procedure for identifying risks from landfills v1.2 - ea england wales - 2003
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
1/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 1 of 19
Procedure for identifying risks fromlandfills
Version 1.2
December 2003
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
2/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 2 of 19
Landfill Risk Assessment
Noise and Vibration; Odour; Particulate Matter; Litter, Birds, Vermin and
Insects; Mud on Road
Scope
This guidance note provides a Risk Screening methodology for assessment of the
following hazards commonly associated with landfilling operations:
? Noise and Vibration? Odour? Particulate matter? Litter? Birds, vermin and insects? Mud on RoadSpecific risk assessments for Landfill Gas, Hydrogeological risk, Stability and
Habitats are required as part of the PPC Permit Application and are not addressed
here.
This risk screening approach may provide sufficient confidence to enable the permit
to be issued but where this is not the case a site specific risk assessment (simple or
complex) may be required.
Format
The risk screening methodology described in this note comprises four sections. These
are:
1. Risk Identification Matrix2. Hazard List3. Receptor List4. Receptor AssessmentThe following provides guidance as to when and how to complete each section.
1. Risk Identification Matrix
Purpose: To identify all the potential source-pathway-receptor linkages
To be completed: For all applications
All operators will need to identify the hazards that have the potential to be found at
the landfill installation on the risk identification matrix. Additional hazards should be
placed in the matrix in the blank columns where any site-specific hazards are not
covered by the generic categories.
Having identified the generic hazards the existence of a pathway between the hazardand receptors would normally be considered. For most of the hazards the pathway will
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
3/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 3 of 19
be airborne and therefore the pathway will always exist. For mud on the road there
will always be an access road to the highway which acts as a pathway for an
operational landfill installation. There may be some pathways that do not exist at all
installations, for instance the risk of siltation in surface waters from runoff or service
ducts as a pathway for rats. For the risks considered here, removing/interrupting the
pathway will not usually be a realistic option to remove the source-pathway-receptor
linkage. Where the hazard and a receptor exist a linkage should be assumed.
You will therefore need to identify the presence of generic receptors near the landfillinstallation. The distance considered should be within at least 500m of the installation
boundary. However there are some receptors where greater distances need to be
considered i.e. airports and habitat sites. In some cases off-site impacts of noise may
also extend beyond 500m.You must mark an X in the boxes where there is a hazard,
and receptor identified. Additional receptor categories should be inserted as necessary
into bottom rows of the matrix.
The Risk Identification Matrix should identify where there is a potential source-
pathway-receptor linkage. Where there are no hazards or no receptors for the hazards
that do exist then the assessment is complete. Where a cross has been placed in a box
in the Risk Identification Matrix then further information needs to be supplied on the
relevant Hazards, Receptors by completing sections 2 and 3 described below.
2. Hazard List
Purpose: To provide information on the location and nature of the
specific hazards at the landfill installation
To be completed: For all hazards where a potential pathway-receptor linkage has
been identified in the risk identification matrix
Where a generic landfill hazard has been identified and there is a potential pathway-
receptor linkage then information on the specific hazards should be provided in the
Hazard List. In circumstances where the location of noise sources or release points
for substances will move over time (e.g. the tipping face) reference should be made to
the phasing and development plans and the situation for the current year should be
reflected. An annual review of the risk assessments will need to consider the change
in locations as landfill progresses. It should be noted that although the changing
locations of specific hazards should be taken into account the risk over the whole life
of the landfill must be considered.
Where possible the hazard should be simply quantified. For instance it is not
unreasonable to expect the operator to know and report the noise levels from the main
pieces of machinery operated at the site. Where a risk management measure for noise
such as reduction at source (e.g. acoustic enclosures) already exists then the noise
level supplied should be the level with the mitigation in place/use.
Where odour levels from wastes are known these should be provided. For example a
considerable amount of work has been done on odours from wastewater treatment so
relevant information on odours from these sludges should be provided.
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
4/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 4 of 19
Where the hazard is related to the waste itself then the waste streams must be
identified and classified as low, medium or high risk. Waste types considered to be
low risk need not be listed. As an example a cardboard waste stream may be
considered to be a medium litter risk.
It should be noted that these waste type assessments are not a consideration of the
relative risk but the absolute risk. In the above example of the cardboard waste stream
this may be the highest litter risk at the landfill and as such the operator may consider
describing it as a high litter risk. Even if the cardboard is the highest risk waste streamit should however still be regarded as a medium litter risk waste type.
The assessment of the risk posed by the waste type should be on the basis of the
properties of the waste and not the risk management measures that exist or are to be
put in place.
3. Receptor List
Purpose: To provide information on all the site specific receptors
potentially at risk and consider the intrinsic sensitivity of each
receptor
To be completed: For all receptors where a potential linkage to a hazard has beenidentified in the risk identification matrix
For each receptor identified in the Risk Identification Matrix, information on that
receptor should be supplied in the Receptor List. Some receptors should be grouped
together where this can be justified. For instance the houses in a short terrace may
sensibly be considered together. For more distant receptors larger groupings may be
appropriate such as a small village nearly 500 metres distant could potentially be
considered as one receptor.
A qualitative assessment should be made on the sensitivity of the receptor based on
the receptor type and characteristics, its location and the pathway between the
receptor and the identified hazards. For existing sites a consideration should also be
made of past complaints and incidents. Unless there are compelling reasons against it,
receptors where there have been substantiated complaints or recorded incidents should
be identified as high sensitivity. For a SSSI receptor the sensitivity to each of the
hazard types should be identified as high unless the hazards effect is either negligible
or inconsequential. The assessment of the sensitivity should be based largely on the
intrinsic sensitivity of the receptor. Risk management measures should not be
considered at this point of the assessment. The assessment of sensitivity should be on
the consideration of each of the hazard types. For example a receptor highly sensitive
to noise is a high sensitive receptor even if its sensitivity to litter is low.
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
5/19
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
6/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 6 of 19
Where there are no high sensitivity receptors it is unlikely that a quantitative
assessment will be required. Where there are hazardous waste streams with a high risk
for particulate generation (with the presence of a sensitive receptor) then quantitative
dust assessment would be justified.
For existing sites the current performance of the risk management measures can be
used to help determine if a more detailed assessment is required. Noise, odour or dustcomplaints or incidents can indicate that a quantitative assessment (e.g. a noise
survey) is required. The absence of such complaints should not preclude a quantitative
assessment.
Where the risk screening methodology used here does not provide enough confidence
to the Agency a more detailed risk assessment should be undertaken. It is
recommended that the proposed level of risk assessment should be discussed at the
pre-application stage.
Useful References
IPPC H1 Horizontal Guidance: Environmental Assessment and Appraisal of BAT,
Version 3.1 (2002). Environment Agency, Bristol. (Available fromwww.environment-agency.gov.uk)
Guidelines for Environmental Risk Assessment and Management Revised
Departmental Guidance (2000). Department of the Environment, Transport & the
Regions, Environment Agency &The Institute for Environment & Health, The
Stationery Office, London. (www.defra.gov.uk)
Noise Guidance - Internal Guidance for the Regulation of Noise at Waste
Management Facilities, Version 3.0 (2002). Environment Agency, Bristol. (Available
from www.environment-agency.gov.uk)
IPPC H3 Horizontal Noise Guidance Part 1 Regulation and Permitting, Version 2
(2002). Environment Agency, Bristol. (Available from www.environment-agency.gov.uk
IPPC H3 Horizontal Noise Guidance Part 2 Noise assessment and Control,
Version 2 (2002). Environment Agency, Bristol. (Available from www.environment-
agency.gov.uk)
Odour Guidance - Internal Guidance for the Regulation of Odour
at Waste Management Facilities, Version 3.0 (2002). Environment Agency, Bristol.
(Available from www.environment-agency.gov.uk)
IPPC H4 - Horizontal Guidance for odour Part 1: Regulation and Permitting (Draft
for consultation 2002). Environment Agency, Bristol. (Available from
www.environment-agency.gov.uk)
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
7/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 7 of 19
IPPC H4 Horizontal Guidance for odour Part 2: Assessment and Control (Draft for
consultation 2002). Environment Agency, Bristol. (Available from
www.environment-agency.gov.uk)
Habitats Directive: Further guidance applying the Habitats Regulations to Waste
Management facilities (Appendix 6) Version 1 (2002). Environment Agency, Bristol.
(Available from www.environment-agency.gov.uk)
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
8/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 8 of 19
ENERIC
AZARDS
ENERIC
ECEPTORS*
Machinery/Generators/Pumps
Vehiclemovements
Wastedeposit
Engineeringworks
Leachate/Gastreatment
Loadingandunloading
Malodourouswastes
LandfillGasmanagement
Leachatemanagement
Dustywastes
Granularhazardouswastes
Vehiclemovements
Unrestoredsurfaces
Wastesurfaces
Particlesinsurfacewater
Windblownwastes
Wastedeposit
Wastesurfaces
Accumulationsoflitter
Littercollection
Putrescible/foodwastes
Storageofwastes
Habitatsforbreeding/loafing
Uncoveredwastes
Uncompactedsurfacevoids
VehicleMovements
Engineeringworks
OMESTIC DWELLING
HOOLS AND
LLEGES
OSPITALS
FICES/COMMERCIAL
EMISES
DUSTRIAL PREMISES
BLIC FOOTPATH OR
IDLEWAY
GHWAYS OR ROADS
RKS AND PUBLIC
EN SPACES
RMLAND WITH
VESTOCK
RMLAND ARABLE
ATURE RESERVE
OCAL)
ECIAL AREAS OF
NSERVATION AND
SIs (WITHIN 2 Km)
ECIAL PROTECTION
EAS (WITHIN 5 Km)
ILWAY
RPORT (13 Km)
RFACE WATER
* Within at least 500m of the installation boundary unless otherwise stated.
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
9/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 9 of 19
2. Hazard List
Description of the activity e.g. Vehicle movements (full andempty), Waste deposit, Loading and unloading, Landfill GasFlares, Machinery, Generators, Pumps, Engineering Works
Location of the activity e.g. QuarantineCompound SE corner of site
Nature of the emission e.g. continuous, intermittent, lowfrequency, vibration, tonal etc. Sound power level in dB(A) orsound pressure level @ 10 metres expressed as an LAeq,T (where T
is the time of a typical cycle or other suitable time period).
Noise andVibration
Description of the activity/event e.g. landfill gas release, deposit of malodourouswastes etc.
Location of the activity or potential release points e.g. leachate monitoring wells (planreferences), transmission pipework northern boundary, leachate lagoon NE corner of site,tipping face Phase 1 SW area of site (June to December 2003) etc.
List of Waste types which are likely to be malodourous. EWC code and description e.g. 19 08 05 sludges from treatment of urban waste water
EWC Description (with odour levels were known) High or Medium Risk Justification for selection of Risk level
Odour
Description of the activity e.g. deposit of dusty wastes,emissions from uncovered/covered waste surfaces, vehicle
movements etc.
Location of the activity e.g. tipping face Phase 1 SWarea of site (June to December 2003), Phase 1A surface
with intermediate cover
Nature of the particulate e.g. bioaerosols, asbestos,other hazardous dust, inert dust etc
List of Waste types which are likely to generate particulates. EWC code e.g. 03 01 02 Sawdust. Non-hazardous and Hazardous wastes (including stable, non reactive hazardous
wastes) should be presented separately
EWC Non-hazardous waste description High or Medium Risk Justification for selection of Risk level
EWC Hazardous waste description including hazard categories High or Medium Risk Justification for selection of Risk level
ParticulateMatter
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
10/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 10 of 19
List of Waste types are likely to become windblown. EWC code e.g. 15 01 01 Paper and cardboard packaging
EWC Description High or Medium Risk Justification for selection of Risk level
Description of the hazard e.g. Flanks where poor compaction and/or cover would allow flyinfestation, wastes received previously stored for periods of time compatible with the lifecycle of flies, large tipping faces, inadequate compaction, areas left: uncovered, or
unrestored, deteriorating cover etc
Location of the activity e.g. Phase 2 tipping area (July 2003 to March 2004)Southern end of the site, Phase 1a intermediately covered flank (south facing),
List of Waste types are likely to attract birds, vermin, insects. EWC code e.g. 20 01 08 Biodegradable kitchen and canteen waste
EWC Description High or Medium Risk Justification for selection of Risk level
Birds,Vermin andInsects
Description of the activity e.g. Vehicles depositing waste leavingthe site, vehicles delivering engineering material etc leaving thesite
Location of the activity e.g. Haul roads, other vehicle routese.g. delivery of capping material to Phase 1(a) programmed forSeptember 2003
Nature of the activity e.g. numbers ofvehicle movements, part icularconcentrations of vehicles (e.g. Fridaylunchtime, Monday morning), etc
Mud onHighway
Please add additional rows where necessary.
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
11/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 11 of 19
3. Receptor List
Receptor Name e.g.Carnation Avenue, CloseHouse Farm etc.
Type of Receptor e.g.house, street, village,SSSI etc
Brief description of the receptore.g. Area for public open space,population for a village, species /
habitat protected by the SSSI etc.
Minimumdistance fromsite boundary
(metres)
Directionfrom SiteBoundary
e.g. NNE
Frequency ofwind blowingin that
direction (%)
Brief description of pathway forairborne substances e.g. downhill(gradient), presence of bunds etc
PlanReference
Sensitivity of receptor. Based on type and location of receptor, the nature of the pathway, wind directions, history of complaints/incidents etc
Hazard Type High , Medium or Low Just ificat ion for the select ion of sens it iv ity
Noise and Vibration
Odour
Particulate MatterLitter
Birds, vermin and insects
Mud on Road
Copy and complete the above table for each Receptor identified in the Risk Identification Matrix with a potential linkage to a hazard
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
12/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 12 of 19
4. Receptor Assessment - High Sensitivity Receptors
ReceptorName
Noise and Vibration AssessmentRankingof the
Hazard
Relevant hazards and locations from Hazard list Distance fromhazard location to
receptor (m)
Directione.g. NNE
Direction in relation to prevailing wind directions and strengths
1
2
3
4
Risk management measures specific to receptor e.g. sound bunds/barriers; operational periods etc
Description e.g. noise bund on southern boundary Hazard(s) mitigated against e.g. O perational noise from cell no X
General risk management measures e.g. source reduction, maintenance schedules, operating hours, machinery replacement schedules, operating hours, road surfacing and maintenance etc.
Descript ion e.g . Acous tic enclosures for leachate t reatment plan t Hazard(s ) mi tigated against e.g. leachate t reatment p lan t
Monitoring
Points/locationsrelating to the receptor
e.g. Outside number 5Coronation Avenueetc.
Nature of monitoring
e.g. subjective noiseassessment, specialist
noise survey (e.g.BS4142), checkingon operational
practices etc.
Frequency of
monitoring e.g.periodic (e.g. daily,
weekly, monthly etc.)or response tocomplaints
Compliance
Assessment.Qualitative,
numerical oroperational
Key actions arising from monitoring e.g. records made, review of risk management measures
etc
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
13/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 13 of 19
Receptor Name
Odour AssessmentRanking of
the Hazard
Relevant hazards and locations from Hazard list Distance from hazard
location to receptor (m)
Direction e.g.
NNE
Direction in relation to prevailing wind directions and
strengths
1
2
3
4Risk management measures specific to receptor
Description e.g. active extraction of gas from operational phase 2b, covering of leachate lagoon in SE corner ofthe site etc
Hazard(s) mitigated against e.g. Number 3 fugitive landfill gas emissionsfrom operational phase 2b etc
General risk management measures e.g. Waste handling procedures for identified waste types, restrictions on deposit of identified waste types under certain wind directions, relevant measures
from landfill gas management plan, , relevant measures from leachate management plan enclosed leachate treatment, phased infilling and capping etc
Descript ion e.g . seal ing of leachate moni toring wel ls LMP1 12 (plan x) Hazard(s) mit igated against e.g. Number 1 po int source fugi tive landfi ll gas
emissions from leachate well LMP2
Monitoring Points/locations
relating to the receptor e.g. SEcorner of boundary fence,leachate riser LEP2 Phase 2 of the
site, gas extraction boreholes 5 to15 and transmission pipework onphase 2 boundary etc
Nature of monitoring
e.g. olfactory inspectionby site manager, FIDmonitoring of gas
extraction system etc
Frequency of
monitoring e.g.daily, monthly,response to
complaints etc
Compliance
Assessment. Numericalor qualitative e.g.Odour Units,
undetectable, faint, etc
Key actions arising from monitoring e.g. records made, repai r/replacement
of pipework/valves, review of risk management measures etc
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
14/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 14 of 19
Receptor Name
Particulate Matter Assessment
Ranking ofthe Hazard
Relevant hazards and locations from Hazard list Distance from hazardlocation to receptor (m)
Directione.g. NNE
Direction in relation to prevailing wind directions andstrengths
1
2
3
4Risk management measures e.g. Surfacing and sweeping site roads, wheel wash, vehicle speed limits and restrictions (speed humps), capping and restoration schedule, cover and intermediatecapping, packaging of waste, damping of waste at source, waste handling procedures for identified waste types asbestos, granular hazardous wastes etc
Description e.g. Phase 3c hydro-seeding September 2003, Phase 3d intermediate capping October 2003 Hazard(s) mitigated against e.g. Number 1 surface of Phase 3c
Specific Monitoring Requirements. Where the Hazard List has identified waste types that pose a specific hazard e.g. asbestos, granular treated hazardous wastes, fine particle wastes etc thesemay require specific particulate monitoring.
Monitoring requirements e.g. asbestos fibres, ambient concentrations of particulatescontaining for example arsenic, PM10. A reference should be given to the detailedmonitoring plans
Justification for the quantitative monitoring proposed
Monitoring Points/locationsrelating to the receptor e.g.Boundary at SE corner of
the site, monitoring pointreference DMP 2 (plan x).
Nature of monitoring e.g.visual inspection by sitemanager, deposited dust,
PM10 monitoring, dustcomposition
Frequency of monitoringe.g. daily, monthly,annually, response to
complaints
Compliance Assessment. Numericalor qualitative e.g. no visible dust,
250mg/m2/day, 50g/m3 (with
relevant averaging period) etc
Key actions arising from monitoring e.g. records made,review of risk management measures etc
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
15/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 15 of 19
Receptor Name
Litter AssessmentRanking of
the Hazard
Relevant hazards and locations from Hazard list Distance from
hazard locationto receptor (m)
Direction
e.g. NNE
Direction in relation to prevailing wind directions and
strengths
1
2
3Risk management measures specific to receptor e.g. permanent and temporary litter fence locations, clearing of identified locations of litter accumulation etc
Description e.g. moveable litter fence south side of Phase 2b (June to September 2003), daily clearing of ditch onSouthern boundary
Hazard(s) mitigated against e.g. Number 1 deposit at current tippingarea Phase 2b
General risk management measures e.g. Waste handling procedures, adverse weather restrictions on identified waste types, emergency tipping area, supply of cover material, litter picking etc
Description e.g. Wind speed and direction for excluding high risk waste types; medium risk waste types and completesite closure.
Hazard(s) mitigated against e.g. Number 1 deposit at current tippingarea Phase 2b
Monitoring Points/locations relatingto the receptor e.g. Hedge on LongRidge Lane
Nature and frequency of monitoringe.g. daily visual inspection by sitemanager, response to complaints
Key actions arising from monitoring e.g. records made, litter picking with response times and performancestandards, review of risk management measures etc
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
16/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 16 of 19
Receptor Name
Birds, vermin and insectsRanking of
the Hazard
Relevant hazards and locations from Hazard list Distance from hazard
location to receptor (m)
Direction e.g.
NNE
1
2
34
Risk management measures specific to receptor e.g. daily and intermediate cover.
Description e.g. intermediate cover on SE flank of Phase 1 Hazard(s) mitigated against e.g. Number 1 fly infestation SE flank of
Phase 1
General risk management measures e.g. Waste handling procedures, compaction, supply of cover material, bird scaring etc
Description e.g. helium balloons at locations marked on plan x. Hazard(s) mitigated against e.g. Number 2 sea gulls
Monitoring Points/locations relatingto the receptor e.g. Outside number
5 Coronation Avenue, SE flank ofPhase 1 etc
Nature and frequency of monitoring e.g. daily visual inspectionby site manager, response to complaints etc
Key actions arising from monitoring e.g. records made, review of risk managementmeasures etc
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
17/19
Version 1.2, December 2003 Page 17 of 19
Receptor Name
Mud on the roadRanking of
the Hazard
Relevant hazards and locations from Hazard list
1
23
Risk management measures e.g. wheel wash location, operation and maintenance, distance from wheel wash to receptor road, length of surfaced road from wheel wash, criteria for provision
of road sweepers on and off site, specific measures relating to programmed engineering works road sweeper continuously on site September 2003 etc
Monitoring Points/locations relating to thereceptor e.g. Corner of site road and QuarryLane, haul road leading to wheel wash, roadafter wheel wash, the wheel wash etc
Nature and frequency of monitoring e.g.twice daily visual inspection by sitemanager, response to complaints
Key actions arising from monitoring e.g. records made, road sweeping with response timesand performance standards, review of risk management measures etc
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
18/19
-
8/14/2019 Procedure for Identifying Risks From Landfills v1.2 - EA England Wales - 2003
19/19
sion 1.2, December 2003 Page 19 of 19