Risk Based Assessment of Landfills and

Contaminated Sites
Aamer Raza
Principal Environmental Consultant

harrisongroup
ENVIRONMENTAL

03/19/21
Policy Objectives and Context
As EU Accession Countries Bulgaria
and Romania must Comply with EU
Environmental Acquis
• Air Quality Directives
• Water Quality Directives
• Waste Management Directives
• Nature Protection Directives

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
 Benefits

 Public health; Resources; Ecosystems

Environmental Ecquis - Annual Benefits of Full Compliance

12,000 €

10,000 €
Million Euros

8,000 €

6,000 €

4,000 €

2,000 € Environmental Ecquis - Annual Benefits of Full Complience

0€
Bulgaria Romania 40%

High 2,240 € 9,800 € 35%

Low 290 € 1,270 € 30%

Percent of GDP 25%

20%

From : THE BENEFITS OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL ACQUIS 15%

10%
FOR THE CANDIDATE COUNTRIES
5%
July 2001, ECOTEC Research and Consulting Limited DGENV Service Contract B7-8110 /
2000 / 159960 / MAR / H1. 0%
Bulgaria Romania

High 19.3% 30.7%

Low 2.5% 4.0%

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
Waste / Landfill Legislative Framework

 Landfill Directive 1999/31/EC on 26 April 1999

– Supplements Waste Framework Directive
– Prevent or reduce negative effects of landfilling on the
environment and public health.
– Uniform technical standards for location, conditioning,
management, control, closure and preventative and protective
measures for landfills.
 Landfill (England and Wales) Regulations 2002, using
the powers in Section 2 of the Pollution Prevention and
Control Act 1999.

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
How the UK framework is
applied
 National commitment
 Sectoral Prioritisation
 Guidelines for monitoring and assessment (1)

(1) Landfill Directive Regulatory Guidance Note 7 Requirements for Landfills that Stop Operating

 Risk based Decision making framework (2)

– Systematic data interpretation
– Focus on Public Health and Ecology
– Prioritisation of sites for remediation on the basis of combined risk

(2) UK Environment Agency Guidance On Assessment Of Risks From Landfill Sites, May 2004

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
How is Risk measured?
The approach to risk assessment is based
on adoption of :
 Risk screening / Tiered Approach using ranking
techniques to prioritise potential impacts

 A source pathway receptor

methodology

 The use of environmental benchmarks to

determine impact levels

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
Tiered Approach
•Efficient
•Cost Effective
•Appropriate Level of
Technical Assessment

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
Sources, Pathways and Receptors

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
Assessing exposure mediums

• Hydrogeological Risk assessment

• Landfill Gas Risk assessment
• Particulate Risks assessment
• Stability Risk Assessment
• Habitats Risk assessment

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
Case Study 1
Former landfill Site
A OFF SITE THE SITE OFF SITE A’

SW NE

Re-worked
Boulder Clay

Gravel
Trench

Waste and
Cover Soil

Lowestoft Till

Chalk – Major Aquifer

Direct Contact
Leaching to Aquifer Buildings

Waste Material Soil Gas/Vapour

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
 Case Study
Site Investigation

20 M borehole to
aquifer

Window Sampler
boreholes to assess
gas migration,
leachate.

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
Case Study 1 (continued)
Ground Gas Risk Assessment Factors
 The rate at which the gas enters the building
• advection – pressure differential
• diffusion – concentration gradient
 The volume of the indoor space
 The ventilation rate (air exchange rate)

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
 Case Study 1 (Continued)
Parameter Value Units Max. value Calculated Calculated
S oil S p ecific reco rd ed (% attenuatio n ind o o r sp ace
To tal p o ro sity 0.51 cm 3 / cm 3 b y vo lume) facto r % b y vo lume
Air filled p o ro sity 0.15 cm 3 / cm 3 Carbo n Dio xide
Water filled p o ro sity 0.36 cm 3 / cm 3 Office 37.1 1.83 E-6 6.8 E-5
Dry weig ht b ulk d ensity 1.4 g / cm 3 Co nfined 37.1 9.31 E-2 3.45
Resid ual so il water co ntent 0.2 cm 3 / cm 3 Sp ace
Parameter Build ing S p ecific Units Carbo n Mo no xide

V
u

u
a

a
l

l
Office 0.0069 1.83 E-6 1.26 E-8
Pressure d ifferential b etween so il and enclo sed sp ace 45 1 g /cm-s 2 Co nfined 0.0069 9.31 E-2 6.42 E-4
Flo o r-wall seam crack wid th 0.2 0.2 cm Sp ace
Crack d ep th b elo w g ro und (enclo sed sp ace flo o r Methane
thickness) 15 15 cm Office 69 1.00 E-5 6.91 E-4
Area o f enclo sed sp ace b elo w g ro und 6.00E+ 06 1.40E+ 05 cm 2 Co nfined 69 9.54 E-2 6.58
Fo und atio n o r slab thickness 15 15 cm Sp ace

Heig ht o f living sp ace ab o ve g ro und 960 100 cm

Leng th o f Build ing
Wid th o f Build ing
2450
2450
400
100
cm
cm
Ground Gas Results
Dep th o f so il g as samp ling 100 100 cm Methane: Lower Explosive Limit:5%
Chem ical S p ecific Carbon dioxide:
Parameter Value Units
Diffusio n Co efficient o f CO 2 in Air 0.02 cm 2 /s Threshold Limit Value:0.5%
Diffusio n Co efficient o f CO 2 in Water 1.80E-05 cm 2 /s Background Value: 0.075%
Diffusio n Co efficient o f CO in Air 0.02 cm 2 /s Conclusion: Significant Explosive Risk;
Diffusio n Co efficient o f CO in Water 1.80E-05 cm 2 /s No Significant Risk from CO2
Diffusio n Co efficient o f Methane in Air 0.15 cm 2 /s
Diffusio n Co efficient o f Methane in Water 1.50E-05 cm 2 /s
03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
Case study 1 continued
Groundwater Risk Assessment (1)
Tiered approach
– Tier 1 - Comparison of Soil Levels – Equilibrium
Partitioning
– Tier 2 assessment, dilution in aquifer below the site.
– Tiers 3 and 4 – attenuation, dilution, degradation,
retardation, dispersion.
– Hydraulically down-gradient compliance point
abstraction well, a surface water body
(1) Environment Agency publication‘Hydrogeological Risk Assessment for Land Contamination:

Remedial Targets Methodology’ .

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
 Target Concentration CT 1.00E-02 mg/l

Domenico - Time Variant

Initial contaminant concentration at plume core C0 1.88E+03 mg/l

Case study 1 Half life for degradation of contaminant in water

Calculated decay rate
Width of plume in aquifer at source (perpendicular to flow)
t1/2

Sz
1.00E+03
6.93E-04
1.00E+01
days
days-1
m
Plume thickness at source Sy 5.00E+00 m
Saturated aquifer thickness da 2.00E+01 m
Bulk density of aquifer materials  1.60E+00 g/cm3
Effective porosity of aquifer n 6.00E-01 fraction
Hydraulic gradient i 5.00E-03 fraction
Hydraulic conductivity of aquifer K 1/5 m/d
Groundwater Risk Results Distance to compliance point x 7.00E+01 m
Max Site Concentration: 1.88 mg/l 0 Time since pollutant entered groundwater t 9.90E+99 days
Parameters values determined from options
Modelled Compliance Point: 0.001 mg/l Partition coefficient Kd 6.00E+05 l/kg
Drinking Water Standard: 0.01 mg/l Longitudinal dispersivity ax 7.000 m
Transverse dispersivity az 0.700 m
Conclusion: No Significant Risk
Vertical dispersivity ay 0.070 m
Calculated Parameters Variable
Groundwater flow velocity v 1.67E-03 m/d
Retardation factor Rf 1.60E+06 fraction
Decay rate used  4.33E-10 d-1
Rate of contaminant flow due to retardation u
1.04E-09 m/d
Remedial Targets 1.60E+04
Remedial Target LTC3 1.03E+04 mg/l
Domenico - Time Variant
Distance to compliance point 70 m
Concentration of contaminant at
compliance point CED/C0 1.82E-03 mg/l
after 9.9E+99 days

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
Case Study – Conclusions and
Recommendations
 No Significant Risk from Groundwater Migration
– Groundwater treatment not required

 Potential risk from ground gas

– Gas protection systems for buildings
– Gas collection systems at landfill
– Engineered Cap

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING
Benefits and constraints of risk
based approaches
 A systematic, tiered, approach to defining risk through
different sources, pathways, exposure mediums, and
receptors.
– Comparative assessment across sites
– Prioritize which sites need to be addressed first,
– Allocation of of money for remediation

 Protection of Public Health, Resources, and Ecology

 Economic Benefits
 Comply with EU Accession requirements

03/19/21 harrisonenvironmental
CONSULTING