Fig 1: Map of Vidin - Zajecar cross-border region ............................................................ 7

Fig 2: Map of municipality of Vidin ................................................................................. 10

Fig 3: Map of municipality Zajecar ................................................................................. 14




Fig 4: Generated solid households waste, municipality Vidin, 2011-2016 ..................... 17

Fig 5: The share of morphological fraction in household waste for 2015,% ................... 24

Fig 6: The share of morphological fraction in household waste for 2015 in tons ........... 25

Fig 7: Classification of the settlement by number of illegal dumpsites .......................... 30

Fig 8: Distribution of the contaminated areas by size .................................................... 31

Fig 8: Distribution of the polluted areas by size and amount of waste ........................... 32

Fig 9: Classification of the settlement by total quantity of waste ................................... 33

Fig 10: Percentages of types of waste in illegal dumpsites ............................................ 34

Fig 11: Distribution of the inert materials by settlements ............................................... 35

Fig 12: Illegal waste dumpsites in Akatsievo village ...................................................... 43

Fig 13: Illegal waste dumpsites in Antimovo village ....................................................... 44

Fig 14: Illegal waste dumpsites in Bela Rada village ..................................................... 45

Fig 15: Illegal waste dumpsites in Botevo village ........................................................... 46

Fig 16: Illegal waste dumpsites in Bukovets village ....................................................... 47

Fig 17: Illegal waste dumpsites in Gaytantsi village ....................................................... 48

Fig 18: Illegal waste dumpsites in Gomotartsi village .................................................... 49

Fig 19: Illegal waste dumpsites in Gradets village ......................................................... 50

Fig 20: Illegal waste dumpsites in Dinkovitsa village ..................................................... 51

Fig 21: Illegal waste dumpsites in Dunavtsi city ............................................................. 51

Fig 22: Illegal waste dumpsites in Zheglitsa village ....................................................... 52

Fig 23: Illegal waste dumpsites in Ivanovtsi village ........................................................ 53

Fig 24: Illegal waste dumpsites in Inovo village ............................................................. 54

Fig 25: Illegal waste dumpsites in Kalenik village .......................................................... 54

Fig 26: Illegal waste dumpsites in Kapitanovtsi village .................................................. 55

Fig 27: Illegal waste dumpsites in Koshava village ........................................................ 56

Fig 28: Illegal waste dumpsites in Kutovo village ........................................................... 57

Fig 29: Illegal waste dumpsites in Novoseltsi village ..................................................... 58

Fig 30: Illegal waste dumpsites in Pokrayna village ....................................................... 59

Fig 31: Illegal waste dumpsites in Ruptsi village ............................................................ 60

Fig 32: Illegal waste dumpsites in Sinagotsi village ....................................................... 61

Fig 33: Illegal waste dumpsites in Slana Bara village .................................................... 62

Fig 34: Illegal waste dumpsites in Slanotran village ...................................................... 63




Fig 35: Illegal waste dumpsites in Tsar Simeonovo village ............................................ 63

Fig 36: Localized soil pollution sites in Serbia ............................................................... 69

Fig 37: Breakdown of activities causing local soil contamination [%] ............................ 70

Fig 38: Map of illegal dumpsites .................................................................................... 80

List of tables

Table I: Population of the municipality of Vidin, 2010 – 2016 ........................................ 11

Table II: Population by areas, 2016 ............................................................................... 12

Table III: Generated municipal waste in Vidin Municipality in ton per year for the period 2011-2016 ..................................................................................................................... 16

Table IV: Comparative table of the accumulation rate / collected household waste - kg/c/year.(data from NSI, *- no data) ............................................................................. 18

Table V: Morphological analysis of solid households’ waste, municipality Vidin ............ 18

Table VI: Morpholoical composition of the solid households waste average for each zone, 4 seasons in % .................................................................................................... 21

Table VII: The morphological composition of the solid household’s waste average for each zone, 4 seasons after reassessment of the “Other” fraction in % ......................... 22

Тable VIII: The quantities of generated waste, by fractions, municipality of Vidin, in tons ...................................................................................................................................... 23

Table IX: Data on the total amount of waste generated by fractions in Vidin municipality in tonnes and% with the quantities of separately collected recyclable fractions ............ 23

Table X: Polluted areas on the territory of municipality Vidin ......................................... 29

Table XI: Polluted areas on the territory of municipality Vidin and their location ............ 37

Table XII: Morphological analysis .................................................................................. 40

Table XIII: Data from NSI by year for the floods in Bulgaria and costs of the damages: 67

Table XIV Risk impact ................................................................................................... 73

Table XV Health assessment of contaminated areas .................................................... 75

Table XVI: Economic assessment- necessary financing for cleaning up activities ........ 79

Table XVII: Contaminated areas on the territory of municipality Vidin and their location 81

Table XVIII: Economic assessment- necessary financing for cleaning up activities in the priority areas .................................................................................................................. 82




1. Introduction

This report was developed by Energy Agency of Plovdiv under Project CB.007.1.31.304

“Prevention and mitigation of consequences of man - made cross - border disasters in

the region Vidin-Zajecar” concerning the Interreg IPA Cross-border Programme Bulgaria-

Serbia.

This report represents detailed research on the cross-border impact of illegal dumps on

the territory of the municipality of Vidin – one of the project objectives. The research was

carried out by the team of the following experts - Milena Agopyan, Liyana Adjarova,

Yonka Peshakova, Elka Piskova, Kiril Tunev, Nikola Balimezov, Hristo Minkov.

1.1. The aim and the scope of the study

The purpose of the study on the cross-border impact of illegal dumps on the territory of

the municipality of Vidin is to assess current waste management practices being

undertaken by Local Authorities and the waste industry within the Cross-Border Region,

as well as to identify opportunities for Local Authorities and the private sector to build

upon the experiences and waste management practices being implemented both in

Bulgaria and Serbia. This summary provides an overview of the key issues that have

been drawn out by the study and highlights the opportunities and challenges to be faced

by Government, Local Authorities and the waste industries if these issues are to be

addressed and cross-border opportunities are to be fully realised.

The main objectives of this study are:

To establish a baseline assessment of illegal dumpsites of undisputed data

quality for the settlements in the Vidin municipality;

As illegal dumpsites are a major nuisance for the citizens and visitors of Vidin

municipality, the final data shall also be used as an awareness-raising tool to

trigger a change in policy, management and social behavior.

To establish a process of data collection and monitoring that is owned and

followed up by cleaning activity from the municipality of Vidin and Ministry of

Environment and Water in Bulgaria.




1.2. The Cross-Border Context

The Bulgarian-Serbian border from the river Danube in the north down to the Bulgarian-

Serbian-Macedonian border triangle is approximately 220 km long. Most of the border

region is mountainous to alpine terrain, except for a short undulating and hilly terrain in

the northern part and a strip in the area where the main road from Sofia to Belgrade

passes. Most of the borderline coincides with the ridgeline of the Western Balkan

Mountains and has few road connections between both sides. There are only three

highways and two main roads crossing the border. High-capacity road and railway lines

connect Nish in Serbia and Sofia and in addition Skopje with Kyustendil and Sofia. Sofia

itself is an important traffic node in Southeastern Europe at the intersection of the axis

Belgrade – Sofia – Istanbul and Thessaloniki on the one hand and Skopje - Sofia –

Bucharest on the other hand.

Fig 1: Map of Vidin - Zajecar cross-border region

Most of the trans-border region is located in remote areas outside of dynamic economic

centers and, with the exception of Sofia, far away from big cities. This is another reason,

which makes cross-border cooperation traditionally more difficult. Job centers or

processing and industrial centers are not available and it is also not an option for




inhabitants to commute to the bigger central places on a daily basis. A big area of the

border region could be categorized as an economically underdeveloped rural area. A

common characteristic of the Bulgarian and Serbian border regions is their low

economic development compared to the remaining territories of both countries (IPA,

2007).

Border regions often have lower population density than the national average because

central places or big cities are usually not located in border areas. One exception is

Slovakia with its capital on the river Danube at the border with Austria. In the Bulgarian

border region, too, the population density is 1.5 times lower than the national average; in

Serbia it is 1.3 times lower.

The border area is characterized by its ethnic diversity, although ethnic Bulgarians and

Serbs form the core part of the population. Most of the people on the Serbian side of the

border are ethnic Serbs, in the Western Outlands ethnic Bulgarians. There is also a Vlah

minority (23 600 people) mostly living in the area of Bor, Boljevac, Negotin and Zaječar,

as well as some Macedonian and Montenegrin minorities, who are mainly concentrated

in Knjaževac, Zaječar, Negotin, Pirot, Dimitrovgrad and Surdulica on the Serbian side of

the border (Gigović, 2010).

Any self-declaration of ethnicity is controversial as this can have social and economic

implications. Also in this case there might be more ethnic Bulgarians in the Western

Outlands as declared in the statistics, due to some economic reasons as, for example,

work access or local business activity related to current regional development.

Part of the population of the Western Outlands has Bulgarian citizenship, which is a

clear advantage concerning travel and work permits within the EU and for traveling to

Bulgaria. The knowledge of the Bulgarian language gives the opportunity to have strong

social, economic and educational ties with Bulgaria. The knowledge of Serbian and

Bulgarian languages also is an advantage for many people who work in trade, legally

and illegally, between both countries.

On the Bulgarian side of the border, most of the people are ethnic Bulgarians; there is

also a significant Roma population, mainly in the city of Kyustendil, the village of Gorni

Lom and the city of Vidin. The share of the Roma population (4.7%) is more than three

times greater than on the Serbian side (1.4%) (IPA, 2007). There are also some villages

with a Vlach population in the region around Novo Selo.




The Serbian, Macedonian and Turkish population on the Bulgarian side of the border

has a limited representation in contrast to the rest of the country. There are only few

Serbians and Macedonians in the biggest cities of Kyustendil, Dragoman and

Belogradchik (Gigović,2010).

Population growth is often seen as an indicator for the long-term economic development

and attractiveness of a region for people and business. In both countries, strong

population declines over the last decades, especially in the border regions, have been

observed. The population decline of 0.57% in Bulgaria was the highest of all EU member

states in 2011. The decline in Serbia was less (0.33%), but still among the highest in

Europe, despite small net migration gains. In both countries, the population decline is

mainly caused by natural population loss. In Bulgaria, however, this is, in contrast to

Serbia, strengthened by a net outward migration.

1.3. Geographical and demographic characteristics of Vidin municipality

The region of Vidin includes 140 settlements and 11 municipalities - Vidin, Boynitsa,

Bregovo, Belogradchik, Gramada, Dimovo, Kula, Makresh, Novo Selo, Chuprene and

Ruzhintsi.

Municipality of Vidin is a mid-size Bulgarian municipality located in the north-west part of

the country, on the Danube River, close to the Romanian and Serbian borders. It covers

an area of 501.3 km2. By this indicator it ranks first among the 11 municipalities of the

Vidin region. The area of the municipality is 16.5% of the area, 2.6% of the area of the

Northwest region and 0.5% of the territory of Bulgaria.




Fig 2: Map of municipality of Vidin

The location of the municipal center Vidin on the banks of the Danube River puts the

municipality at the crossroads of two European transport corridors. The area under

investigation is the intersection of the Rhine - Main - Danube Corridor No 7, which

provides transport links between the Black Sea and the North Sea and Corridor 4

connecting Central with South - Eastern Europe. The strategic location of Vidin

Municipality over key European transport arteries and the presence of the Vidin port

create favorable opportunities for the economic development of the municipality at

national and international levels. The second bridge on the Danube (officially opened in

June 2013) is the most important for the development of the studied territory. Through

the bridge “New Europe” there is a road and rail transport link between the municipal

center Vidin and the Romanian city of Calafat.

The favorable geographic location of the regional and municipal center creates good

conditions for its differentiation as a transport and industrial unit in the northwestern part

of Bulgaria. Within the Vidin municipality there are two border checkpoints:




Vidin border checkpoint - River station - located in the central part of the regional

and municipal center – city of Vidin;

Danube Bridge 2 / Bridge “New Europe” / connecting the town of Vidin and the

city of Calafat.

The city of Vidin has a rich history as a cultural and touristic site, and has had a major

role in the production industries on the national level; however, in the last years the city

has suffered recession and companies have retreated from the region, which has also

led to migration of the young population. In this respect, the city is interested in

revitalizing its existing infrastructure and developing an attractive image for potential

investors. The city has developed an EE and RES strategy and action plan to increase

its energy efficiency in public buildings and facilities and public transport, and encourage

the introduction of RES capacities to answer the energy demands and increase its

energy independence. The municipality is involved in national and EU trans - border

cooperation projects.

According to the latest Census (2011) the population of Vidin municipality is 63 257

inhabitants - 62.6 % of the population of Vidin district.

The population of Vidin Municipality in December 2016 was 55 790 (according to NSI

data), which represents 62.78% of the total population of Vidin region.

Table I: Population of the municipality of Vidin, 2010 – 2016

Population by years

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Vidin Region 99 481 97 546 95 467 93 361 91 235 88 867

Municipality of Vidin 62 348 61 416 60 222 59 039 57 001 55 790

The municipality of Vidin covers 34 settlements - two cities (city of Vidin and city of

Dunavtsi) and 32 villages (see Table II). The population in the municipality is decreasing

and this tendency has continued in recent years.




Table II: Population by areas, 2016

№ Area Population

1 City of Vidin 46 777

2 City of Dunavtsi 2 258

3 Akatsievo village 40

4 Antimovo village 433

5 Bela rada village 373

6 Botevo village 24

7 Bukovets village 571

8 Voinitsa village 37

9 Vartop village 34

10 Gaitantsi village 45

11 General Marinovo village 94

12 Gomotartsi village 491

13 Gradets village 1 083

14 Dinkovitsa village 75

15 Dolni Boshnyak village 44

16 Druzhba village 125

17 Zheglitsa village 119

18 Ivanovtsi village 54

19 Inovo village 466

20 Kalenik village 158

21 Kapitanovtsi village 843

22 Koshava village 287

23 Kutovo village 638

24 Mayor Uzunovo village 207

25 Novoseltsi village 636

26 Peshakovo village 57

27 Plakuder village 37

28 Pokrayna village 1 032

29 Ruptsi village 88

30 Sinagovtsi village 275

31 Slana bara village 294

32 Slanotran village 400

33 Tarnyane village 103

34 Tsar Simeonovo village 52




The population of Vidin Municipality is concentrated in the municipal center city of Vidin

with a share of 80.30% of the total population, as well as in the town of Dunavtsi -

3.88%, and the other three larger villages with population of about 1000 inhabitants.

1.4. Geographical and demographic characteristics of Zajecar municipality

The municipality of Zajecar is the central municipality of the Zajecar administrative

district, which includes four municipalities: Zajecar, Boljevac, Knjazevac and Sokobanja.

It is located in the central part of the Timocka Krajina and covers the Zajecar Basin, the

eastern part of Crnorečke and the northern part of the Knjazevac Basin, as well as the

southern parts of the Negotin Krajina. The territory of the municipality is bordered: from

the north slopes of the mountain Deli Jovan, from the east and southeast slopes of Stara

Planina mountain range, which goes to the state border of Bulgaria, in the south and

southwest of Lasovačka mountain as a branch of Tupižnica mountain, and in the west

by Ježević and the branches of Veliki Krša.

The municipality of Zajecar comprises 42 settlements, with a total population of 59 461

inhabitants, Zaječar (38 165 inhabitants) and 41 villages (21 296): Borovac (114),

Brusnik (315), Velika Jasikova (819), Veliki Izvor (2.399), Veliki Jasenovac (287),

Vražogrnac (1.096), Vratarnica (457), Vrbica (205), Gamzigrad (683), Glogovica (387),

Gornja Bela Reka (122), Gradskovo (504), Grlište (697), Grljan (2.379), Dubočane

(365), Zagrađe (167), Zvezdan (1.602), Jelašnica (100), Klenovac (172), Koprivnica

(420), Lasovo (245), Lenovac (147), Leskovac (80), Lubnica (808), Mala Jasikova

(235), Mali Izvor (372), Mali Jasenovac (232), Marinovac (209), Metriš (273),

Nikoličevo (715), Planinica (205), Prlita (90), Rgotina (1.452), Salaš (688), Selačka

(208), Tabakovac (170), Trnovac (391), Halovo (707), Čokonjar (143), Šipikovo (383),

Šljivar (253). Source of data is RZS Serbia (Census 2011).

The municipality occupies an area of 1 069 km2, of which 63.7% is agricultural land

(data for 2011, RZS Serbia). In this area are 59 461 inhabitants, according to the 2011

population census (Census 2011). The number of households is 21 031 and the

average number of household members is 2.83. The population density is 56 inhabitants

per km2 and is the largest in the Zajecar district and the second largest in the whole




Timok region. In the city of Zajecar live 38 165 inhabitants (64.18%) and in other 41

settlements live 21 296 inhabitants (35.81%).

Fig 3: Map of municipality Zajecar

2. Past experience and problems with illegal dumpsites in the

municipality of Vidin

Lifestyles due to the growth of the population's welfare generate an increasingly

household solid waste. The lack of collecting and treating waste generated in the last

decade has created a bad image of aesthetic and environmental pollution. Waste

management has not yet been reached to cover the whole country. The lack of a waste

management system in Bulgaria is attributed to a number of factors:

the lack of network management,

lack of technical and financial means,

low rate payment, and

lack of waste law implementation.




2.1. Review of the municipal waste management program of municipality of Vidin

2.1.1. Common information

The new Regional municipal landfill for all 11 municipalities in the Vidin region has been

in operation since 2015.

Vidin Municipality fully complies with the requirements for landfill disposal at landfills

meeting European and national requirements. The municipality has ensured the

ecological disposal of the Regional Landfill for non-hazardous waste for the

municipalities of Vidin, Belogradchik, Boynitsa, Bregovo, Gramada, Dimovo, Kula,

Makresh, Novo Selo, Rujintsi and Chuprene, based on the Integrated permit (КР № 389

– Н0/2010) issued by the Ministry of Environment and Water, according to the provisions

in art.117 of Environmental Protection Act.

For the municipality of Vidin the value of the indicator rate of accumulation (represented

as the amount of generated household waste per year per capita) for 2016 is 317 kg per

capita per year (kg/cap/y). This value is less than the values for settlements with a

population of 50,000 to 150,000 inhabitants – 349,6 kg /cap/ y.

The municipality decides the issues of construction and demolition waste by transporting

and treating them through an installation for crushing and screening of construction

waste located in the southernmost part of the Regional Non-hazardous Waste Depot for

the municipalities of Vidin, Belogradchik, Boynitsa, Bregovo, Gramada, Dimovo, Kula,

Makresh, Novo Selo, Rujintsi and Chuprene. The installation has a maximum annual

capacity for receiving and treating 80 000 t of construction waste. Installations for

crushing and screening of construction waste are not yet operational.

For the purpose of environmentally friendly collection and recovery of packaging waste,

the Vidin Municipality has a contract with a recovery organisation and has organised a

system for the separate collection of recyclable fractions (paper and cardboard, glass,

plastic).

Data from the morphological analysis show the share of household biowaste (food,

garden, wood) - in 2016, the quantity is 5 667,3 tonnes, or 33,74% of total (Table V to

Table IX, Figures 5 and 6) generated solid household waste in the municipality. In order

to achieve the Municipality's objective of reducing the amount of landfilled household

bio-waste through separate collection and recycling in the Regional Non-hazardous

Waste Depot for the municipalities Vidin, Belogradchik, Boynitsa, Bregovo, Gramada,




Dimovo, Kula, Makresh, Novo Selo, Rujintsi and Chuprene a composting plant operates

- with maximum annual capacity for receiving and treating 10 000 t of biodegradable

waste; the composting plant includes the treatment of biodegradable green and

municipal waste generated on the territory of Vidin and Belogradchik. The municipality of

Vidin has started a phased introduction of a system for the separate collection and

utilization of “green” waste from parks and gardens and from households. During 2016,

46, 58 tons of biodegradable wastes were accepted at the regional landfill.

2.1.2. Waste analyses

In Table III and Fig. 3 are presented the quantities of municipal solid waste generated on

the territory of Vidin Municipality during the investigation period 2011-2016.

Table III: Generated municipal waste in Vidin Municipality in ton per year for the period 2011-2016

Quantities of mixed municipal waste, in tons per year

Type of waste 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Mixed households

waste in

municipality Vidin

26 577 26 080 25 225 26 020 17 142 17 664




Fig 4: Generated solid households waste, municipality Vidin, 2011-2016

As can be seen from Fig. 4, for the period 2011-2014, there were no changes in the

quantity of generated solid household waste on the territory of the municipality.

Quantities decreased sharply from 2015 after the commissioning of the regional waste

management system and the weighing of the quantity of generated solid households

waste on the territory of the municipality.

An important indicator of waste management is the rate of accumulation of waste,

expressed as the amount of household waste generated per year per capita. Table IV

presents the comparison of cumulative accumulation rates for Bulgaria, district Vidin and

municipality Vidin, for the period 2011-2015. According to the Ministry of Environment

and Waters (MoEW) and the National program for waste management 2014-2020, the

accumulation rate for the period 2012-2015 for settlements with a population of less than

3 000 inhabitants is 241,7 kg/cap/year, and for settlements with a population of 25 000

to 50 000 inhabitants is 334,9 kg/cap/year. The average value of the accumulation rate

for Vidin municipality for 2015 is 301 kg/cap/year and for 2016 - 317 kg/cap/year.




Table IV: Comparative table of the accumulation rate / collected household waste - kg/c/year.(data from NSI, *- no data)

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

For Bulgaria 380 347 434 443 420 *

Region Vidin 337 314 315 330 243 *

Municipality of

Vidin

426 425 419 441 301 317

Between February and November 2016 a morphological analysis of the composition and

quantities of municipal solid waste was carried out. The analysis was carried out

according to the requirements of the Methodology for determining the morphological

composition of household waste, approved by the Ministry of Environment and Water in

2012. The analysis data for the individual seasons, as well as the average annual

values, are presented in Tables V to IX and Figures 5 and 6.

Table V: Morphological analysis of solid households’ waste, municipality Vidin

a) Morphological analysis, area city of Vidin, high - rise buildings, 4 seasons

Morphological fraction

sample “summer”

sample “autumn” sample “winter” sample “spring”

Weight, kg

Morphological fraction, % Weight,

kg

Morphological fraction, % Weight, kg Morphological

fraction % Weight, kg

Morphological fraction, %

Food 23,5 19,1 17,5 14,0 28,0 22,4 23,9 20,0

Paper and cardboard

20,4 16,6 15,0 12,0 16,8 13,5 16,8 14,0

Plastic 18,9 15,4 22,0 17,6 13,3 10,6 24,5 20,4

Textile 6,6 5,4 6,7 5,4 3,3 2,6 2,9 2,4

Tire 0,8 0,6 1,6 1,3 1,2 1,0 0,3 0,2

Leader 3,3 2,7 1,5 1,2 0,0 0,0 0,3 0,2

Garden 8,4 6,9 9,0 7,2 2,1 1,7 2,4 2,0




Wood 2,3 1,8 2,2 1,8 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0

Glass 4,7 3,8 12,0 9,6 13,3 10,6 10,9 9,1

Inert 2,0 1,6 5,5 4,4 1,2 1,0 3,5 2,9

Metals 2,5 2,0 4,1 3,3 4,5 3,6 0,5 0,4

Hazardous 2,6 2,1 1,9 1,5 0,4 0,4 0,8 0,7

Other 27,0 21,9 26,0 20,8 41,0 32,8 33,3 27,7

Total 123,00 100,00 126,00 100,00 125,00 100,00 120,00 100,00

b) Morphological analysis, area city of Vidin, single-family buildings, 4 seasons


sample “summer”


Weightkg

Morphological

fraction, % Weight

kg

Morphological

fraction, % Weight

kg


% Weight

kg

Morphological

fraction, %

Food 13,4 11,1 17,6 14,2 23,4 18,6 12,3 9,8

Paper and cardboard

11,7 9,7 5,0 4,1 8,8 7,0 11,2 8,9

Plastic 19,2 15,9 20,3 16,4 19,7 15,6 21,8 17,4

Textile 8,1 6,7 5,4 4,3 2,0 1,6 6,2 4,9

Tire 1,7 1,4 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,8 0,7

Leader 2,5 2,1 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,6 0,4

Garden 20,5 16,9 24,2 19,5 7,7 6,1 12,6 10,1

Wood 3,1 2,6 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 5,0 4,0

Glass 8,1 6,7 1,7 1,4 4,3 3,4 3,9 3,1

Inert 3,6 3,0 11,4 9,2 13,1 10,4 12,3 9,8

Metals 2,0 1,7 3,6 2,9 2,6 2,0 0,6 0,4

Hazardous 1,8 1,5 3,9 3,1 6,0 4,8 1,1 0,9

Other 25,4 21,0 31,0 25,0 38,5 30,5 36,6 29,3

Total 121,0 100 124 100 126 100 125 100




c) Morphological analysis, area villages, 4 seasons


sample “summer”


Weight kg

Morphological

fraction, %

Weight kg

Morphological

fraction, %

Weight kg

Morphological

fraction %

Weight kg

Morphological

fraction, %

Food 15,4 12,4 15,8 13,2 14,0 11,2 13,3 10,9

Paper and cardboard

8,1 6,5 5,4 4,5 8,4 6,7 4,8 3,9

Plastic 24,3 19,6 16,6 13,9 25,6 20,5 25,6 20,9

Textile 5,8 4,7 15,8 13,2 14,8 11,9 7,2 5,9

Tire 0,5 0,4 4,7 4,0 1,5 1,2 0,7 0,6

Leader 3,8 3,1 0,8 0,7 0,0 0,0 0,3 0,3

Garden 25,8 20,8 22,6 18,8 14,5 11,6 16,7 13,7

Wood 0,0 0,0 10,4 8,7 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0

Glass 7,4 6,0 0,8 0,7 3,2 2,6 1,4 1,1

Inert 4,4 3,5 7,2 6,0 4,9 3,9 12,3 10,1

Metals 4,3 3,5 1,2 1,0 1,0 0,8 4,8 3,9

Hazardous 2,1 1,7 1,8 1,5 1,2 0,9 1,7 1,4

Other 22,0 17,8 16,6 13,9 35,9 28,7 33,4 27,4

Total 124,0 100,0 120,0 100,0 125,0 100,0 122,0 100,0




Table VI: Morpholoical composition of the solid households waste average for

each zone, 4 seasons in %


City of Vidin, high- rise

buildings, %

City of Vidin, single family residential

buildings, %

Area - villages, %

Average for the

municipality, %

Food 18,87 13,41 11,93 13,40

Paper and cardboard

14,00 7,42 5,42 7,30

Plastic 16,00 16,34 18,72 17,49

Textile 3,96 4,38 8,90 6,58

Tire 0,77 0,51 1,53 1,06

Leader 1,02 0,62 1,01 0,87

Garden 4,44 13,15 16,22 13,52

Wood 0,90 1,65 2,17 1,81

Glass 8,28 3,63 2,58 3,72

Inert 2,47 8,11 5,88 6,24

Metals 2,33 1,76 2,30 2,11

Hazardous 1,17 2,56 1,40 1,79

Other 25,80 26,46 21,93 24,11

Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,00

It is clear from the above table that the largest fraction of household waste is occupied by the plastic fraction - 17.49%, followed by “garden” - 13.52% and “food” - 13.40%, “paper and cardboard” - 7.30 %. The share of category “others” is 24.11%. It is worth mentioning the large share of the textile fraction - 6.58%, with the average for the country 3.0%.

Waste identified as “other” is an indeterminable waste which, due to its small size and shape, cannot be separated and weighed. This indeterminable waste is often in quite a large quantity, especially when it has passed a lorry with a compaction device and could reach 50%, and should not be neglected. According to the recommendations given in the Methodology for determining the morphological composition of municipal waste for




the re-evaluation of the fraction “others”, it contains about 65% ash (ash from solid fuels, earth, sap) and about 25% biodegradable waste.

Data from the morphological analysis performed after reassessment of the “other” fraction are presented in Table VII.

Table VII: The morphological composition of the solid household’s waste average for each zone, 4 seasons after reassessment of the “Other” fraction in %


City of Vidin- average value, %

Area- villages, %

Average for the

municipality, %

Food 18,02 14,56 16,29

Paper and cardboard 10,23 6,30 8,26

Plastic 16,78 19,16 17,97

Textile 4,53 9,12 6,83

Tire 0,58 1,53 1,06

Leader 0,73 1,01 0,87

Garden 12,93 17,97 15,45

Wood 1,66 2,34 2,00

Glass 6,50 3,94 5,22

Inert 18,73 19,92 19,32

Metals 7,13 2,74 4,94

Hazardous 2,19 1,40 1,79

Total 100,0 100,0 100,0




Тable VIII: The quantities of generated waste, by fractions, municipality of Vidin, in tons


Average f or city of Vidin, t

Area - villages, t Average for

the municipality, t

Food 2 472,21 498,38 2 970,58

Paper and cardboard 1 402,89 215,66 1 618,55

Plastic 2 301,30 656,01 2 957,31

Textile 620,96 312,37 933,33

Tire 79,67 52,48 132,15

Leader 100,09 34,58 134,67

Garden 1 773,61 615,36 2 388,98

Wood 227,44 80,27 307,71

Glass 891,86 134,81 1 026,67

Inert 2 569,87 681,81 3 251,68

Metals 978,40 93,87 1 072,26

Hazardous 300,16 47,95 348,11

Total 13 718,47 3 423,53 17 142,00

Table IX: Data on the total amount of waste generated by fractions in Vidin municipality in tonnes and% with the quantities of separately collected recyclable

fractions


Average f or city of Vidin, t

Area- villages, t Average for the municipality, t

Average for the municipality, %

Food 2545,16 498,4 3043,5 17,03

Paper and cardboard

1466,57 215,7 1682,2 9,41

Plastic 2360,91 656,0 3016,9 16,88

Textile 627,04 312,4 939,4 5,26




Tire 79,67 52,5 132,1 0,74

Leader 100,09 34,6 134,7 0,75

Garden 1822,25 615,4 2437,6 13,64

Wood 232,30 80,3 312,6 1,75

Glass 965,28 134,8 1100,1 6,16

Inert 2958,95 681,8 3640,8 20,37

Metals 990,55 93,9 1084,4 6,07

Hazardous 300,16 47,9 348,1 1,95

Total 14 448,95 3 423,5 17 872,5 100,00

Fig 5: The share of morphological fraction in household waste for 2015,%

33.74%

8.26%

17.97%

8.76%

5.22%

19.32%

4.94% 1.79%

Food, garden,woodPaper andcardboardPlastic

Textile, tire,leatherGlass

Inert

Metals

Hazardous




Fig 6: The share of morphological fraction in household waste for 2015 in tons

2.2. Past experience of the municipality Vidin with the illegal dumpsites

In 2015 the municipality of Vidin identified illegal dumps on its territory. The polluted

areas were situated in villages Botevo, Vartop, Gaytantsi, Ivanovtsi, Sinagovtsi, Bela

Rada, Voynitsa, General Marinovo, Peshakovo, Slana Bara, Tarnyane, Akatsievo,

Gradets, Dinkovitsa, Dolni Boshnyak, DrujbaPlakuder, Ruptsi, Antimovo, Gomotartsi,

Inovo, Kapitanovtsi, Koshava, Kutovo, Pokrayna and Slanotran. The municipality of Vidin

cleaned the polluted areas in 2016.

In 2018 the experts from the Energy Agency of Plovdiv identified the polluted areas in

the municipality Vidin by visiting the settlements. The Vidin municipality has more than

30 settlements with household-waste-polluted territories that need to be cleaned

regularly to reduce the risk of disasters caused by contamination from human activity. By

providing the pictures from polluted areas, the municipality of Vidin could undertake

5667.27

1618.55

2957.31

1200.15

1026.67

3251.68

1072.26 348.11 Food, garden, wood

Paper andcardboard

Plastic

Textile, tire, leather

Glass

Inert

Metals

Hazardous




additional measures to ensure the ecological balance in the municipality and the

prevention of risks of various disasters related to pollution and dumps as a whole.

2.3. Identified illegal dumpsites on the territory of Vidin municipality

The experts from Energy Agency of Plovdiv during the visits to the illegal dumpsites

conducted morphological analysis of the composition and quantities of the solid waste.

The analysis is carried out according to the requirements of the Methodology for

determining the morphological composition of household waste approved by the Ministry

of Environment and Water in 2012. The analysis data for the each site are described

below.

The areas/lands around the landfill have greater risk for contamination of groundwater.

Many of the products that have toxic origin and heavy metals, such as arsenic, zinc,

copper, and selenium, are harmful to the environment. In the most common case urban

wastes are disposed into landfills, which were originally located relatively close to the

urban areas. This means that a huge amount of waste could be burned, disposed of

through the rivers or in inappropriate places as illegal dumpsites.

The Waste Management Act in Bulgaria (Promulgated, State Gazette No.

53/13.07.2012, effective 13.07.2012, amended, SG No. 66/26.07.2013, effective

26.07.2013; Judgment No. 11/10.07.2014 of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of

Bulgaria - SG No. 61/25.07.2014; amended, SG No. 98/28.11.2014, effective

28.11.2014, SG No. 14/20.02.2015, amended and supplemented, SG No.

105/30.12.2016, SG No. 13/7.02.2017) determines:

Article 19

(3) The municipality mayor shall be responsible for:

15. prevention of the dumping of waste in places unauthorised for this purpose

and/or of the establishment of illegal dumping sites and ensuring their removal.

Article 29

(1) Waste, depending on its type, properties, composition and other characteristics, shall

be collected, transported and treated in a manner not impeding its further recovery.




(2) The abandonment, unauthorised dumping and incineration or any other form of

uncontrolled waste management shall be prohibited

Article 112

(1) The municipal mayor or an official authorised thereby shall exercise control over:

1. operations relating to the generation, collection, including separate collection,

storage, transport and treatment of household and construction and demolition

waste;

Article 133

(1) A fine of BGN 300 or exceeding this amount but not exceeding BGN 1,000 shall be

imposed on any natural person who:

1. discards waste in places unauthorized for this purpose;

Article 151

(2) A fine of BGN 3,000 or exceeding this amount but not exceeding BGN 10,000 shall

be imposed on any municipal mayor and/or an official, unless subject to a severer

sanction, who:

6. fails to take measures for prevention of the dumping of waste in places unauthorised

for this purpose and/or of the establishment of illegal dumping sites and ensuring their

removal;

2.3.1. Methodology

In order to ensure a collection of reliable baseline data comparable across municipalities,

experts from the Energy Agency of Plovdiv were engaged in data collection and data

collection methodology. For this assessment, the following were applied:

Scope: All the populated settlements in the Vidin municipality were visited and the

pollutant areas were evaluated. A routing had been agreed on with the experts from

municipality of Vidin, in advance, to ensure an efficient assessment.

Data collection: The following data points of each dumpsite were collected:




- Photo proof: Each dumpsite was photographed. Panoramic or multiple pictures were taken when necessary.

- Geo-reference: Each dumpsite was geo - referenced by the indication of Latitude and Longitude. The decimal second was indicated (e.g., 43°56’07”) and when was possible the contaminated territories were described by name.

- Municipality: The name of the municipality where the dumpsite has been found was indicated.

- Risks: 3 levels of risks were determined: 1- low, 2- medium, 3- high

- Amount: The experts defined the amount of the waste in the dumpsites:

Small: 1-20 m3

Medium: 20-200 m3

Big: > 200 m3

- Size: The experts defined the size of contaminated area:

1-49 m²; i.e. up to 7m x 7m or the like 50-400 m², i.e. up to 20 x 20 m or the like >400 m²

- Fractions: Data collectors were indicated as one or more of the following:

Plastic waste Food waste Paper waste Garden/ wood waste Textile, tires, leader waste Glass waste Inert/construction waste Hazardous waste

2.3.2. Results

For a month, two teams conducted an investigation and identification of illegal

landfills in 30 settlements on the territory of the municipality Vidin. In total, 46 illegal

dumpsites were identified in 24 settlements. Polluted areas cover more than 45 000 m2,

with more than 20 000 m3 of waste.




The identified polluted areas, the number of illegal dumpsites in each settlement, the

quantity of waste and the polluted areas are shown in Table X:

Table X: Polluted areas on the territory of municipality Vidin

№ Settlement Number of

illegal dumpsites

Contaminatedarea (in m²)

Amount of waste (in m³)

Waste weight (kg)

1 Akatsievo 1 30 20 242

2 Antimovo 1 30 20 102

3 Bela Rada 1 10 30 134

4 Botevo 1 20 20 58

5 Bukovets 4 6 250 600 2 445

6 Gaytantsi 2 130 15 127

7 Gomotartsi 5 1 300 1 030 2 232

8 Gradetс 4 1 470 260 885

9 Dinkovitsa 1 150 50 3 030

10 Dunavtsi 2 220 40 505

11 Zheglitsa 1 1 200 1 580 3 420

12 Ivanovtsi 1 30 20 311

13 Inovo 2 6 005 315 1 213

14 Kalenik 3 390 75 2 132

15 Kapitanovtsi 2 8 015 5 020 4 612

16 Koshava 1 3 000 1 000 3 145

17 Kutovo 2 8 000 4 000 6 855

18 Novoseltsi 2 1 900 100 422

18 Pokrayna 1 2 500 20 4 180

20 Ruptsi 1 50 30 770

21 Sinagovtsi 1 2 000 3 000 2 980

22 Slana Bara 1 20 15 377

23 Slanotran 2 40 45 134

24 Tsar Simeonovo 1 100 18 202

Total: 43 42 860 17 323 40 513




In the Fig. 7 the total number of illegal dumpsites for all of the settlements in municipality

Vidin is conducted.

Fig 7: Classification of the settlement by number of illegal dumpsites

According to the results in Fig.7, the territories of 24 settlements contained a large

number of illegal dumpsites. This number ranges from 1- 5 with illegal dumpsites. The

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Akatsievo

Antimovo

Bela Rada

Botevo

Bukovets

Gaytantsi

Gomotartsi

Gradetс

Dinkovitsa

Dunavtsi

Zheglitsa

Ivanovtsi

Inovo

Kalenik

Kapitanovtsi

Koshava

Kutovo

Novoseltsi

Pokrayna

Ruptsi

Sinagovtsi

Slana bara

Slanotran

Tsar Simeonovo

Number

Number of illegal dumpsites in the settlements




settlements that have the most illegal dumpsites are: Gomotartsy, Gradets and

Bukovets.

Fig 8: Distribution of the contaminated areas by size

0 1 000 2 000 3 000 4 000 5 000 6 000 7 000 8 000 9 000

Akatsievo

Antimovo

Bela Rada

Botevo

Bukovets

Gaytantsi

Gomotartsi

Gradetс

Dinkovitsa

Dunavtsi

Zheglitsa

Ivanovtsi

Inovo

Kalenik

Kapitanovtsi

Koshava

Kutovo

Novoseltsi

Pokrayna

Ruptsi

Sinagovtsi

Slana bara

Slanotran

Tsar Simeonovo

Distribution of the contaminated areas by size

Contaminated area (in m²)




The total contaminated area is 42 860 m2. The biggest contaminated areas were

identified in the villages Kutovo, Kapitanovtsi, Inovo and Bukovets.

Fig 9: Distribution of the polluted areas by size and amount of waste

Figure 8 presents distribution of the polluted areas in the settlement by surface (in m2)

and quantity of waste-- both in m3 and kg. Sometimes a small quantity of waste

occupied a large area, as in villages Inovo and Bukovets. In other cases a large amount

of waste could occupy a small area - as in the Pokrayna village.

Local policies should be focused on limiting contaminated sites and clearing up larger

illegal dumpsites.

0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

7 000

8 000

9 000

Distribution of the contaminated areas by size and amount of waste

Total polluted area for the settlement (in m²) Amaunt of waste (in m³)

Waste weight in the settlemet (kg)




Fig 10: Classification of the settlement by total quantity of waste

In Fig. 9, the percentage of illegal dumpsites has been categorized based on the amount

of waste calculated in kg and m3. The largest amount, with 29%, was registered in

Kapitanovtsi village.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Akatsievo

Antimovo

Bela Rada

Botevo

Bukovets

Gaytantsi

Gomotartsi

Gradetс

Dinkovitsa

Dunavtsi

Zheglitsa

Ivanovtsi

Inovo

Kalenik

Kapitanovtsi

Koshava

Kutovo

Novoseltsi

Pokrayna

Ruptsi

Sinagovtsi

Slana bara

Slanotran

Tsar Simeonovo

Percent distribution of the settlement by contaminated area and amaunt of waste

Amaunt of waste (in m³) Waste weight (kg)




Fig 11: Percentages of types of waste in illegal dumpsites

Fig. 10 presents percentage of waste by types. Inert materials are 55% of the total

waste, garden and wood materials are 21% and plastic 14%.

The main polluted areas by inert materials are shown in Fig 11.

Plastic, 14% Food, 2%

Paper, 2%

Garden/ wood, 21%

Textile/ tire/ leader, 5% Glass, 1%

Inert, 55%

Dangerous, 1%

Type of waste




Fig 12: Distribution of the inert materials by settlements

The villages Kutovo and Pokrayna are responsible for 18% of the inert waste, village

Kapitanotsi for 13%.

0 500 1 000 1 500 2 000 2 500 3 000 3 500 4 000 4 500

Akatsievo

Antimovo

Bela Rada

Botevo

Bukovets

Gaytantsi

Gomotartsi

Gradetс

Dinkovitsa

Dunavtsi

Zheglitsa

Ivanovtsi

Inovo

Kalenik

Kapitanovtsi

Koshava

Kutovo

Novoseltsi

Pokrayna

Ruptsi

Sinagovtsi

Slana bara

Slanotran

Tsar Simeonovo

kg

Distribution of the inert materials by settlements




2.3.3. Conclusions

Definitely, to achieve the good results on illegal dumpsites treatment, involvement of

several institutions, organisations (the government, municipalities, wastes management

operators and companies, and technical experts) and their collaboration is needed.

Raising awareness of environmental, health and other important aspects is another key

factor in the minimisation of the contaminated areas. The integration of sustainable

development, waste separation, minimisation and recycling knowledge into all levels of

education should be a key priority. The re-usage of mixed limited waste, and recycling

and conversion options, play a huge role in the increase in the costs and reduce the

efficiency of performances of the existing technologies for waste treatment.

The lack of data warehousing in tone at illegal dumpsites is an obstacle in comparing the

data in this study, but the data obtained will help as a reference for research and further

study(s), as in the contamination of water, soil and other environmental effects. The

management of these dumpsites would be impossible without the identifying information.

The main problem is that these dumps are still active. There is a lack of information

about waste fragmentation. The large amount of waste dumped in illegal dumpsites,

could be reused, whether by recycling or energy recovery, thereby generating financial,

environmental, and social returns that would otherwise be lost.

Therefore, we can conclude that a lot of work is still needed and a lot of future

challenges will have to be overcome to achieve significant advances in waste handling,

especially in the settlements of Vidin municipality, because depending on the advances

obtained, this will help in minimising the negative impact.

This study will enable municipality Vidin to activate their full potential and financial

personnel for preparing management plans for the elimination of dumpsites. This study

will enable central and local institutions and the public to have accurate information

about the existence of illegal dumpsites, the socio-economic effects on dumpsites, the

efficient use of funds, and the disposal of illegal dumpsites to municipalities, and it will

help in preventing the expansion of other dumpsites.




3. Waste-related disaster risks in the municipality of Vidin

The experts from Energy Agency of Plovdiv identified the location of each dumpsite.

The disaster risk for each dumpsite was evaluated. These risks were related to the

inappropriate illegal solid waste disposal in locations such as riverside, roadside, in the

forests, or in non-designated dumping sites, as well as the impact of municipal solid-

waste decomposition that caused instability in the ground. The impact of natural events

such as heavy rainfall as well as human interventions on soil instability and the

appearance of landslides, and the erosion and displacement of soil sediments in rivers

increased the probability of flooding and consequently the population vulnerability to

disaster risk, were analysed.

Disasters such as the results of damaging effects caused by natural or human

processes on a vulnerable ecosystem, resulting in economic, social and environmental

damage, were studied and described.

Natural disasters caused by floods (such as environmental hydro-meteorological

problems) and landslides generating some of the main problems have been analysed.

The follow contaminated areas were identified:

Table XI: Polluted areas on the territory of municipality Vidin and their location

№ Settlement Area GPS coordinates

1 Akatsievo Area “Baira” / Border between

Akatsievo and Ruptsi - channel 44°56'22”/22°48'25”

2 Antimovo In the area of Cemetery Park 44°01'35”/22°57'06”

3 Bela Rada area “Tarneto” 43°58'32”/22°44'58”

4 Botevo area “Gaydarski dol”/ Vegetable

gardens near Danube River / 43°50'23”/22°51'27”

5

Bukovets

Area “Vishite” 43°56'07”/22°46'37”

area “Gradinite” 43°56'07”/22°46'37”

former canton 43°55'33”/22°45'17”

former cooperative farms 43°55'39”/22°45'16”

6 Gaytantsi

On the way to the village of

Archar 43°49'49”/22°49'06”





Former cooperative farms 43°49'48”/22°48'46”

7

Gomotartsi

Area “Valya Ra” / Near the Pump

Station / 44°05'36”/22°56'35”

end of 12-th str 44°05'10”/22°58'09”

end of 28-th str and 1-st str 44°05'11”/22°57'46”

end of 34-th str 44°05'06”/22°57'44”

end of 10-th str 44°05'12”/22°57'44”

8 Gradets

area “Drakata” 44°02'06”/22°43'46”

area “Grachko bardo” 44°02'08”/22°44'39”

Area “Royaka” 44°01'46”/22°45'54”

Area “Do selo” 44°01'45”/22°45'54”

9 Dinkovitsa end of 9-th str 44°02'25”/22°46'31”

10 Dunavtsi

behind railway station 43°54'37”/22°49'11”

former pigs farm 43°55'36”/22°49'28”

11 Zheglitsa A former agricultural airport 43°52'55”/22°47'42”

12 Ivanovtsi Area “Selsko” /former soccer

field/ 43°51'39”/22°45'31”

13 Inovo

the old semetеry 44°01'44”/22°50'06”

area “Lozyata” 44°01'51”/22°50'30”

14 Kalenik

end of 3-rd str 44°00'26”/22°39'46”

near to the village stadium 44°00'12”/22°39'39”

near to the semetery 44°00'06”/22°39'47”

15

Kapitanovtsi

Drenage on the road to Inovo village

44°02'30”/22°51'59”

to the west of Kapitanovtsi village to Negovanovtsi village

44°02'34”/22°52'35”

16 Koshava №7 20-th street 44°04'17”/23°01'30”

17

Kutovo

area “Valya Porchilor” 44°01'05”/22°58'35”

Area “Choara” 44°01'19”/22°57'10”

18

Novoseltsi

8-th str 43°59'07”/22°49'15”

14-th str 43°59'00”/22°49'05”

19 Pokrayna near to farmyard on the road to

Gomotartsi village 44°01'39”/22°53'38”





20 Ruptsi on the road to Akatsievo village 44°00'20”/22°48'17”

21 Sinagovtsi former landfild 43°53'51”/22°46'31”

22 Slana Bara On the road to v. Bukovets 43°57'58”/22°48'24”

23

Slanotran

on the road to former mineral bath

44°02'36”/23°01'17”

on the road to former canton 44°02'43”/23°00'11”

24 Tsar Simeonovo former farmyard/ on the road to

Botevo village/ 43°50'55”/22°50'35”

The morphological analyses were made during the visit to the illegal dumpsites.

The data are shown in the Table XII.

П Project CB007.1.31.304 "Prevention and mitigation of consequences of man-made cross-border disasters in the region Vidin-Zajecar” concerning

Interreg-IPA CBC Bulgaria–Serbia Programme 2014 — 2020


Table XII: Morphological analysis

№

Settlement

Area

Plastic Food Paper and cardboard

Garden/ wood Textile/ tire/ leader

Glass Inert Hazardous

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

1 Akatsievo area “Baira” / Border between Akatsievo and Ruptsi - channel

20 8% 10 4% 80 33% 5 2% 5 2% 120 50% 2 1%

2 Antimovo In the area of Cemetery Park

15 15% 15 15% 5 5% 15 15% 12 12% 5 5% 30 29% 5 5%

3 Bela Rada area “Tarneto” 7 5% 5 4% 3 2% 70 52% 5 4% 40 30% 4 3%

4 Botevo area “Gaydarski dol” / Vegetable gardens near Danube River /

10 17% 5 9% 5 9% 15 26% 0% 20 34% 3 5%

5 Bukovets

area “Vishite” 35 34% 8 8% 5 5% 25 24% 10 10% 3 3% 15 15% 2 2%

area “Gradinite” 20 29% 10 14% 5 7% 15 21% 5 7% 2 3% 10 14% 3 4%

former canton 7 11% 5 8% 5 8% 10 16% 15 24% 20 32% 0%

former cooperative farms

260 12% 250 11% 200 9% 1 500 68% 0%

6 Gaytantsi

On the way to the village of Archar

10 17% 5 8% 5 8% 30 50% 10 17% 0%

Former cooperative farms

10 15% 7 10% 5 7% 25 37% 20 30% 0%

7 Gomotartsi

area “Valya Ra” / Near the Pump Station /

200 29% 60 9% 40 6% 150 22% 100 15% 20 3% 100 15% 12 2%

end of 12-th str 120 22% 50 9% 30 5% 120 22% 100 18% 15 3% 100 18% 15 3%

end of 28-th str and 1-st str

100 19% 60 11% 30 6% 80 15% 100 19% 10 2% 150 28% 10 2%

end of 34-th str 30 11% 15 6% 20 7% 100 37% 25 9% 0% 80 30% 0%

end of 10-th str 25 13% 15 8% 10 5% 50 26% 20 11% 0% 70 37% 0%




№

Settlement

Area




weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

8 Gradets

area “Drakata” 30 9% 20 6% 10 3% 110 31% 110 31% 5 1% 60 17% 5 1%

area “Grachko bardo”

40 14% 30 10% 15 5% 30 10% 30 10% 0% 150 51% 0%

area “Royaka” 10 10% 10 10% 5 5% 40 38% 15 14% 5 5% 20 19% 0%

area “Do selo” 15 11% 12 9% 3 2% 50 37% 20 15% 30 22% 5 4%

9 Dinkovitsa end of 9-th str 0% 3 030 100% 0% 0%

10 Dunavtsi

behind railway station

10 8% 5 4% 100 80% 10 8% 0%

former pigs farm 30 8% 0% 250 66% 100 26% 0%

11 Zheglitsa A former agricultural airport

300 9% 50 1% 420 12% 500 15% 30 1% 2 100 61% 20 1%

12 Ivanovtsi Аrеа “Selsko” /former soccer field/

40 13% 5 2% 15 5% 8 3% 0% 240 77% 3 1%

13 Inovo

the old semetеry 10 12% 10 12% 30 36% 10 12% 5 6% 15 18% 3 4%

area “Lozyata” 300 27% 0% 280 25% 150 13% 400 35% 0%

14 Kalenik

end of 3-rd str 75 5% 0% 85 6% 1 300 89% 0%

near to the village stadium

100 26% 50 13% 10 3% 22 6% 200 52% 5 1%

near to the semetery

65 23% 5 2% 30 11% 20 7% 5 2% 150 53% 10 4%

15 Kapitanovtsi Drenage on the road to Inovo village

22 17% 12 9% 80 61% 5 4% 10 8% 3 2%


400 9% 260 6% 180 4% 500 11% 70 2% 30 1% 3000 67% 40 1%

16 Koshava №7 20-th street 190 6% 20 1% 1 100 35% 30 1% 1 800 57% 5 0%




№

Settlement

Area




weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

17 Kutovo area “Valya Porchilor”

1 800 32% 30 1% 50 1% 250 4% 30 1% 5 0% 3 400 61% 10 0%

area “Choara” 300 23% 20 2% 30 2% 190 15% 30 2% 5 0% 700 55% 5 0%

18 Novoseltsi 8-th str 60 31% 30 16% 5 3% 5 3% 2 1% 90 47% 0%

14-th str 40 17% 50 22% 50 22% 50 22% 30 13% 10 4%

19 Pokrayna near to farmyard on the road to Gomotartsi village

80 2% 100 2% 4 000 96%

20 Ruptsi on the road to Akatsievo village

55 7% 17 2% 30 4% 150 19% 16 2% 500 65% 2 0%

21 Sinagovtsi former landfild 500 17% 200 7% 50 2% 430 14% 220 7% 30 1% 1 500 50% 50 2%

22 Slana bara On the road to village Bukovets

90 24% 30 8% 30 8% 55 15% 170 45% 2 1%

23 Slanotran on the road to former mineral bath

10 13% 5 7% 5 7% 20 27% 30 40% 5 7%

on the road to former canton

6 10% 5 8% 5 8% 15 25% 10 17% 5 8% 10 17% 3 5%

24 Tsar Simeonovo

former farmyard/ on the road to Botevo village/

55 27% 5 2% 10 5% 45 22% 10 5% 15 7% 60 30% 2 1%




3.1. Akatsievo village

Akatsievo village is located on northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin, in the

western periphery of the Vidin Valley, on the banks of the Topolovets River. The

population is 59 inhabitants (data from NSI, National register of populated places on

31.12.2017).

Fig 13: Illegal waste dumpsites in Akatsievo village

Inert and garden wastes dominate in the area. They are dumped by the local population

in an inactive drainage canal. The result is a small amount of waste, which does not

pose risks to the environment.

3.2. Antimovo village

Antimovo village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin, near the

Dunabe River and the New Europe Bridge, previously known as the Danube Bridge 2,

and informally called the Calafat-Vidin Bridge. The population is 436 inhabitants (data

from NSI, National register of populated places on 31.12.2017).




Fig 14: Illegal waste dumpsites in Antimovo village

The waste comes from households in the village.

3.3. Bela rada

Bela Rada village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin.

It is 11.92 km. west of the town of Vidin. Adjacent to the village of Bella Rada are the

villages Slana Bara, Peshakovo and Voynitsa. A kilometer from the village passes the

main road Vidin-Kula, and the Danube River is 12 km away. The population is 431

inhabitants (data from NSI, National register of populated places on 31.12.2017).




Fig 15: Illegal waste dumpsites in Bela Rada village

In the village Bela Rada waste was found only in the area “Tarneto”. This contaminated

area covers agricultural area and is a potential risk to the soil and plants growing.

3.4. Botevo

Botevo village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin. It is 20.86 km.

south of Vidin, on the banks of the Danube and on the main road between the towns of

Vidin and Lom. Neighbors of Botevo are the villages Gaitantsi, Tsar Simeonovo and

Archar. The population is 49 inhabitants (data from NSI, National register of populated

places on 31.12.2017).




Fig 16: Illegal waste dumpsites in Botevo village

In the village Botevo was found a small amount of waste near the village water tap. This

waste comes from the visitors of the water tap.

3.5. Bukovets

TBukovets village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin. It is located

14.76 km. southwest of Vidin. Neighboring villages are the village of Trannyane, the

village of Slana Bara and the village of Voynitsa. The Voynishka River passes through

the village and the Danube River is 9 km away. The population is 565 inhabitants (data





Fig 17: Illegal waste dumpsites in Bukovets village

In the village Bukovets were found several polluted areas: area “Vishite”, area

“Gradinite”, former canton, former cooperative farms. The areas “Gradinite” and former

cooperative farms contain a significant amount of waste. The area's former cooperative

farms serve as illegal dumpsites. Еvery year this area is cleaned.

3.6. Gaytantsi

Gaytantsi village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin.

It is 28.63 km. south of Vidin. Neighbors of the village of Gaitantsi are the villages of

Sratsimirovo, Vertop and Botevo. 3 km from the village passes the main road E79 Vidin-




Montana. The Archang River flows through the village of Gaitantsi and the Danube River

is 4 km away. The population is 80 inhabitants (data from NSI, National register of

populated places on 31.12.2017).

Fig 18: Illegal waste dumpsites in Gaytantsi village

The small amount of waste (15 m3) is not a risk.

3.7. Gomotartsi

Gomotartsi village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin. It is situated

on the banks of the Danube River, 14.55 km, northeast of Vidin. Neighboring villages are

Koshava, Yasen and Pokrayna. A railway line passes 6 km from Gomotartsi. The


31.12.2017).




Fig 19: Illegal waste dumpsites in Gomotartsi village

Waste collection in the village is missing. The area “Valya Ra”, Near the Pump Station,

is the biggest polluted area, situated on an inactive drainage channel. The area at the

end of 12th Street, with the area near the pump station, contains a high risk. The area at

the end of 28th Street and First Street and the area at the end of 34th Street contain

basically inert materials. The last polluted area found is at the end of 10th Street.

3.8. Gradets

Gradets village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin. It is one of the

biggest in the municipality. Gradets is situated 12 km northwest of the district center

town of Vidin, in the valley of the Topolovets River, which springs from the most western




part of the Stara Planina (Vrashka Chuka). The population is 1 197 inhabitants (data


Fig 20: Illegal waste dumpsites in Gradets village

The areas “Drakata” and “Grachko Bardo” have the highest waste quantities. The area

“Grachko Bardo” on the date of the visit was partially burnt. The other polluted areas in

the village are area “Royaka” and area “Do Selo”.

3.9. Dinkovitsa

Dinkovitsa village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin. It is situated

11.01 km. from Vidin. Neighboring villages of Dinkovitsa are Akatsievo, Gradetes and

Plakuder. The main road 12 Vidin - Bregovo passes 3km away. Around the both sides of




the village Dinkovitsa flow the rivers Deleynska and Topolovets. The population is 117


Fig 21: Illegal waste dumpsites in Dinkovitsa village

Almost 100% of the waste is with organic origin - manure and waste from garden.

3.10. Dunavtsi

The city Dunavtsi is located in the Vidin Valley near the Danube River, 8 km from the city

of Vidin. In the northern part of the city flows the River Voynishka (or Tarnyanska River),

and in the southern part (Gurkovo district) flows the Vidbol River. The population is

1,916 inhabitants (data from NSI, National register of populated places on 31.12.2017).

Fig 22: Illegal waste dumpsites in Dunavtsi city




Small amount of waste; the waste from gardens predominates.

3.11. Zheglitsa

Zheglitsa village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin, 4 kilometers

away from the Danabe River and 19.74 km. southwest of Vidin. Neighboring places of

Zheglitsa are the villages of Ivanovtsi and Sinagovtsi and the town of Dunavtsi. The


31.12.2017).

Fig 23: Illegal waste dumpsites in Zheglitsa village




The large contaminated area was observed on the territory of the former agricultural

airport. The waste is generated by the former airport and households of the village.

3.12. Ivanovtsi

Ivanovtsi village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin. It is situated

23.07 kilometers southwest of Vidin. Neighboring the village of Ivanovtsi are the villages

Zheglitsa, Vodna and Gaytantsi. Six km. from the village passes a railway line and 2 km

away the main road E79 Vidin-Montana.

Near Ivanovtsi passes the Vidbol River. The population is 72 inhabitants (data from NSI,

National register of populated places on 31.12.2017).

Fig 24: Illegal waste dumpsites in Ivanovtsi village

Small amounts of waste, predominantly inert and plastic waste.

3.13. Inovo

Inovo village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin. It is situated 6.24

km. northwest of Vidin. Neighboring villages are Akatsievo, Dinkovitsa and the town of

Vidin. Аround the village two rivers flow -- Topolovets and Deleynska -- and the Danube

River is only 5 km away. The population is 646 inhabitants (data from NSI, National

register of populated places on 31.12.2017).




Fig 25: Illegal waste dumpsites in Inovo village

The polluted area, a former agrarian cooperative, contains a small amount of waste. The

area “Lozyata” covers a large territory. Inert, garden and plastic waste predominate.

3.14. Kalenik

Kalenik village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin. The village is 17

km from Vidin, to the west. The nearest villages to which it is located are Drujba and

Topolovets. The population is 237 inhabitants (data from NSI, National register of


Fig 26: Illegal waste dumpsites in Kalenik village




In the polluted area near the village stadium and near to the cemetery, inert, garden and

plastic waste predominate.

3.15. Kapitanovtsi

Kapitanovtsi village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin. It is

situated 2.63 km. north of Vidin. Neighboring villages of Kapitanovtsi are Pokrayna,

Inovo and the town of Vidin. Two km from the village crosses the main road E79 Vidin-

Montana. Near the village of Kapitanovtsi flows the Deleynska River and the Danube

River is 4 km away. The population is 848 inhabitants (data from NSI, National register

of populated places on 31.12.2017).

Fig 27: Illegal waste dumpsites in Kapitanovtsi village




The polluted drainage area on the road to Inovo village was an old landfill, closed in

2016, but still the population of the village uses it. The area covers 8 decars, and is

sprinkled once a year. The area to the west of Kapitanovtsi village, to Negovanovtsi

village, has a small amount of waste and is situated in an inactive drainage that contains

50% garden waste.

3.16. Koshava

Koshava village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin.

It is situated on the bank of the Danube, about 19 km northeast of the town of Vidin, 6

km from the nearest village, Slanotron. The population is 337 inhabitants (data from NSI,


Fig 28: Illegal waste dumpsites in Koshava village




Near to last houses in the village was found a polluted area, which is actively in use. The

waste is generated by the households of the village, as well as by the construction

companies.

3.17. Kutovo

Kutovo village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin and is 13 km

from the town of Vidin. It is located about 1 km from the Danube River. The population is

618 inhabitants (data from NSI, National register of populated places on 31.12.2017).

Fig 29: Illegal waste dumpsites in Kutovo village




A large amount of waste can be observed in the area “Valya Porchilor”-- very close to

the Danube River, on the river dike. The area “Choara” is in a former irrigation channel.

There is high risk here.

3.18. Novoseltsi

Novoseltsi village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin.

It is situated 6.12 km. west of Vidin. Neighboring places of village of Novoseltsi are

villages Slana Bara, Ruptsi and the town of Vidin. The village is crossed by main road 14

Vidin-Kula. Near the village passes the Topolovets River, and the Danube River is 7 km

away. The population is 808 inhabitants (data from NSI, National register of populated

places on 31.12.2017).

Fig 30: Illegal waste dumpsites in Novoseltsi village




At the end of 8th and 14th streets a contaminated area can be observed. Plant, plastic and food waste dominate. Because of the very narrow streets between houses built randomly without any planning, waste collection is not possible. Some hazardous waste was found.

3.19. Pokrayna

Pokrayna village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin, and is located 3 km north of the city of Vidin. Because of the proximity to the district town the village is one of the largest in the area. It is situated under the great bend of the Danube River, surrounded on three sides by the river -- north, east and south. It is located in the riparian plain on a flat field without any hills.

Fig 31: Illegal waste dumpsites in Pokrayna village

Between the village of Pokrayna and Vidin there is the terminal of the Vidin-Calafat ferry,

the starting point of the Republican Road I-1 and the Bulgarian section of the European

road E79, as well as the approaches to Vidin-Kalafat Bridge, also known as the New

Europe Bridge. Nearby are the Vidin border checkpoint, customs, and the duty-free

zone, one of the main bases of the transport company SOMAT. The population is 1,062


The waste is generated by travelers. A second polluted site is located next to the farm

yard on the Gomotartsi Road.




3.20. Ruptsi

Ruptsi village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin.

It is situated 6.85 km. west of Vidin. Neighboring villages are Akatsievo, General

Marinovo and the town of Vidin. The River Topolovets is 1 km away and the Danube

River is 6 km away. The population is 117 inhabitants (data from NSI, National register

of populated places on 31.12.2017).

Fig 32: Illegal waste dumpsites in Ruptsi village

Waste is generated by the local population. Inert and plant wastes dominate and there is

risk for agricultural land.

3.21. Sinagovtsi

Sinagovtsi village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin.

It is situated 20 km. south of Vidin. Neighboring villages are Tarnyane and Ivanovtsi and

the city of Dunavtsi. Three km from the village crosses the main road E79 Vidin-

Montana. Near the village Sinagovtsi runs the Vidbol River and the Danube is situated 6

km. away. The population is 354 inhabitants (data from NSI, National register of





Fig 33: Illegal waste dumpsites in Sinagotsi village

Polluted territory is a registration in the former depot. It is periodically sprinkled, 1-2

times a year. The risks are mainly to agricultural land.

3.22. Slana Bara

Slana Bara village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin.

The village is 6km southwest of Vidin. The population is 344 inhabitants (data from NSI,





Fig 34: Illegal waste dumpsites in Slana Bara village

At this dumpsite inert, garden and plastic waste dominate.

3.23. Slanotran

Slanotran village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin, 18 km from

the city of Vidin. The population is 445 inhabitants (data from NSI, National register of





Fig 35: Illegal waste dumpsites in Slanotran village

A small amount of waste, generated by the population of the village, was observed.

3.24. Tsar Simeonovo

Tsar Simeonovo village is located in northwestern Bulgaria, municipality of Vidin. It is

situated on the bank of the Danube River, 22.56 km. south of the town of Vidin.

Neighboring villages are Botevo, Gaytantsi and the town of Dunavtsi. Through the

village passes main road No 11 Vidin - Lom. The population is 111 inhabitants (data


Fig 36: Illegal waste dumpsites in Tsar Simeonovo village




Inert waste dominates.

4. Waste-related disaster risks in the Bulgaria-Serbian cross-border area

The Energy Agency of Plovdiv has analysed the floods of 2013-2014 on the territory of

Bulgaria and Serbia.

4.1. Floods in 2013

Extreme floods occurred in June 2013 on the upper and lower Danube, and the strength

and intensity of this flood event reminded observers of floods in 2002. The flood impact

was devastating in Germany, Austria, Slovakia, Romania and Hungary, and remarkable

consequences were observed in Bulgaria, Croatia and Serbia.

Also in Bulgaria the total rainfall in June was about 40% above the long-term monthly

average. The most intensive rainfall was registered during 30.06–01.07 in the Silistra-

region (64 to 140 mm), in the Ruse-region (127 mm) and in the Tutrakan region (110

mm).

Interventions were undertaken in the regions affected by flash floods. Emergency teams

from the Main Directorate Fire Safety and Protection of the Population at the Ministry of

Interior were activated to carry out the rescue operations and to drain the flooded

residential areas.

Residential areas in the Sofia region and Lovech were flooded due to the heavy rainfall

on 11th and 25th June. Torrential rainfall between 30th June and 1st July caused

flooding and damages to properties in the residential areas of Silistra, Dobrich and

Russe municipalities in the northeastern part of the country. The most affected area was

the municipality of Glavinitsa and Valchi Dol, where many streets, private properties and

public buildings were flooded and damaged. There were isolated cases of evacuation of

people from flooded buildings and cars. Besides the emergency interventions,

disinfection work was carried out in some flooded settlements in order to avoid further

adverse consequences related to the environment and human health.

The damages include flooded and damaged private and public buildings, roads and

streets. Due to a landslide a local road was closed. The regional library in Ruse was




flooded, and about 50,000 books had to be evacuated; 108 households were affected

after the flooding in the Glavinitsa Municipality. Four houses were assessed as being in

danger of collapse and some others as needing fortifications. A drainage channel spilt

over; agriculture areas were inundated and crops were destroyed. The total damage in

Glavinitsa is being assessed at over 300,000 €. All the streets in the Municipality of

Valchi Dol were flooded and many of them have been damaged. Almost all residential

buildings have been affected. Many public buildings, including three schools and the

Municipality’s cultural club, were damaged. Sewage has been blocked up by silt.

4.2. Floods in 2014

During the third week of May, exceptionally heavy rains fell on Serbia, which was

caused by a low-pressure system (‘Yvette’) that formed over the Adriatic. Record-

breaking amounts of rainfall exceeding 200 mm fell in western Serbia in a week’s time,

which is the equivalent of three months of rain under normal conditions.

The heavy rainfalls led to a rapid and substantial increase in water levels in the main

rivers in western, southwestern, central and eastern Serbia: Sava, Tamnava, Kolubara,

Jadar, Zapadna Morava, Velika Morava, Mlava and Pek. In the Sava River basins where

most of the rainfall was received, the consequences were two-fold. In the first place,

flash floods occurred in the tributaries where water levels rose almost immediately after

the onset of the rains and then dropped quickly back to normal levels when the rains

stopped. In this regard, the water level at Beli Brod on the tributary river Kolubara rose

by 7 meters on 14-16 May but was back to normal levels by 18-19 May. The second

consequence was that the level of the River Sava itself rose at a more gradual rate, with

an increase of 3.5 meters recorded over the period 14-20 May. In contrast to its

tributaries, the water level on the Sava peaked after the rains had stopped and

decreased much more slowly after the peak (by some 20- 30 centimetres per day). This

delay in response time is due to the travelling time of the water through the entire river

catchment, including the upstream reaches of the Sava.

The heavy rainfall and rising water levels had three immediate and direct effects:

High-intensity flash floods resulting in the total destruction of houses, bridges and

sections of roads (in Krupanj and areas around Sabac);




Rising water levels resulting in the widespread flooding of both urban areas

(particularly in Obrenovac) and rural areas (around Sabac); and,

Increased flow of underground waters leading to widespread landslides (around

Krupanj and Bajina Basta).

Overall, the floods affected some 1.6 million people living in 38 municipalities/cities

mostly located in central and western Serbia. Two cities (Šabac and Sremska Mitrovica)

and 17 municipalities (Obrenovac, Mali Zvornik, Krupanj, Ljubovija, Vladimirci,

Koceljeva, Šid, Svilajnac, Paraćin, Ub, Lajkovac, Ljig, Osečina, Mionica, Smederevska

Palanka, Trstenik, Bajina Bašta) were severely impacted.

Torrential rainfall in Bulgaria caused unprecedented flooding across the country, killing

at least 11 people, with several others missing. The worst of the floods struck late on

Thursday, June,19 2014, although Bulgaria’s Black Sea coast had seen some minor

flooding a few days earlier.

The victims of the flood in Varna were 13. Three died in Dobrich, where as many as 150

people had to be evacuated.

Along the Black Sea Coast the worst-hit areas are Varna and Burgas, two of the more

densely populated communities in the region. Weather experts claim that the equivalent

of a month’s amount of rain fell in just 24 hours. Further rainfall had been forecast for

northern and eastern Bulgaria for the following 24 hours.

The flooding destroyed houses and roads in particular in the Asparuhouvo area of

Varna. Some reports claim that cars were floating along streets and in some cases piled

on top of each other. Floodwater was over one meter deep in some areas. Storms and

strong winds also led to power outages. Regional Police say that several bodies were

found near Varna after they had been swept away by floodwater.

In Kilifarevo, in central Bulgaria, around 11 people had to be rescued from the roofs of

houses after they took refuge from the floodwater. Other areas near the capital Sofia

were affected, including Chavdar, where over 100 homes were damaged by floods.

The Bulgarian National statistical institute provides information about the number of

floods in Bulgaria for the period 2010-2017:




Table XIII: Data from NSI by year for the floods in Bulgaria and costs of the damages:

Regions Numbers Determinate damages – thousands BGN

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017* 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017*

Total 651 382 692 547 360 266 184 159 38882 206659 20898 15285 177604 171032 30617 135530

Blagoevgrad 14 10 5 14 4 3 5 1 12094 1061 61 119 639 384 75 -

Burgas 82 22 77 37 19 14 42 55 493 140 384 13 16205 136129 807 117959

Varna 30 16 11 15 28 47 4 2 2615 1315 1226 1369 37797 3548 4664 669

Велико Търново 24 28 32 17 21 3 1 1 224 305 1829 789 23834 2061 131 3211

Vidin 1 1 4 - 2 - - - - 133 250 - 493 - - -

Vraca - 10 5 1 5 5 1 - - 230 - 4 25810 635 - -

Gabrovo 8 9 7 2 13 - 2 - 139 78 606 84 6825 - 2792 -

Dobrich 10 21 3 2 4 2 2 1 405 499 1 216 7854 1951 34 800

Kardjali 11 12 19 9 14 13 26 16 164 224 1175 1131 976 2418 5436 4230

Kustendil 2 5 11 1 1 17 1 14 2249 435 452 301 - 1016 11 677

Lovech 4 1 1 - 3 - - - 460 4 4 - 165 - - -

Montana 14 11 6 4 30 2 2 5 551 500 342 13 11123 19 - 5

Parzrdjik 27 11 2 4 7 2 - 1 968 353 - 23 1007 - - 1000

Pernik 9 13 2 1 1 4 1 2 892 22 2 13 9 1 2 75

Pleven 14 10 1 - 19 31 3 4 1099 792 18 - 1384 2592 12 1440

Plovdiv 9 - 2 2 42 7 2 18 4446 - 152 195 17563 1416 8301 2803

Razgrad 1 - 2 8 5 - 2 - 26 - 42 1528 307 - 1 -

Ruse 6 5 5 2 11 23 14 4 255 868 135 162 1330 4152 2852 631

Silistra - 4 - 1 2 - - - - 418 - 2536 - - - -

Sliven 102 51 267 335 25 36 39 21 1227 719 - - 62 1335 176 35

Smolyan 179 97 98 88 43 29 30 9 8092 8113 8030 6327 3406 9248 5154 1069

Sofia 30 32 8 2 25 7 3 4 454 190006 800 409 5738 740 - 345

Stara Zagora 7 5 115 - 8 11 - - 258 - 842 - 7654 1686 - -

Hsakovo 3 6 5 1 10 7 4 - 273 432 4325 - 4240 225 169 -

Shumen 1 1 4 1 16 3 - - 11 10 222 53 2905 1476 - -




From the analysis of contaminated sites management data, it can be concluded

that preliminary studies of all identified potentially contaminated sites up to 2012

have been carried out, while main site investigations have been completed on a

lesser number of sites (Tab. 1). Data sources on progress in the management of local

soil pollution are represented by research and monitoring projects on soil and

groundwater pollution from localized sources. These data are then used as input to

the database managed by the Environmental Protection Agency.

The results allow an assessment of which are the most dominant sources of local soil

contamination.

The biggest number of registered sources of localized soil pollution are related to

municipal waste disposal sites (39.9%), oil extraction and production (28%) and

industrial and commercial activities (10.8%). The database of potentially polluted and

polluted sites does not include military sites. The number of sites in which manure is

being stored is not reliable and for that reason is not reported.




Fig 37: Localized soil pollution sites in Serbia




Fig 38: Breakdown of activities causing local soil contamination [%]

4.3. Conclusions

Most of the trans - border region is located in remote areas outside of dynamic

economic centers and, with the exception of Sofia, far away from big cities. A big area of

the border region could be categorized as an economically underdeveloped rural area. A

common characteristic of the Bulgarian and Serbian border regions is their low

economic development compared to the remaining territories of both countries (IPA,

2007).

Border regions often have lower population density than the national average because

central places or big cities are usually not located in border areas. In the Bulgarian

border region, too, the population density is 1.5 times lower than the national average; in

Serbia it is 1.3 times lower.

Illegal dumpsites are formed near populated areas. That means that environmental risks

and exposure risk in the cross-border region are very low.




The data on floods in the period 2012- 2015 show that floods were mainly due to heavy

rainfalls and not from human activities.

5. Environmental effects on the CBC area from the illegal dumps on the territory of the municipality of Vidin

During the visits to the dumpsites the experts from the Energy Agency of Plovdiv

evaluated the environmental effects due to the waste dumping. The analysis covered

the environmental impacts of illegal waste disposal on land deterioration, on ground

and surface water, and on air quality. Waste composition such as types of substances -

- particularly toxic waste coming from the last phase of the industrial activities: copper,

arsenic, mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls, hydrocarbons, etc. -- will be studied.

Waste disposal practices including illegal burying in areas not legally designated as

toxic waste dumpsites such as cultivable areas, roads and buildings and construction

yards, their impact on land, water and air pollution, were analysed. The effect of the

chemicals and non-biodegradable materials in the contaminated groundwater and soil

on the physical environment and the waterways, agriculture and wildlife were studied,

together with the effect on domesticated animals after consuming poisonous materials

such as plastics and chemicals from the waste. Risks of other practices such as illegal

dumping of chemicals, tires, green waste and cigarette butts will be also assessed. The

analyses will cover the following impacts:

5.1. Air quality

Many household appliances and other waste could contain harmful chemicals which can

be extremely damaging when released. For example, refrigerators and freezers contain

either tetrafluoroethane or chloro-fluoro-carbon, both of which destroy the earth's ozone

layer. The analyses show that inert materials predominate next to the garden and plastic

waste. This kind of appliances was not found in the contaminated areas and air quality is

not affected in this way. Inert materials are a source of particulate matter.




5.2. Surface and ground waters

Illegal dumping near waterways can cause river pollution. In rural or remote areas in

poorer countries, rubbish disposal facilities are often completely absent. This leaves two

ways of disposing of trash: dumping it into the environment or burning it. Unfortunately,

the most common disposal method involves throwing the garbage directly into a river or

stream, as the case in Kutovo village. The contaminated area “Valya Porchilor” is very

close to the Danube River--in fact, on the river dike.

5.3. Soils

The possibility of soil contamination by different hazardous wastes has been evaluated.

The possible contaminants come from illegal deposition of different chemical

compositions used in agriculture. In some cases the contaminated areas cover the

agricultural land. The villages at risk are Gomotartsi, Zheglitsa, Kutovo, Novoseltsi,

Ruptsi and Sinagovtsi.

5.4. Plants and wildlife

Illegal dumping can adversely affect many native species of plants and animals. If

animals consume waste from illegal dump sites it can cause health complications and

even death. The toxins from waste can leach into the surrounding environment, killing

plants and destroying the food sources of local animals. The possible contaminants

come from illegal deposition of chemical compositions used in agriculture. The risk is to

the plants. The villages at risk are Gomotartsi, Zheglitsa, Kutovo, Novoseltsi, Ruptsi

and Sinagovtsi

5.5. Aesthetic impact

Illegally dumped garbage can be a horrible eyesore in an otherwise beautiful place. This

can reduce tourism and therefore reduce community revenue, which in turn reduces the

funds available to deal with the problem. The contaminated areas are in small villages

with small of populations. Demographic and economic impacts dominate. The




contaminated areas are outside of the villages and are not an aesthetic problem.

Tourism is not developed.

Plastic bags (part of plastic waste) were blown long distances by the wind and ruin the

landscape.

5.6. Fires

They can occur from either spontaneous combustion or arson. This can be hazardous,

as the sites may have old aerosol or gas cans that can lead to explosions, and

household or farm chemicals can give off toxic smoke. Burning at these sites can lead to

forest fires and erosion, and sediment loading can occur in streams. This can also cause

damage to and evacuation of surrounding neighborhoods.

The impact of the risks was evaluated during the visits to the contaminated areas, based

on a three levels risk: 1- low, 2- medium, 3- high. They are summarized in the table

below:

Table XIV Risk impact

Settlement Area Air Ground water

Under ground water

Plant and

wildlife

Floods Fire

Akatsievo area “Baira” / Border between Akatsievo and

Ruptsi - channel /

1

Antimovo In the area of Cemetery Park

2 2 3 2 2 3

Bela Rada area “Tarneto” 2

Botevo area “Gaydarski dol” / Vegetable gardens near

Danube River /

1

Bukovets area “Vishite” 1 1

area “Gradinite” 2 2 2

former canton 1 1

former cooperative farms 2 2

Gaytantsi On the way to the village of Archar

1 1 1 1






Under ground water

Plant and

wildlife

Floods Fire

Gomotartsi area “Valya Ra” / Near the Pump Station /

2 2 3 3 3 3

end of 12-th str 2 2 2 2 2 3


1 1 2 2 2 3

end of 34-th str 1 1 1 1 1 1

end of 10-th str 1

Gradetс area “Drakata” 2 1 1 1

area “Grachko bardo” 2 1 1 1

area “Royaka” 1 1

area “Do selo” 1 1 1 1

Dinkovitsa end of 9-th str

Dunavtsi behind railway station 1

former pigs farm 2

Zheglitsa A former agricultural airport

2 1 1 2 1 3

Ivanovtsi Аrеа “Selsko” /former soccer field/

2 1

Inovo the old semetеry 1

area “Lozyata” 2 1 2 2 2 3

Kalenik end of 3-rd str 1 1 1


1 2

near to the semetery 1

Kapitanovtsi Drenage on the road to Inovo village

1 1 1 2 1 1


2 2 2 2 2 3

Koshava №7 20-th street 3 2 2 3 2 3

Kutovo area “Valya Porchilor” 2 2 3 2 2 2

area “Choara” 2 2 3 2 2 2

Novoseltsi 8-th str 1 1 1 2 1 2

14-th str 1 1 1 1

Pokrayna near to farmyard on the road to Gomotartsi

village

1 1 1 2 1 2

Ruptsi on the road to Akatsievo village

1 1 1 1





Under ground water

Plant and

wildlife

Floods Fire

Sinagovtsi district “Mihalaki Georgievo”

former landfild 2 2 2 1 3

Slana bara On the road to Bukovets village

2 1

Slanotran on the road to former mineral bath

1 1 1


1 1

Tsar Simeonovo


1 2

The village with the highest risk is Koshava; immediate clearing action is required. The other areas for fast reaction are Kutovo and Sinagovtsi.

6. Health effects on the CBC area from the illegal dumps on the territory of the municipality of Vidin

The health impact was evaluated during the visits to the contaminated areas, based on

a three levels risk: 1- low, 2- medium, 3- high. They are summarized in the table below:

Table XV Health assessment of contaminated areas

Settlement Population Number of illegal

dumpsites

Area Health

Akatsievo 59 1 area “Baira” / Border between Akatsievo and Ruptsi - channel /

Antimovo 436 1 In the area of Cemetery Park 2

Bela Rada 431 1 area “Tarneto”

Botevo 49 1 area “Gaydarski dol” / Vegetable gardens near Danube River /

Bukovets

565

4

area “Vishite”

area “Gradinite” 3

former canton

former cooperative farms 1





dumpsites

Area Health

Gaytantsi

80

2



Gomotartsi

550

5


3

end of 12-th str 2


end of 34-th str 1

end of 10-th str

Gradetс

1 197

4

area “Drakata” 1

area “Grachko bardo” 1

area “Royaka”

area “Do selo” 1

Dinkovitsa 117 1 end of 9-th str

Dunavtsi

1 916

2


former pigs farm

Zheglitsa 131 1 A former agricultural airport 1

Ivanovtsi 72 1 Area “Selsko” /former soccer field/ 1

Inovo

646

2

the old semetеry

area “Lozyata” 3

Kalenik

237

3

end of 3-rd str

near to the village stadium 1

near to the semetery 1

Kapitanovtsi

848

2


1


2

Koshava 337 1 №7 20-th street 3

Kutovo

618

2

area “Valya Porchilor” 2

area “Choara” 2

Novoseltsi

808

2

8-th str 1

14-th str 1

Pokrayna

1 062 1 near to farmyard on the road to Gomotartsi village

1

Ruptsi 117 1 on the road to Akatsievo village 1

Sinagovtsi

354

2

district “Mihalaki Georgievo”

former landfild 2

Slana Bara 344 1 On the road to Bukovets village

Slanotran

445

2







dumpsites

Area Health

Tsar Simeonovo

111 1 former farmyard/ on the road to Botevo village/

2

The highest risks are contaminated areas with hazardous waste. The villages in risk are: Gomotartsi, Inovo and Koshava.

7. Economic effects on the CBC area from the illegal dumps on the

territory of the municipality of Vidin

The Waste Management Act in Bulgaria (Promulgated, State Gazette No.

53/13.07.2012, effective 13.07.2012, amended, SG No. 66/26.07.2013, effective

26.07.2013; Judgment No. 11/10.07.2014 of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of

Bulgaria - SG No. 61/25.07.2014; amended, SG No. 98/28.11.2014, effective

28.11.2014, SG No. 14/20.02.2015, amended and supplemented, SG No.

105/30.12.2016, SG No. 13/7.02.2017) determines:

Article 54 (Amended, SG No. 105/2016) The expenses for waste management shall be

covered by:

1. the original waste producer or the current or previous waste holder; 2. persons placing on the market products which, after use, form ordinary waste, in the cases referred to in this Act.

Article 55 (1) Where the producers or waste are unidentified, the costs of environmental remediation shall be borne by the persons who or which are in holding of any such waste. (2) All costs of environmental remediation and of identification of the actual producer of the waste shall be recovered therefrom. Article 154. When the producers of waste referred to in Article 55, paragraph 1 are

identified, natural persons are sanctioned with a fine of BGN 3,000 or exceeding this




amount but not exceeding BGN 10,000, and legal persons and sole traders are

sanctioned with a pecuniary penalty of BGN 6,000 or exceeding this amount but not

exceeding BGN 20,000.

The municipalities could ask for financing from the Ministry of Environment and Water:

Article 56. (1) On a motion by the Minister of Environment and Water, resources shall

be allocated annually by the State Budget of the Republic of Bulgaria Act for the specific

purpose of construction of facilities and installations for treatment of household, ordinary

and hazardous waste, as well as for cleaning and reclamation of places polluted with

waste.

Article 57. The expenses for operations with household waste and compliance with the

obligations of the local self-government authorities and the local administration referred

to in Chapter Two, Section III of this Act shall be planned in the budget of the relevant

municipality in an amount at least equal to the revenues from local fees pursuant to

Article 6, paragraph 1(a) of the Local Taxes and Fees Act planned for the respective

year.

In general, the cleaning of the contaminated areas consists of collecting, loading and

transporting the waste to a landfill or at a site (by sinking and sprinkling) and includes

the following types of activities:

- Collection of waste

In most cases, waste is dumped into separate piles and it is necessary to collect it with

appropriate equipment. In other cases, the waste is accumulated and sealed into a

layer. In a relatively some cases, manual waste collection is required - when they are

from light fractions scattered over a large area or due to the specificity of the relief.

In case the pollution is from biodegradable or inert waste and the site allows it, it is

possible to clean it on site. The necessary activities are collecting the waste, forming a

pile, compacting and eventually spraying.

- Loading of waste

The load is mainly carried by the loader equipment, but in some cases it may be

necessary to load manually.

- Transport of the waste to the municipal landfill.




A market study and analyses for the clean-up activities has been carried out. The final

costs are formed by calculation of the costs for collection, loading and transport to the

municipal landfill as an average price.

Table XVI: Economic assessment- necessary financing for cleaning up activities

№ Settlement № of illegal dumps

Distance to the municipal landfill

Waste (in m³)

Lv,without VAT

Lv with VAT

1 Akatsievo 1 21 20 273 328

2 Antimovo 1 26 20 338 406

3 Bela Rada 1 22 30 429 515

4 Botevo 1 7 20 91 109

5 Bukovets 4 24 600 9 360 11 232

6 Gaytantsi 2 22 15 215 257

7 Gomotartsi 5 36 1 030 24 102 28 922

8 Gradetс 4 34 260 5 746 6 895

9 Dinkovitsa 1 26 50 845 1 014

10 Dunavtsi 2 7 40 182 218

11 Zheglitsa 1 2 1 580 2 054 2 465

12 Ivanovtsi 1 11 20 143 172

13 Inovo 2 22 315 4 505 5 405

14 Kalenik 3 33 75 1 609 1 931

15 Kapitanovtsi 2 23 5 020 75 049 90 059

16 Koshava 1 36 1 000 23 400 28 080

17 Kutovo 2 29 4 000 75 400 90 480

18 Novoseltsi 2 18 100 1 170 1 404

19 Pokrayna 1 23 20 299 359

20 Ruptsi 1 19 30 371 445

21 Sinagovtsi 1 8 3 000 15 600 18 720

22 Slana bara 1 17 15 166 199

23 Slanotran 2 34 45 995 1 193

24 Tsar Simeonovo 1 5 18 59 70

505 17 323

Total 242 398 290 878




8. Map of the illegal dumpsites on the territory of the municipality of Vidin

A map of illegal dumps on the territory of the municipality of Vidin and was developed. It

is shown in the Fig. 38

Fig 39: Map of illegal dumpsites

In the table below the polluted areas and their numbers on the map are shown:




Table XVII: Contaminated areas on the territory of municipality Vidin and their

location


1 Akatsievo area “Baira” / Border between Akatsievo and Ruptsi - channel

44°56'22”/22°48'25”

2 Antimovo In the area of Cemetery Park 44°01'35”/22°57'06”


4 Botevo area “Gaydarski dol” / Vegetable gardens near Danube River /

43°50'23”/22°51'27”

5 Bukovets area “Vishite” 43°56'07”/22°46'37”

area “Gradinite” 43°56'07”/22°46'37”

former canton 43°55'33”/22°45'17”

former cooperative farms 43°55'39”/22°45'16”

6 Gaytantsi On the way to the village of Archar 43°49'49”/22°49'06”

Former cooperative farms 43°49'48”/22°48'46”

7 Gomotartsi area “Valya Ra” / Near the Pump Station /

44°05'36”/22°56'35”

end of 12-th str 44°05'10”/22°58'09”

end of 28-th str and 1-st str 44°05'11”/22°57'46”

end of 34-th str 44°05'06”/22°57'44”

end of 10-th str 44°05'12”/22°57'44”

8 Gradetс area “Drakata” 44°02'06”/22°43'46”

area “Grachko bardo” 44°02'08”/22°44'39”

area “Royaka” 44°01'46”/22°45'54”

area “Do selo” 44°01'45”/22°45'54”

9 Dinkovitsa end of 9-th str 44°02'25”/22°46'31”

10 Dunavtsi behind railway station 43°54'37”/22°49'11”

former pigs farm 43°55'36”/22°49'28”

11 Zheglitsa A former agricultural airport 43°52'55”/22°47'42”

12 Ivanovtsi Аrеа “Selsko” /former soccer field/ 43°51'39”/22°45'31”

13 Inovo the old semetеry 44°01'44”/22°50'06”

area “Lozyata” 44°01'51”/22°50'30”

14 Kalenik end of 3-rd str 44°00'26”/22°39'46”

near to the village stadium 44°00'12”/22°39'39”

near to the semetery 44°00'06”/22°39'47”

15 Kapitanovtsi Drenage on the road to Inovo village 44°02'30”/22°51'59”

to the west of Kapitanovtsi village to 44°02'34”/22°52'35”





Negovanovtsi village

16 Koshava №7 20-th street 44°04'17”/23°01'30”

17 Kutovo area “Valya Porchilor” 44°01'05”/22°58'35”

area “Choara” 44°01'19”/22°57'10”

18 Novoseltsi 8-th str 43°59'07”/22°49'15”

14-th str 43°59'00”/22°49'05”


44°01'39”/22°53'38”

20 Ruptsi on the road to Akatsievo village 44°00'20”/22°48'17”

21 Sinagovtsi former landfild 43°53'51”/22°46'31”

22 Slana bara On the way to Bukovec village 43°57'58”/22°48'24”

23 Slanotran on the road to former mineral bath 44°02'36”/23°01'17”

on the road to former canton 44°02'43”/23°00'11”

24 Tsar Simeonovo


43°50'55”/22°50'35”

9. Recommendations

Taking into account the sizes of the contaminated areas as well as all risks factors

subject to this study, priority should be given to the cleaning up activities for areas of

villages of Kapitanovci, Koshava, Kutovo, Sinagovci and Gomotarci. Following the

economic assessment of the study financing of about 260 000 BGN should be secured

for clearing up the areas in these villages.

Table XVIII: Economic assessment- necessary financing for cleaning up activities

in the priority areas

№ Settlement № of illegal dumps

Distance to the municipal

landfill

Waste (in m³)

lv without VAT

lv, VAT included

7 Gomotartsi 5 36 1 030 24 102 28 922

15 Kapitanovtsi 2 23 5 020 75 049 90 059

16 Koshava 1 36 1 000 23 400 28 080

17 Kutovo 2 29 4 000 75 400 90 480

21 Sinagovtsi 1 8 3 000 15 600 18 720

132 14 050

Total 213 551 256 261




10. Literature

1. Veselaj T. et al, Illegal waste dumps in Kosovo; Green Energy and

Environmental Science in Albania, Agricultural University of Tirana, Albania, 2014

2. Veselaj.T. et al. The environmental impacts of uncontrolled landfill leachate to

the surrounding soil in some regions of Kosovo. The international science

conference” Terra Madre Balkans 2016”, Academy of Sciences in Tirana, 2016,

Albania.

3. Kumar S., J. K. Bhattacharyya, A.N. Vaidya, T. Chakrabarti, , S. Devotta, A.B.

Akolkar, Assessment of the status of municipal solid waste management

in metro cities, state capitals, class I cities, and class II towns in India: An

insight, Waste Management,2009,29, 883–895.

4. MESP, State of waste and chemicals Report, 2014 http://ammk-

rks.net/repository/docs/Raport_ Waste_and_Chemicals_2014.pdf,

5. World Bank, The state environmental analysis, cost assessment of

environmental degradation, institutional review and revision of public spending

on the environment in Kosovo, 2012

6. MESP, Waste management Strategy http://mmph-

rks.org/repository/docs/

7. Maria Triassi et al, Environmental Pollution from Illegal Waste Disposal

andHealth Effects: A Review on the “Triangle of Death”. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public

Health 2015, 12, 1216- 1236; doi:10.3390/ijerph120201216.

8. Dolores Elizabeth Turcott Cervanteset al. Waste Management Program at

the Universidad Tecnologica de Leon. The Open Waste, Management Journal,

2010, 3, 174-183.

9. Report SERBIA FLOODS 2014

http://www.sepa.gov.rs/download/SerbiaRNAreport_2014.pdf

10. 2013 – 2014 floods

(https://www.danubewaterquality.eu/uploads/mod_files/Session_I_Laszlo_Kothay.pdf

http://ammk-rks.net/repository/docs/Raport_%20Waste_and_Chemicals_2014.pdf



http://mmph-rks.org/repository/docs/

http://mmph-rks.org/repository/docs/

http://www.sepa.gov.rs/download/SerbiaRNAreport_2014.pdf

https://www.danubewaterquality.eu/uploads/mod_files/Session_I_Laszlo_Kothay.pdf




11. Floods in June 2013 in the Danube River Basin- International commission for the

protection of the Danube river

(https://www.icpdr.org/main/sites/default/files/nodes/documents/icpdr_floods-

report-web_0.pdf)

12. НАВОДНЕНИЯ ПРЕЗ 2017 ГОДИНА - ОБЩО ЗА СТРАНАТА И ПО ОБЛАСТИ

(http://www.nsi.bg/bg/content/2915/%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%

B4%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F)

13. Floods in June 2013in the Danube River Basin

https://www.icpdr.org/main/sites/default/files/nodes/documents/icpdr_floods-

report-web_0.pdf

14. INVENTORY OF CONTAMINATED SITES IN SERBIA: http://contaminated-

sites.sazp.sk/sites/contaminated-

sites.sazp.sk/files/prilohy/zbornik%20komplet_opraveny%281%29.pdf

15. The Program for management of municipal waste of the municipality Vidin

11. Annexes

Annex 1- Tool for monitoring, control and reduction of the risk

The tool is excel based, and contains data about the name of settlements with polluted

areas, the number of the dumpsites per settlement, GPS coordinates of the dumpsites,

quantity of waste (in m3 and kg), size of the polluted area (in m2), morphological

analyses for each dumpsite, risk assessment for each dumpsite.

https://www.icpdr.org/main/sites/default/files/nodes/documents/icpdr_floods-report-web_0.pdf


http://www.nsi.bg/bg/content/2915/%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F

http://www.nsi.bg/bg/content/2915/%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F



http://contaminated-sites.sazp.sk/sites/contaminated-sites.sazp.sk/files/prilohy/zbornik%20komplet_opraveny%281%29.pdf



П Project CB007.1.31.304 "Prevention and mitigation of consequences of man-made cross-border disasters in the region Vidin-Zajecar” concerning Interreg-IPA CBC Bulgaria–Serbia Programme 2014 — 2020


№

Settlement

Area

GPS coordinates

Population

№ of illegal dumpsites

Polluted area (in

m²)

Amount of waste (in

m³)

Total polluted area (in

m²)

Total amount of waste (in m³)


Garden/ wood Textile/ tire/

leader Glass Inert Hazardous

Waste weight in the area kg)

Waste

weight in the

settlement (kg)

weight (kg)

Fraction % weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)


Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction, %

1 Akatsievo

area “Baira”/ Border between Akatsievo and Ruptsi - channel

44°56'22”/22°48'25” 59 1 30 20 30 20 20 8%

10 4% 80 33% 5 2% 5 2% 120 50% 2 1% 242 242

2 Antimovo In the area of Cemetery Park

44°01'35”/22°57'06” 436 1 30 20 30 20 15 15% 15 15% 5 5% 15 15% 12 12% 5 5% 30 29% 5 5% 102 102


1 10 30 10 30 7 5% 5 4% 3 2% 70 52% 5 4%

0% 40 30% 4 3% 134 134

4 Botevo

area “Gaydarski dol”/ Vegetable gardens near Danube River /

43°50'23”/22°51'27” 49 1 20 20 20 20 10 17% 5 9% 5 9% 15 26%

0%

0% 20 34% 3 5% 58 58

5

Bukovets

area “Vishite” 43°56'07”/22°46'37” 565 4 300 50 6 250 600 35 34% 8 8% 5 5% 25 24% 10 10% 3 3% 15 15% 2 2% 103 2 445

area “Gradinite” 43°56'07”/22°46'37”

900 40

20 29% 10 14% 5 7% 15 21% 5 7% 2 3% 10 14% 3 4% 70

former canton 43°55'33”/22°45'17”

50 10

7 11% 5 8% 5 8% 10 16% 15 24%

0% 20 32%

0% 62

former cooperative farms

43°55'39”/22°45'16”

5 000 500

260 12%

0%

0% 250 11% 200 9%

0% 1 500 68%

0% 2 210

6 Gaytantsi


43°49'49”/22°49'06” 80 2 70 8 130 15 10 17% 5 8% 5 8% 30 50%

0%

0% 10 17%

0% 60 127


43°49'48”/22°48'46”

60 7

10 15% 7 10% 5 7% 25 37%

0%

0% 20 30%

0% 67

7

Gomotartsi


44°05'36”/22°56'35” 550 5 700 350 1 300 1 030 200 29% 60 9% 40 6% 150 22% 100 15% 20 3% 100 15% 12 2% 682 2 232

end of 12-th str 44°05'10”/22°58'09”

250 300

120 22% 50 9% 30 5% 120 22% 100 18% 15 3% 100 18% 15 3% 550


44°05'11”/22°57'46”

280 300

100 19% 60 11% 30 6% 80 15% 100 19% 10 2% 150 28% 10 2% 540

end of 34-th str 44°05'06”/22°57'44”

40 50

30 11% 15 6% 20 7% 100 37% 25 9%

0% 80 30%

0% 270

end of 10-th str 44°05'12”/22°57'44”

30 30

25 13% 15 8% 10 5% 50 26% 20 11%

0% 70 37%

0% 190

8

Gradetс

area “Drakata” 44°02'06”/22°43'46” 1 197 4 500 50 1 470 260 30 9% 20 6% 10 3% 110 31% 110 31% 5 1% 60 17% 5 1% 350 885

area “Grachko bardo”

44°02'08”/22°44'39”

900 100

40 14% 30 10% 15 5% 30 10% 30 10%

0% 150 51%

0% 295

area “Royaka” 44°01'46”/22°45'54”

20 30

10 10% 10 10% 5 5% 40 38% 15 14% 5 5% 20 19%

0% 105

area “Do selo” 44°01'45”/22°45'54”

50 80

15 11% 12 9% 3 2% 50 37% 20 15%

0% 30 22% 5 4% 135

9 Dinkovitsa end of 9-th str 44°02'25”/22°46'31” 117 1 150 50 150 50

0%

0%

0% 3

030 100%

0%

0%

0%

0% 3 030 3 030

10 Dunavtsi


43°54'37”/22°49'11” 1 916 2 20 10 220 40 10 8%

0% 5 4% 100 80%

0%

0% 10 8%

0% 125 505

former pigs farm 43°55'36”/22°49'28”

200 30

30 8%

0%

0% 250 66%

0%

0% 100 26%

0% 380

11 Zheglitsa A former agricultural airport

43°52'55”/22°47'42” 131 1 1 200 1 580 1 200 1 580 300 9%

0% 50 1% 420 12% 500 15% 30 1% 2 100 61% 20 1% 3 420 3 420

12 Ivanovtsi Аrеа “Selsko” /former soccer field/

43°51'39”/22°45'31” 72 1 30 20 30 20 40 13%

0% 5 2% 15 5% 8 3%

0% 240 77% 3 1% 311 311

13 Inovo

the old semetеry 44°01'44”/22°50'06” 646 2 5 15 6 005 315 10 12%

0% 10 12% 30 36% 10 12% 5 6% 15 18% 3 4% 83 1 213

area “Lozyata” 44°01'51”/22°50'30”

6 000 300

300 27%

0%

0% 280 25% 150 13%

0% 400 35%

0% 1 130

14 Kalenik

end of 3-rd str 44°00'26”/22°39'46” 237 3 300 20 390 75 75 5%

0%

0% 85 6%

0%

0% 1 300 89%

0% 1 460 2 132


44°00'12”/22°39'39”

50 30

100 26%

0% 50 13% 10 3%

0% 22 6% 200 52% 5 1% 387

near to the semetery

44°00'06”/22°39'47”

40 25

65 23% 5 2% 30 11% 20 7% 5 2%

0% 150 53% 10 4% 285

15 Kapitanovtsi


44°02'30”/22°51'59” 848 2 15 20 8 015 5 020 22 17% 12 9%

0% 80 61% 5 4%

0% 10 8% 3 2% 132 4 612

to the west of Kapitanovtsi village

44°02'34”/22°52'35”

8 000 5 000

400 9% 260 6% 180 4% 500 11% 70 2% 30 1% 3000 67% 40 1% 4 480

П Project CB007.1.31.304 "Prevention and mitigation of consequences of man-made cross-border disasters in the region Vidin-Zajecar” concerning Interreg-IPA CBC Bulgaria–Serbia Programme 2014 — 2020


№

Settlement

Area

GPS coordinates

Population

№ of illegal dumpsites

Polluted area (in

m²)

Amount of waste (in

m³)

Total polluted area (in

m²)

Total amount of waste (in m³)


Garden/ wood Textile/ tire/

leader Glass Inert Hazardous

Waste weight in the area kg)

Waste

weight in the

settlement (kg)

weight (kg)


Fraction %

weight (kg)


Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction %

weight (kg)

Fraction, %

to Negovanovtsi village

16 Koshava №7 20-th street 44°04'17”/23°01'30” 337 1 3 000 1 000 3 000 1 000 190 6%

0% 20 1% 1

100 35% 30 1%

0% 1 800 57% 5 0% 3 145 3 145

17

Kutovo

area “Valya Porchilor”

44°01'05”/22°58'35” 618 2 6 000 2 500 8 000 4 000 1

800 32% 30 1% 50 1% 250 4% 30 1% 5 0% 3 400 61% 10 0% 5 575 6 855

area “Choara” 44°01'19”/22°57'10”

2 000 1 500

300 23% 20 2% 30 2% 190 15% 30 2% 5 0% 700 55% 5 0% 1 280

18

Novoseltsi

8-th str 43°59'07”/22°49'15” 808 2 900 50 1 900 100 60 31% 30 16%

0% 5 3% 5 3% 2 1% 90 47%

0% 192 422

14-th str 43°59'00”/22°49'05”

1 000 50

40 17% 50 22%

0% 50 22% 50 22%

0% 30 13% 10 4% 230


44°01'39”/22°53'38” 1 062 1 2 500 20 2 500 20 80 2%

0%

0% 100 2%

0%

0% 4 000 96%

0% 4 180 4 180

20 Ruptsi on the road to Akatsievo village

44°00'20”/22°48'17” 117 1 50 30 50 30 55 7% 17 2% 30 4% 150 19% 16 2%

0% 500 65% 2 0% 770 770

21 Sinagovtsi former landfild 43°53'51”/22°46'31” 354 1 2 000 3 000 2 000 3 000 500 17% 200 7% 50 2% 430 14% 220 7% 30 1% 1 500 50% 50 2% 2 980 2 980

22 Slana Bara On the road to v. Bukovets

43°57'58”/22°48'24” 344 1 20 15 20 15 90 24% 30 8% 30 8% 55 15%

0%

0% 170 45% 2 1% 377 377

23

Slanotran


44°02'36”/23°01'17” 445 2 30 30 40 45 10 13% 5 7% 5 7% 20 27%

0%

0% 30 40% 5 7% 75 134


44°02'43”/23°00'11”

10 15

6 10% 5 8% 5 8% 15 25% 10 17% 5 8% 10 17% 3 5% 59

24 Tsar Simeonovo


43°50'55”/22°50'35” 111 1 100 18 100 18 55 27% 5 2% 10 5% 45 22% 10 5% 15 7% 60 30% 2 1% 202 202

П Project CB007.1.31.304 "Prevention and mitigation of consequences of man-made cross-border disasters in the region Vidin-Zajecar” concerning Interreg-IPA CBC

Bulgaria–Serbia Programme 2014 — 2020


Annex 2- Map of illegal dumpsites




EUROPEAN UNION

This material has been produced with the assistance of the European Union through the

Interreg-IPA CBC Bulgaria-Serbia Programme, CCI No 2014TC16I5CB007. The contents

of this material are the sole responsibility of Municipality of Vidin and can in no way be

taken to reflect the views of the European Union or the Managing Authority of the

Programme.

REPORT ON THE CROSS-BORDER IMPACT FROM ILLEGAL … · 2018-12-02 · EUROPEAN UNION REPORT ON THE...

Documents

Transcript of REPORT ON THE CROSS-BORDER IMPACT FROM ILLEGAL … · 2018-12-02 · EUROPEAN UNION REPORT ON THE...