Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
7.1 Background
In relation to sites which have been used for thedisposal of hazardous waste, section 26(2)(c) of theAct requires that the Plan provides for, as appropriate,the actions listed in Box 7.1.
The objectives listed are mostly site specific. Thischapter specifically addresses objectives 1 and 2while recommending further work in relation toobjectives 3, 4 and 5.
In 1988, in Circular letter ENV 11/88, theDepartment of the Environment requested thatlocal authorities identify the “location and extentof land which may be contaminated either by wastedisposal operations or past industrial activities”.The letter is reproduced in Appendix D.1. One ofthe requirements of the letter was theidentification of public and private sites which hadbeen used or were at the time being used for wastedisposal, and particularly for the disposal ofindustrial waste.
7.2 Existing legislation
Apart from the Waste Management Act, there is nospecific legislation relating to sites at whichhazardous waste disposal was carried out. There arehowever a number of acts and regulationsconcerning related issues, as follows:
a) The Local Government (Sanitary Services)Act, 1964. This Act identifies theresponsibilities and powers of local authoritieswith respect to ‘dangerous places’. The lattercan be “an excavation, quarry, pit, well,reservoir, pond, stream, dam, bank, dump,shaft or land that ... is or is likely to bedangerous to any person”. Local authorities areempowered to serve notice on the owners ofsuch properties, outlining the nature of therisk and the remedial actions required. Aregister of all such notices served must bemaintained by each local authority;
b) The Local Government (Water Pollution) Act,1977, the Local Government (WaterPollution) (Amendment) Act, 1990, and theLocal Government (Water Pollution)Regulations, 1992 (SI No. 271 of 1992). Oneof the most significant environmental risksassociated with the presence of hazardouswaste substances in soil is the impact of therelease of such substances to surface andgroundwaters. The powers of local authoritiesto abate any pollution of controlled waters arestipulated in this legislation;
c) The European Communities (Toxic andDangerous Waste) Regulations, 1982 (SI No.33 of 1982). This statutory instrument, whichis now revoked, obliged local authorities toprepare special waste plans dealing with allaspects of the disposal of such wastes. Itplaced an onus on persons depositing toxic ordangerous wastes to maintain records on theexact location of all disposal sites; and
d) The Derelict Sites Act, 1990. This Act definesa derelict site as “any land which detracts, or islikely to detract, to a material degree from theamenity, character or appearance of land in the
77
National Hazardous Waste Management Plan
Section 26(2)(c) of the Waste Management Actrequires that this Plan provides for:
1) the identification of sites at which wastedisposal activities, being activities that to asignificant extent involved hazardous waste,have been carried on;
2) the assessment of any risk of environmentalpollution arising as a result of such activities;
3) the taking or recommendation of measures inorder to prevent or limit any suchenvironmental pollution;
4) the identification of necessary remedialmeasures in respect of such sites; and
5) the recommendation of measures to be takento achieve such remediation, having regard tothe cost-effectiveness of availableremediation techniques.
Box 7.1 Objectives in the management ofhazardous waste disposal sites
7. HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL SITES
neighbourhood of the land in question becauseof … the presence, deposit or collection on theland in question of any litter, rubbish, debrisor waste”. The Act obliges each local authorityto maintain a register of all such derelict sitesin its functional area, to be known as the‘Derelict Sites Register’.
7.3 Liability for clean-up
In relation to liability for the clean-up of landcontaminated as a result of hazardous wastedisposal activities, the Waste Management Act andother pieces of legislation confer powers on localauthorities to recoup the costs of works required toabate water pollution and remedy otherenvironmental damage. Irish waste policy is, inaddition, governed by the polluter pays principle.In other words, remediation costs should be paidfor by the polluter.
Legal precedent was set in 1994 when a wastedisposal company was required to defray the costsof providing an alternative potable water supply topersons whose well water was contaminated byleachate from a waste disposal site (Meath CountyCouncil v. Thornton). This High Court decisionobliged the company to remedy the environmental
damage caused as a result of the incident underSections 10 and 11 of the Local Government (WaterPollution) Acts, 1977 and 1990.
7.4 Identification of the problem
A desktop assessment carried out by the EPAindicates that approximately 2,000 sites exist inIreland which may, because of current or historicalactivities associated with them, be contaminated;of this, up to 487 may be contaminated because ofhazardous and non-hazardous waste disposalactivities – of which 84 are operating sites. Thesefigures are preliminary and site specificinformation should be used in the identificationand assessment of hazardous waste disposal sites.
The Act identifies five objectives to be met withrespect to the management of hazardous wastedisposal sites (see Box 7.1). Objectives 3, 4 and 5refer to site specific environmental pollution risksand remediation strategies.
In addressing the first two objectives a number ofquestions must first be considered, namely:
● What constitutes ‘disposal activities that to asignificant extent involved hazardous waste’?
- All sites which have been used for thedisposal of hazardous waste should initiallybe screened. This reflects the fact that thesignificance of a particular hazardous wastedisposal event will depend very much on thematerial involved, the quantity deposited andthe geological and hydrogeologicalcharacteristics of the land in question. It istherefore more appropriate to define the‘significance’ of the site on the basis of theinformation which has been gathered duringpreliminary site assessment, and not before.
● To what extent should remediation be carriedout?
- There are two main policy approaches toremediation which can be taken:
a) Multifunctionality – the contaminatedland is remediated to a state where it canbe adapted for any purpose withoutrestriction. In some cases, this mayrequire the remediation of land to acondition which exceeds that of its
78
National Hazardous Waste Management Plan
Photo 7 Waste acceptance criteria at a local authority
operated landfill.
original state. In this context, the costsinvolved may be prohibitively high; and
b) Functionality – involves remediation to astandard which facilitates a particularend-use or limited range of end-uses.
Within this Plan, an approach to remediationwill be identified. Procedures for use by localauthorities and others need to be developed.Overall it is recommended that hazardouswaste disposal sites which are assessed asposing a risk of environmental pollutionshould be remediated with the aim offacilitating ‘functional use’ of that site.
● What is the role of local authorities in theprocess as a whole?
- The role of local authorities in relation tosites used for hazardous waste disposal isdefined in Section 22(7)(h) of the Act. Wastemanagement plans must identify sites atwhich waste disposal or recovery activitieshave been carried out, assess the risk ofenvironmental pollution and proposemeasures for the remediation of the sites. Thetask of site identification and investigation iswithin the remit of local authorities’functions. Local authorities are the holders ofhistorical and current planning records andother data which will be required for theassessment of these sites.
7.5 Identification and assessment of sites
Identification of sitesSites known or suspected to have been used for thedisposal of hazardous waste in the past should beincorporated into a register to be maintained byeach local authority and to be called a ‘section 26register’. A standardised approach to the compilationof such registers is essential if the information is tobe put to any meaningful use. In particular, it mustbe possible for users to easily identify the location ofthe specific site in relation to dwellings, parks,designated land and other receptors. The format andcontents of the registers must, therefore, beconsistent across all local authorities.
In compiling a register of sites where hazardouswaste disposal activities have been carried out, anumber of steps must be followed. The
methodology proposed is outlined in Box 7.2.
Experience in the UK indicates that the cost ofcompiling registers at a local authority level may bein the region of £35,000-£40,000 per localauthority, with an additional annual maintenancecost of approximately £8,000.
It must be noted that inclusion of a site on a‘section 26 register’ would not necessarily implythat that land was contaminated, polluted orotherwise dangerous. Rather, it is an approach thatis consistent with the precautionary principlewhich states that where significant evidence ofenvironmental risk exists, appropriate precautionaryaction should be taken even in the absence ofconclusive scientific proof of causes.
Other tools which might aid local authorities in thecompilation of these registers should be assessed.One such tool, COSIMA, is a computerised systemfor the management of contaminated land which iscurrently being developed by the cities of Cork,Cologne, Bologna and Amsterdam. It will provide aGIS (geographical information system) format forthe integration of all available information at thelocal level and will handle graphics, maps andphotographs, as well as data on testing andanalytical methods for investigation, remediationand re-use of sites. The tool is being developed asan aid to the planning process but has obviousapplications for the remediation of land potentiallycontaminated with hazardous waste materials. It isrecommended that COSIMA be investigated toascertain its applicability and usefulness in thecontext of identifying and managing sites at whichhazardous waste disposal may have taken place.
Prioritisation of suspect sitesA preliminary risk assessment should be carried outin order to assign a priority to each suspect sitewhich will indicate the level of urgency with whichmore detailed risk assessment procedures should beundertaken. Three priority categories should beused:
79
National Hazardous Waste Management Plan
Category A - high priorityCategory B - medium priorityCategory C - low priority
Category A - 1) Sites known to have been used forhazardous waste disposal; and
2) Sites suspected to have been usedfor hazardous waste disposal and forwhich there is strong evidence(circumstantial or otherwise) thatenvironmental pollution is occurring(such as unexplained poor surfacewater quality downstream of the site,unexplained morbidity in livestockon neighbouring farms6 or asignificant incidence of historicalcontaminative activities in thecatchment area of the site).
Category B - 1) Sites suspected to have been usedfor historical hazardous wastedisposal and for which there is someevidence that environmentalpollution is occurring; and
2) Sites about which very littleinformation is available but whichare considered to be suspect (basedon desk study results). It isconsistent with the precautionaryprinciple that these sites be includedin this category as there is noevidence to suggest that they do notrepresent an environmental risk.
Category C - 1) Sites which are known to havebeen used for historical wastedisposal but which are unlikely tocontain significant deposits ofhazardous waste; and
2) Sites which are suspected to havebeen used for historical wastedisposal but for which there was nosignificant incidence of historicalcontaminative activities in thecatchment area.
Assessment of hazardous waste disposal sitesInternational experience has indicated that themost significant environmental pollution risk
associated with hazardous waste disposal is theproduction of leachate and the subsequentcontamination of surface or groundwaters. Riskassessment on historical hazardous waste disposalsites in Ireland should primarily be based on anassessment of leachate discharged. Other factorsmay be considered where appropriate.
Waste disposal sites possess a finite capacity toattenuate and assimilate both non-hazardous andhazardous wastes. Depending on the materialdeposited, chemical or physical changes may bebrought about thereby changing the nature of theoriginal waste. Hazardous waste materials depositedinto the waste mass should not necessarily beexpected to appear in leachate in their originalform. The substances which appear in the leachateand its constituents will depend on such factors aspH, temperature, rainfall and the presence of otherwastes. Where a leachate is generated, itsenvironmental impact will depend on such factorsas:
● the nature and quantity of the waste deposited;
● the ease with which a contaminant can reachthe receptor (dependent on, for example, themobility of the contaminant, the thickness ofthe subsoil and the geology of the site);
● the period of time which has elapsed sincedisposal was carried out; and
● the proximity, vulnerability and value ofreceptors such as aquifers, rivers, designatedareas and populations.
In other words, the risk of environmental pollutionby leachate can be determined by the interaction ofa number of elements, with the two most importantbeing:
● the probability, or frequency, of exposure ofreceptors to contaminated leachate; and
● the magnitude (including the seriousness) ofthat exposure.
Stages 5 to 7 in Box 7.2 describe the principal stepsin assessing the risk associated with individualhazardous waste disposal sites.
International experience of risk assessment ofcontaminated land indicates that an intermediaterisk assessment is sufficient to allow for fulfilment
80
National Hazardous Waste Management Plan
6 see Protocol for the investigative approach to seriousanimal/human health problems, EPA, 1998.
of objectives 1 and 2 of Box 7.1 with a detailed riskassessment being required for the fulfilment ofobjectives 3, 4 and 5.
The parameters which may be utilised in anintermediate risk assessment are described in
Table 7.1. The interaction of each of the fiveparameters listed will determine the potential riskof environmental pollution associated with each ofthe sites.
81
National Hazardous Waste Management Plan
7 Power, J., 1996, The development and testing of a methodology for compiling information on historical land use inIreland for the purpose of identifying land which may be contaminated (Unpublished).
STAGE 1: Develop a list of the industrial, commercial or agricultural activities most likely to haveresulted in the generation of hazardous waste which would subsequently have required disposal eitheron or off-site. These activities or land-uses are sometimes referred to as ‘contaminative uses’. Thefollowing, or other, sources are available:
● the nine contaminative uses identified in Circular letter ENV 11/88 (Appendix D.1);
● the list of contaminative uses identified for the UK’s Section 143 Registers (Appendix D.2 andAppendix D.3);
● known industrial activities generating hazardous waste; and
● other activities likely to result in hazardous waste generation (Appendix D.4).
STAGE 2: Assess historical land-use with particular reference to the contaminative uses identified inStage 1. This will require a desk study to identify the waste disposal activities likely to have beencarried out and whether these took place on-site or off-site. Research7 has shown that there is a rangeof documents and other sources of data available with respect to historical land-use patterns but thatthe process of analysing the data is both time-consuming and labour-intensive. In addition, it wasnoted that many of these sources are difficult or expensive to access and that there is far moreinformation available for Dublin than for the rest of the country. Available resource materials include:
● primary sources of information (Appendix D.5);
● secondary sources of information (Appendix D.6); and
● current and historical maps (Appendix D.7).
STAGE 3: Identify which of the locations identified in Stage 2 are most likely to have been used for thedisposal of hazardous waste. Sources of information will include:
● local authority landfill records;
● local authority planning application and permit records;
● records maintained at the hazardous waste generation facilities; and
● local archival data.
STAGE 4: Compile a ‘section 26 register’ of all suspected or known hazardous waste disposal sites.
Box 7.2 Methodology for the development of ‘section 26’ registers and risk assessmentof hazardous waste disposal sites
82
National Hazardous Waste Management Plan
STAGE 5: Carry out a preliminary risk assessment based on the desk study procedure in stages 1 to 4.The assessment allows suspect sites to be provisionally allocated to one of three priority categories (A, B or C) and is done as part of the process of identifying suspect sites within a given local authorityfunctional area. In other words, every site included on a local authority register will be assigned apreliminary priority rating.
STAGE 6: An intermediate risk assessment may be based on a literature review and a visualinspection of the site. The results of this procedure will allow suspect sites to be re-allocated, asappropriate, to a more relevant priority category. The resultant priority rating will allow identificationof those sites which must be subjected to Stage 7 investigations as well as ranking them in order ofpriority.
STAGE 7: A detailed risk assessment will be based on site investigations and is therefore moreobjective than stages 5 and 6. A sampling regime appropriate to the specific site in question will berequired as well as on-site investigations. Stage 7 investigations will verify the presence or absence ofcontaminants and will provide the information to be used in identifying an appropriate remediationstrategy.
Box 7.2 Methodology for the development of ‘section 26’ registers and risk assessmentof hazardous waste disposal sites (contd.)
83
National Hazardous Waste Management PlanTa
ble
7.1
Inte
rmed
iate
ris
k as
sess
men
t of
sus
pect
his
tori
cal ha
zard
ous
was
te d
ispo
sal si
tes
No.
1 2 3
Para
met
er
Type
of
cont
amin
ant(
s)pr
esen
t
Toxi
city
of
cont
amin
ant(
s)
Pollu
tant
-pat
hway
-re
cept
or li
nkag
e
Des
crip
tion
Veri
fica
tion
of
the
pres
ence
(or
like
lypr
esen
ce)
of h
azar
dous
was
tes
orth
eir
brea
kdow
n pr
oduc
ts o
n th
e si
te.
Ass
esse
s th
e le
vel o
f to
xici
tyas
soci
ated
wit
h ea
ch c
onta
min
ant
whe
n it
was
fir
st d
epos
ited
and
doe
sno
t re
flec
t th
e co
nseq
uenc
es o
f an
yph
ysic
al o
r ch
emic
al r
eact
ion.
Envi
ronm
enta
l ris
k do
es n
ot a
rise
mer
ely
from
the
pre
senc
e of
apa
rtic
ular
con
tam
inan
t on
a s
ite.
Rath
er, th
e su
bsta
nce
mus
t m
ove
alon
g a
path
way
to
a po
int
whe
re it
can
impa
ct u
pon,
or
reac
t w
ith,
are
cept
or.
Sour
ces
of I
nfor
mat
ion
Desk
Stu
dy-
the
natu
re o
f th
eco
ntam
inat
ive
acti
viti
es c
arri
ed o
utin
the
cat
chm
ent
area
of
the
site
will
dete
rmin
e th
e ty
pe o
f co
ntam
inan
tw
hich
may
be
pres
ent
Site
Ins
pect
ion
- th
e pr
esen
ce o
fdi
scar
ded
pack
agin
g m
ater
ial
(lab
elle
d dr
ums
etc.
) or
iden
tifi
able
smel
ls m
ay in
dica
te t
he n
atur
e of
the
cont
amin
ants
pre
sent
Lite
ratu
re S
urve
y-
a la
rge
body
of
info
rmat
ion
on t
he r
elat
ive
toxi
city
of c
hem
ical
s an
d ot
her
mat
eria
ls h
asbe
en a
mas
sed
in c
ount
ries
whe
reco
ntam
inat
ed la
nd c
lean
-up
has
been
unde
rtak
en.
Loca
l aut
hori
ty r
egis
ter
- co
ntai
ning
info
rmat
ion
on r
ecep
tors
.
Desk
stu
dy a
nd s
ite
insp
ecti
on-
toid
enti
fy t
he c
onta
min
ants
pre
sent
.
Lite
ratu
re r
evie
w a
nd s
ite
insp
ecti
on -
to m
ap t
he m
ost
likel
y pa
thw
ay b
yw
hich
a p
ollu
tant
can
rea
ch a
giv
enre
cept
or.
Impl
icat
ion
Allo
ws
toxi
city
of
cont
amin
ants
(ite
m2)
to
be a
sses
sed.
The
pres
ence
(ei
ther
kno
wn
orsu
spec
ted)
of
a hi
ghly
tox
ic w
aste
mat
eria
l will
pla
ce a
sit
e in
a h
igh
prio
rity
cat
egor
y fo
r st
age
3as
sess
men
t
Veri
fica
tion
of
a lin
kage
will
res
ult
inth
e si
te b
eing
ass
igne
d to
a h
igh
prio
rity
cat
egor
y -
exce
pt w
here
the
toxi
city
or
conc
entr
atio
n of
the
cont
amin
ant
invo
lved
is lo
w.
Resu
lt
Cont
amin
ant
pres
ent
or n
otpr
esen
t
Hig
h, m
ediu
mor
low
ran
king
of m
ater
ials
Link
age
veri
fied
,su
spec
ted
orno
t ve
rifi
ed
84
National Hazardous Waste Management Plan
Tabl
e 7.
1 In
term
edia
te r
isk
asse
ssm
ent
of s
uspe
ct h
isto
rica
l ha
zard
ous
was
te d
ispo
sal si
tes
(con
td.)
No.
4 5
Para
met
er
Haz
ard
fact
or
Deve
lopm
ent
fact
or(c
ost-
bene
fit
anal
ysis
)
Des
crip
tion
The
actu
al ‘h
azar
d’ a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith
the
pres
ence
of
a gi
ven
cont
amin
ant
on a
n ar
ea o
f la
nd is
dep
ende
nt o
nth
e in
tera
ctio
n of
a n
umbe
r of
fact
ors,
incl
udin
g:●
the
orig
inal
tox
icit
y of
the
mat
eria
l;●
the
toxi
city
of
any
brea
kdow
npr
oduc
ts;
●th
e lik
elih
ood
of s
peci
fic
brea
kdow
n pr
oduc
ts a
risi
ng;
●qu
anti
ties
of
the
cont
amin
ant
and
degr
adat
ion
prod
ucts
;●
the
prox
imit
y of
rec
epto
rs;
●pr
evai
ling
wea
ther
pat
tern
s in
the
loca
lity;
and
●th
e ge
olog
ical
and
hydr
ogeo
logi
cal c
hara
cter
isti
cs o
fth
e si
te.
Bala
nces
the
cos
ts o
f fu
rthe
rin
vest
igat
ion
and
rem
edia
tion
agai
nst
the
resu
ltan
t en
viro
nmen
tal
bene
fits
. It
is b
ased
on
a nu
mbe
r of
fact
ors
incl
udin
g:●
the
loca
tion
of
the
site
(ur
ban
vers
us r
ural
);●
the
land
-use
for
whi
ch t
he s
ite
and
the
surr
ound
ing
land
s ha
vebe
en d
esig
nate
d;●
the
chem
ical
and
eng
inee
ring
aspe
cts
of re
med
iati
on;
●th
e lik
ely
cost
of
rem
edia
tion
;●
the
valu
e of
the
sit
e an
dne
ighb
ouri
ng la
nds;
and
●th
e cu
rren
t us
e to
whi
ch t
he s
ite
is b
eing
put
.
Sour
ces
of I
nfor
mat
ion
Desk
stu
dy
Loca
l aut
hori
ty r
egis
ter
Lite
ratu
re r
evie
w
Site
insp
ecti
on
Loca
l aut
hori
ty r
egis
ter
Lite
ratu
re r
evie
w
Site
insp
ecti
on
Inte
rnat
iona
l exp
erie
nce
wit
h re
spec
tto
the
rem
edia
tion
of
cont
amin
ated
land
Impl
icat
ion
This
par
amet
er a
llow
s fo
r a
subj
ecti
veas
sess
men
t of
the
haz
ard
asso
ciat
edw
ith
a gi
ven
susp
ect
site
. Fo
rex
ampl
e, a
land
fill
site
whi
ch is
use
dso
lely
for
haz
ardo
us w
aste
wou
ldha
ve a
hig
h fa
ctor
, w
here
as a
sm
all
site
wit
h lit
tle
or n
o ha
zard
ous
was
tede
posi
ted
mig
ht b
e as
sign
ed a
haz
ard
fact
or o
f 1.
The
se f
acto
rs a
re t
o be
used
in p
rior
itis
ing
site
s.
A ‘m
ulti
func
tion
al’ a
ppro
ach
wou
ldre
nder
thi
s pa
ram
eter
obs
olet
e as
the
futu
re u
ses
of t
he s
ite
are
irre
leva
nt.
It b
ecom
es r
elev
ant
in t
he c
onte
xt o
fa
‘func
tion
al’ a
ppro
ach
whe
re t
hede
gree
of
rem
edia
tion
und
erta
ken
(and
the
met
hod
used
) is
ver
yde
pend
ent
on t
he c
urre
nt u
se a
ndde
sign
ated
fut
ure
use
of t
he la
nd in
ques
tion
. A
sco
re o
f 0
indi
cate
s th
atre
med
iati
on is
eit
her
not
requ
ired
or
is n
ot a
ppro
pria
te, w
here
as a
sco
re o
f5
indi
cate
s th
at r
emed
iati
on is
a h
igh
prio
rity
Resu
lt
1 -
5
0 -
5
