Groundwater/Surface Water Assessment Work Plan€¦ · GROUNDWATER/SURFACE WATER ASSESSMENT WORK...

September 2017

SOUTHWESTERN LANDFILL PROPOSAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

Groundwater/Surface Water Assessment Work Plan

FIN

AL

REP

OR

T

Report Number: 1664706-R01

Distribution:

2 Copies - Walker Environmental Group

1 e-Copy - Golder Associates Ltd.

Submitted to:Mr. Darren Fry Walker Industries 160 Carnegie Street Ingersoll, Ontario N5C 4A8

GROUNDWATER/SURFACE WATER ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

September 2017 Report No. 1664706-R01 i

Table of Contents

1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE ................................................................................................................................ 1

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CRITERIA .................................................................................................... 1

4.0 STUDY DURATIONS ............................................................................................................................................. 3

5.0 STUDY AREAS ..................................................................................................................................................... 5

6.0 INDICATORS/MEASURES .................................................................................................................................... 8

7.0 ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................................................................................................... 10

7.1 Facility Characteristics ............................................................................................................................ 10

7.2 Land Use Forecast ................................................................................................................................. 11

7.3 Climate Change ...................................................................................................................................... 11

8.0 DATA COLLECTION ........................................................................................................................................... 12

8.1 Background Data Collection ................................................................................................................... 12

8.2 Field Data Collection ............................................................................................................................... 13

9.0 DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................................ 17

10.0 REPORTING ........................................................................................................................................................ 20

11.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................................... 21

12.0 CONTACT INFORMATION ................................................................................................................................. 22

FIGURES

Figure 1: Proposed Borehole/Monitoring Well Location Plan

Figure 2A: Schematic Sketches of Boreholes/Monitoring Wells (Locations 1 and 2)

Figure 2B: Schematic Sketches of Boreholes/Monitoring Wells (Locations 3 and 4)

Figure 2C: Schematic Sketches of Boreholes/Monitoring Wells (Locations 5 and 6)

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A Environmental Assessment Criteria and Studies


September 2017 Report No. 1664706-R01 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION Walker Environmental Group (“Walker”) is preparing an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the “provision of future

waste landfill capacity at the Carmeuse Lime (Canada) site in Oxford County for solid, non-hazardous waste

generated in the Province of Ontario”. Figure 1 shows the proposed site location.

On March 17, 2016 the Minister of the Environment issued the Notice of Approval to Walker for its Southwestern

Landfill Terms of Reference, subject to fifteen further Amendments. Walker published a consolidated version,

including these further amendments, under the title “Approved Amended Terms of Reference” (May 10, 2016).

Section 8.2 of that document details the approved methodology for evaluating the environmental effects of the

proposed landfill, while Appendix B identifies the associated technical studies that are required; this work plan

specifically addresses the groundwater/surface water components of the EA.

2.0 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study is to complete a groundwater and surface water assessment of the landfill proposed by

Walker.

The objectives of the study are listed below, in accordance with the requirements of Section 8.2 of the Approved

Amended Terms of Reference:

a) Describe the environment potentially affected by the proposed undertaking, including both the existing

environment as well as the environment that would otherwise be likely to exist in the future without the

proposed undertaking.

b) Carry out an evaluation of the environmental effects of the proposed undertaking, using the environmental

assessment criteria described in Appendix A.

c) Carry out an evaluation of any additional impact management actions that may be necessary to prevent,

change or mitigate any (negative) environmental effects.

d) Prepare a description and evaluation of the environmental advantages and disadvantages of the proposed

undertaking, based on the net environmental effects that will result following mitigation.

e) Prepare monitoring, contingency and impact management plans to remedy the environmental effects of the

proposed undertaking.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Appendix A contains a complete list and detailed descriptions of the approved environmental assessment criteria

that are to be used in this EA.

From that list, the following are the primary environmental assessment criteria that are to be addressed in the

groundwater and surface water assessment, along with examples of related issues heard by Walker during the

public consultation about the proposal:



Environmental Criteria Issue(s) Raised Through Public Consultation

Effects due to contact with contaminated groundwater

or surface water Groundwater Contamination

Surface Water Contamination

Waterborne Pathogens/Toxins

Explosive hazard due to combustible gas

accumulation in confined spaces Proximity to Residential Properties

Flood and erosion hazard Impacts to Water Supply/Levels/Flows

Water Drainage on-site

Land Erosion

Loss/displacement of surface water resources Impacts to Water Supply/Levels/Flows

Impact on the availability of groundwater supply to

wells Impacts to Water Supply/Levels/Flows

Effects on stream baseflow quantity/quality Impacts to Water Supply/Levels/Flows

Impacts to Aquatic Species/Wildlife/Birds

Impacts to Aquatic Habitat

Impacts on Wetlands

Furthermore, this study is also designed to provide key input/data to other environmental criteria that will be

addressed through studies conducted by other experts. These criteria include:

Environmental Criteria Issue(s) Raised Through Public Consultation

Primary Expert

Property value impacts Impacts on Property Values Economic/Financial

Public costs for indirect liabilities Economic/Financial

Loss/disturbance of terrestrial

ecosystems

Impacts to Wildlife/Birds

Impacts to Terrestrial Habitat

Impacts on Wetlands

Ecology

Loss/disturbance of aquatic

ecosystems

Impacts on Fish/Aquatic Habitat

Impacts on Wetlands

Ecology

Disruption of farm operations Impacts on Agriculture Agriculture



It should be noted that the above list is not a complete list of the criteria and experts that may use the findings of

the Groundwater and Surface Water Assessment. Golder will make our findings available to all experts for use in

evaluating any environmental criteria the individual experts determine as necessary.

4.0 STUDY DURATIONS For each of the primary criteria to be addressed in this study, two durations (or time frames) will be considered in

which potential environmental effects can occur:

Operational Period

The time during which the waste disposal facility is constructed, filled with waste, and capped. These activities are combined since they occur progressively (i.e., overlap) on a cell-by-cell basis, and they have a similar range of potential effects (e.g., there is heavy equipment active on the site).

Post-Closure Period The time after the site is closed to waste receipt. Activities are normally limited to operation of control systems, routine property maintenance and monitoring, and thus have a more limited range of potential effects.

Table A1 appended to this work plan identifies the study duration associated with each of the criteria.

Specifically, for the groundwater and surface water assessment, the study durations to be considered for each of

the primary assessment criteria are summarized below.

EA Criteria Associated Study Duration Rationale

Effects due to contact with contaminated groundwater or surface water

Operational Period

Post-Closure Period

Contaminants associated with a waste

disposal site are generated within the

waste for the contaminating lifespan of

the waste disposal facility. The

contaminating lifespan generally carries

through the operational period and post-

closure period. These contaminants have

the potential to seep into the groundwater

or surface water and could pose a public

health concern.



EA Criteria Associated Study Duration Rationale

Explosive hazard due to combustible gas accumulation in confined spaces

Operational Period

Post-Closure Period

Gas produced within a waste disposal

facility (e.g. methane), while operational

and/or post-closure, can move through

the ground and accumulate in confined

spaces (e.g. manholes, basements) on or

immediately adjacent to the waste

disposal facility. There is potential for the

gas to combust, creating an explosion

and fire hazard.

Flood and erosion hazard Operational Period

Post-Closure Period

The construction and closure of a waste

disposal facility can disrupt natural

surface water drainage patterns, causing

a potential for increased flooding and

erosion.

Loss/displacement of surface water resources

Operational Period

Construction of a waste disposal facility

may cause the removal of all or part of a

natural stream or pond and affect stream

baseflows.

Impact on the availability of groundwater supply to wells

Operational Period

Post-Closure Period

A waste disposal facility can impact the

availability of groundwater supply if

groundwater is pumped from aquifers or

if recharge to aquifers is reduced. This

can occur during both the operational

and post-closure periods.

Effects on stream baseflow quantity/quality

Operational Period

Post-Closure Period

The presence of a waste disposal facility

has the potential to affect the quality or

quantity of baseflow to surface water.



5.0 STUDY AREAS Table A1 in Appendix A identifies three general study areas:

On-Site and in the Site Vicinity

On-site includes the waste disposal facility plus the associated buffer zones. Site vicinity is the area immediately

adjacent to the waste disposal facility property that is directly affected by the on-site activities. Its size will be

variable and flexible in order to encompass the actual extent of the effects, but could consist of neighbouring

properties and/or communities as needs be.

Along the Haul Routes

The primary route along which waste disposal facility truck traffic moves between a major provincial highway and

the waste disposal facility site entrance, plus the properties directly adjacent to these roads.

Wider Area

The broader wider area is generally beyond the immediate site vicinity. Depending on the particular criterion this

may include neighbourhoods, local municipalities, Oxford County, or the Province. This study area can also be

used for some of the general or indirect effects of a landfill that are not resulting from specific physical activities

on the site.

Table A1 indicates the relevant study areas that will be examined for each of the criteria.

These study areas are not intended to be fixed. Flexibility is available to expand or focus study areas, depending

on the study findings. The boundaries of the study areas will reflect the limits of the groundwater flow domain

and/or the limits of any potential effects of the proposed undertaking on groundwater or surface water flow, quantity

and/or quality.

For the purposes of this groundwater and surface water assessment, the initial estimate of the study areas based

on experience with the existing Carmeuse Lime (Canada) Limited site, and other landfills, is as follows:



EA Criteria Associated Study Areas Rationale


On-Site and Site Vicinity - The On-Site study

area includes the existing Carmeuse Lime

(Canada) Limited site and the landfill buffer

zones. The Site Vicinity also includes the local

area where surface water discharge from the

Site is currently permitted (i.e. the Thames

River and local tributaries) and where the

groundwater may potentially be drawn down to

below existing water levels, the existing and

proposed activities at the Site (i.e. quarrying).

Contaminants associated with a

waste disposal site can enter the

groundwater or surface water and

impact off-site groundwater or

surface water.


On-Site and Site Vicinity – The On-Site study




area extending about 500 metres (m) in all

directions.

Gas produced within a waste

disposal facility can move through

the ground and accumulate in

confined spaces on or

immediately adjacent to the waste

disposal facility.

Flood and erosion hazard




zones and perimeter ditches. The Site Vicinity

also includes the local area where surface

water discharge from the Site is currently

permitted (i.e. the Thames River and local

tributaries).

The construction and closure of a

waste disposal facility can disrupt

natural surface water drainage

patterns, causing a potential for

increased flooding and erosion.

Loss/ displacement of surface water resources









below existing water levels, due to the existing

and proposed activities at the Site (i.e.

quarrying).

Construction of a waste disposal

facility may cause the removal of

all or part of a natural stream or

pond or affect stream baseflows.



EA Criteria Associated Study Areas Rationale












quarrying).

A waste disposal facility can

impact the availability of

groundwater supply if

groundwater is pumped from

aquifers or if recharge to aquifers

is reduced.












quarrying).

The presence of a waste disposal

facility has the potential to affect

the quality or quantity of baseflow

to surface water.

The proposed study areas for this assessment are illustrated in Figure 1



6.0 INDICATORS/MEASURES Indicators identify how the potential environmental effects will be measured for each criterion. Following are the

indicators that are proposed for each of the primary EA criteria to be addressed in this assessment:

EA Criteria Proposed Indicators / Measures


Ontario Regulation 347 General – Waste Management (as

amended).

Ontario Regulation 232/98 Landfilling Sites (as amended).

Safe Drinking Water Act, 2002, Ontario Regulation 169/03

Ontario Drinking Water Quality Standards.

Water Management – Policies, Guidelines and Provincial

Water Quality Objectives” (Guideline B-1-3).

Guideline B-7 Incorporation of the Reasonable Use

Concept into MOEE Groundwater Management Activities.

Guideline B-7-1 Determination of Contaminant Limits and

Attenuation Zones.

Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines, Canadian

Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME).

Ontario Regulation 153/04 (as amended) and its

associated “rationale” documents.


Ontario Regulation 347, General – Waste Management (as

amended).

Ontario Regulation 232/98, Landfilling Sites (as amended).




Flood and erosion hazard


Ontario Regulation 166/06 - Development, Interference

with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and

Watercourses.

Technical Guide: River and Stream System Flooding

Hazard Limits – Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources

(OMNR), 2002.

Technical Guide: River and Stream System Erosion Hazard

Limits, OMNR, 2002

Environmental Planning Policy Manual for UTRCA, June

2006.

UTRCA Regulation Limit (O. Reg 157/06).

Stormwater Management Planning and Design Manual

(Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change

(MOECC), March 2003)

Loss/displacement of surface water resources

Ontario Regulation 347, General – Waste Management (as

amended).


Ontario Regulation 166/06 - Development, Interference

with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and

Watercourses.

Applicable Regulations under the Ontario Conservation

Authorities Act.


Sections 53 and 34 of the Ontario Water Resources Act

(OWRA)

Environmental Protection Act (EPA).

Guide to Permit to Take Water Application (2007)

Water Taking Regulation O. Reg. 387/04.

Appropriate water quality guidelines (e.g. PWQO or CCME)





Ontario Water Resources Act (OWRA).

Water Taking Regulation O. Reg. 387/04.

Environmental Protection Act (EPA).

7.0 ASSUMPTIONS

7.1 Facility Characteristics Walker has provided an initial set of working assumptions regarding the design and operations of the proposed

landfill (Facility Characteristics Report; November, 2016). The following key assumptions are drawn from that

report for the purposes of this study:

Groundwater

A buffer area ranging in width from 30 to 150 m will surround the waste fill area.

The height of the waste mound, above surrounding grade, will be approximately 15 m at its highest point.

The waste fill area will average approximately 32.85 m thick; depth below grade will range between 30 and

40 m and depth below the bedrock/overburden interface will range between 10 and 20 m.

The landfill liner system will be a Generic Design Option II, as per Ontario Regulations 292/98, and the Landfill

Standards Guideline published by the MOECC and will include a composite liner underlain by a minimum 1

m thick attenuation layer.

Compacted engineered backfill, ranging in thickness from 5 to 22 m and averaging 15 m, will be placed

between the quarry floor/walls and the bottom of attenuation layer.

The final cover will be constructed in accordance of the requirements of O. Reg. 232/98 and will consist of at

least 0.6 m of soil that will permit a minimum infiltration rate of 0.15 m/year.

Leachate generation will be at average approximately 124,000 cubic metres per year (m3/yr) at full build-out,

with a minimum of generation rate of 81,000 m3/yr.

Leachate quality will be as described in Section 1.7.2 of the Facility Characteristics report.

Leachate will be collected using primary and secondary leachate collection systems.

Surface Water

During construction of the landfill, stormwater and groundwater seepage on the undeveloped portion of the

quarry (where no liner system or waste placement has occurred) will be segregated from the active landfill

areas using berms, ditches and sumps and will be managed through existing approved systems.

Any storm water that comes into contact with the active working areas of the landfill that do not have final

cover, will be treated as potentially contaminated and will be directed into the leachate collection system for

treatment.



Storm water in the perimeter areas of the landfill, including the buffer areas, and any runoff from completed

areas of the landfill (i.e. with final cover) will be directed to the storm water management area on the Site for

sediment removal and monitoring prior to being discharged from the site.

Landfill Gas

Landfill gas will start being generated several months after waste is placed in the landfill and increase through

the operational period – the peak generation rate of 20,000 m3/hour is expected to occur within a few years

of landfill closure, after all of its final cover is in place, and will gradually decrease as organic matter in the

landfill decomposes.

Landfill gas migration controls will include the extension of the liner to ground surface at the landfill perimeter

(to provide a physical barrier to landfill gas migration) and the operation of a gas collection system with an

operating efficiency of 85 percent of total gas production (to reduce or eliminate positive gas pressure within

the landfill).

7.2 Land Use Forecast In order to address cumulative effects in accordance with the methodology set out in Section 8.2 of the Approved

Amended Terms of Reference, this study will compare the potential effects of the proposed landfill at its different

stages of development to the forecast baseline conditions over that same period of time (i.e., the “do nothing”

alternative). In order to guide the forecasting of future baseline conditions, Walker has provided a set of working

assumptions regarding future land uses (including community growth, other industrial activities such as quarrying,

etc.) at the site, in the surrounding area and in the broader community (MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson

Planning Limited (MHBC) Report entitled, Landuse Planning Forecast Draft Report, Proposed Southwestern

Landfill, Township of Zorra, Oxford County, dated October 2016). The following key assumptions are drawn from

that report for the purposes of this study:

The surrounding Townships of South-West Oxford and Zorra, including the Village of Beachville, and the

Rural Cluster of Centerville, will experience minimal change and/or growth to the year 2045. Future

development outside of the Town of Ingersoll will be minimal, with the majority of growth occurring by infill.

These areas will remain relatively similar to current built conditions, with agricultural and existing quarries as

the dominant land use.

Based on the above, it is assumed that the quarry at the site of the landfill will remain in a dewatered condition

throughout and beyond the active life of the landfill.

No new residential and/or employment development is proposed in the site vicinity, defined as the area within

a 1 kilometre radius of the site.

7.3 Climate Change Minister’s amendment #12 to the Approved Amended Terms of Reference required that climate change should be

considered in this environmental assessment. The following table summarizes the mean climate change

(temperature and precipitation) assumptions to be considered during this study, where relevant.



Temperature (degrees Celsius) Precipitation (mm)

Annual Summer Winter Annual Summer Winter

2011-2040 +2.3 +2.0 +2.2 +52.0 -2.7 +28.3

2041-2070 +3.9 +3.2 +4.5 +87.0 -2.5 +34.9

2071-2100+ +4.8 +4.1 +5.5 +89.0 -4.4 +46.8

Source: McDermid, J., S. Fera and A. Hogg. 2015. Climate change projections for Ontario: An updated synthesis for policymakers and

planners. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Science and Research Branch, Peterborough, Ontario. Climate

Change Research Report CCRR-44.

The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry document from which this data is sourced includes other

information that can be used if and where appropriate in this and other studies.

8.0 DATA COLLECTION

8.1 Background Data Collection Groundwater

As this project involves the development of a landfill within an existing quarry, available existing data on the

geology and hydrogeology of the site will be considered and incorporated into the assessment, as appropriate.

The proposed Work Plan described herein assumes that the assessment will build on the data already available

to augment the understanding of the site to a level of detail suitable for the purpose of supporting a submission for

Environmental Assessment Act (EAA) application for approval for development of the landfill.

The Groundwater component includes the sub-components groundwater quality and groundwater flow (quantity).

The following tasks will be undertaken to characterize existing environmental conditions:

Data Review and Site Reconnaissance

The data review and site reconnaissance task will consist of the following activities:

Review of published geological and hydrogeological maps and reports, water well data, regional groundwater

and wellhead protection studies, regional and local topographic and drainage mapping, previous subsurface

investigation findings, and interpretation.

Review of groundwater results from annual monitoring reports including depth to water table and water quality

analysis.

Review of key groundwater-related features identified by the community (e.g. the Community Liaison

Committee tour, and other public inputs and comments).

Review of available site-specific studies previously undertaken will be obtained and reviewed to corroborate

hydraulic conductivity in the bedrock aquifer(s) and groundwater flow directions, estimated from the proposed

intrusive program, and to establish drawdown distance associated with the existing quarry dewatering to

serve as input for groundwater modelling.

Review of the groundwater sample data at select water supply wells in the site vicinity and wider study area

to adequately characterize background groundwater quality.



Completion of a site reconnaissance to corroborate the results of the desktop review, document general site

drainage and identify potential groundwater-dependent receptors in the area.

Consideration of any other pertinent information, as available.

Water Well Assessment

An inventory of private and public water wells in the vicinity of the site will be carried out based on the MOECC

water well records. A door-to-door survey will be carried out for wells within 500 m of the property boundary

and any wells determined to be within the zone of influence of the existing quarry dewatering. This task will

utilize previous water well surveys conducted at the site.

Surface Water

The Surface Water component includes the sub-components of surface water quantity (flow) and surface water

quality. A compilation and interpretation of existing information from defined background sources will be conducted

including, but not limited to:

Key surface water related features identified by the community (e.g. the Community Liaison Committee tour,

and other public inputs and comments);

Surface water quality and quantity information from Carmeuse Lime (Canada) Limited, Ingersoll, Ontario

annual monitoring reports;

Topographic mapping, satellite imagery and aerial photography to define the On-site and site Vicinity

drainage network, drainage watershed/sub-watersheds, and discharge locations;

Published sources, including studies and annual reports by MOECC, Environment Canada, Upper Thames

River Conservation Authority (UTRCA) and Universities to characterize existing water quality and stream flow

in the Thames River; and,

Flood Regulation mapping and supporting hydraulic/hydrologic models for the Thames River, available from

the UTRCA.

8.2 Field Data Collection

Groundwater

The following provides a preliminary summary of the activities that will be undertaken for the hydrogeological

component. Program specifics, such as media assessed, investigative methodologies, numbers and locations of

sampling points and the analytical parameters will be determined based on the results of the review of available

background information and information on the proposed design alternatives for the landfill:

Retain an expert in Karst geology to provide input into and participate in data collection and interpretation

regarding Karst features, as described below.



Obtain and review available site specific studies previously undertaken to determine hydraulic conductivity in

the bedrock aquifer(s) and assess groundwater flow directions.

Drill boreholes in the bedrock and overburden at representative locations on the site and within 500 m of the

proposed landfill, as described below, to characterise site geological and hydrogeological conditions,

including potential surface water and groundwater interactions.

Conduct geophysical logging and detailed hydraulic conductivity testing (i.e. packer testing) on selected

boreholes to confirm site stratigraphy and assess the physical properties of the bedrock on the site, as

described below.

Borehole Drilling and Monitoring Well Installations

A total of six borehole locations are proposed around the perimeter of the site and in the central area of the

site, the locations of which are shown on Figure 1, attached. A schematic of the boreholes and monitoring

well construction details is provided on the attached Figures 2A through 2C.

Borehole locations 1 through 3, and location 5 will be completed in the vicinity of the Site, as indicated on

Figure 1, where overburden material is inferred to be present. Three boreholes will be drilled through the

overburden and into the bedrock at each of these locations and instrumented with monitoring wells. The

deepest of these (borehole “A” on Figures 2A through 2C) will be advanced to a depth of approximately 63

m (205 feet (ft)), and will be cored (the shallower two will be advanced using rotary or coring methods). The

core will be logged for lithology, fractures (depth and orientation) and geotechnical indices including total core

recovery (TCR), solid core recovery (SCR), and rock quality designation (RQD). The screened intervals in

the bedrock will target zones of higher permeability (as determined by core logging, geophysics and packer

testing) and/or stratigraphic contacts. A minimum of one well will be installed in the overburden at each

location (which is inferred to range in thickness from about 7 to 22 m (25 to 70 feet), screened to target zones

of higher permeability and the water table.

Borehole location 4 will be situated on the quarry floor. The deep borehole (“A” on Figure 2B) will be

completed in the lower portion of the Amherstburg Formation, at an approximate depth of 65 ft (20 m) beneath

the quarry floor. A shallow depth borehole, (“B” on Figure 2B), will also be installed beneath the quarry floor,

in the Amherstburg Formation, at an approximate depth of 30 ft (10 m). Both boreholes will be installed with

monitoring wells that will be utilized to monitor vertical hydraulic gradients beneath the site.

Borehole location 6 will be drilled and instrumented adjacent to the Thames River. Two boreholes targeting

bedrock and one targeting the overburden will be drilled and each instrumented with monitoring wells to allow

for assessment of hydraulic gradients in the vicinity of the Thames River as part of the assessment of

groundwater flow and groundwater-surface water interactions. The deeper borehole (“A” on Figure 2C) will

be completed in the Lucas formation at an approximate depth of 15 m (50 ft). The shallower borehole (“B”

on Figure 2C) will be completed in the shallow, fractured portion of the Lucas formation approximately 6-7.5

m (20-25 ft) below the bedrock surface. A mini-piezometer will be installed in the vicinity of the Thames River

in order to assess the shallow groundwater gradients in the immediate vicinity of the river.

Borehole Geophysics

The open boreholes will be geophysically logged at each cored hole location for natural gamma and conductivity

following drilling. The geophysical logging will identify the lithological intervals in each borehole which will be used



to design the appropriate intervals for well screens and annular seals in the monitoring wells. The open boreholes

will also be video-logged to evaluate the downhole geology as well as the potential presence of karstic features.

The boreholes will be pumped to lower the water level in the wells and induce flow into the borehole. The flow into

the borehole will be logged using an impeller (spinner) flow meter to evaluate the inflow in the borehole (e.g.,

fractures) which will be used for the karst evaluation.

Hydraulic Conductivity Testing

The hydraulic conductivity of the bedrock will be evaluated through packer testing of the deep borehole at

approximately 3 m (10 foot) intervals at each cored hole location. Rising and/or falling head tests will also be

conducted in the monitoring wells to estimate the hydraulic conductivity of the monitoring intervals. A pumping

test may be included in the karst study component of this work program which will provide an estimate of the

transmissivity of the bedrock beneath the proposed landfill.

Karst Study

A karst study will be conducted to determine the potential presence or absence of karst in the area that may be

relevant to the landfill design, the net effects analysis, proposed contingency measures and the monitoring

program. The study will involve examination of potential karstic futures in areas of exposed bedrock and potentially

tracer testing. The karst study will be conducted by Dr. Stephen Worthington, a recognized karst expert, in

conjunction with Golder Associates.

The karst work program will involve:

An initial inspection of the quarry faces and bedrock exposures in the area to assess any karstic features;

A conductivity and temperature survey of the river will be conducted by boat using probes to identify potential

zones of groundwater discharge along the Thames River and the area will be investigated for the potential

presence of springs;

The flow into the deep boreholes will be logged using an impeller (spinner) flow meter to identify potential

zones of groundwater discharge. The boreholes will be video-logged to determine whether they are

potentially related to karstic features; and,

A 72 hour pumping test may be performed including tracer tests to assess the potential presence of karst.

Groundwater Monitoring Program

Following the installation of the monitoring wells, pressure transducers equipped with dataloggers, configured to

record water levels and temperatures at regular intervals, would be installed at key locations. The data would be

downloaded quarterly, at which time a complete round of water level measurements will be carried out. The

collected data will be used to assess the horizontal and vertical groundwater gradients. Hydraulic response testing

will also be carried out on selected monitoring wells in order to determine the in situ hydraulic conductivity of the

screened interval for each well.

In conjunction with the quarterly water level monitoring events, groundwater sampling will be undertaken in order

to determine the seasonal variations in groundwater quality. Groundwater samples will be collected using

dedicated sampling equipment and analysed by an independent accredited laboratory for the parameters listed in

Section 10 of O. Reg. 232/98, as well as for a suite of groundwater quality indicator parameters.



Surface Water

A preliminary Site reconnaissance was conducted by Golder staff (hydrologists/water resources engineers) on

September 6, 2017 to delineate the On-site and Site Vicinity drainage networks, watersheds and sub-watersheds

and confirm the information from available sources.

An inventory of surface water uses will be assembled using municipal, conservation authority and MOE records

(e.g., Permits to Take Water), supplemented by field inspection of surface water uses at key receptor points.

In order to provide more current and more detailed data for the purposes of the EA, additional field efforts beyond

the current annual monitoring (being performed by Carmeuse Lime (Canada) Limited) will be required to capture

the specific seasonal changes that exist at the Site and surrounding area.

The field monitoring plan will characterize surface water flow and water quality, including background surface water

quality and baseline conditions on Site, on the Thames River upstream and downstream of the Site, and on

representative streams tributary to the Thames River in the Site Vicinity, utilizing both existing and new sampling

and flow measurement locations. The sampling will include an assessment of the quantity and quality of any

seepage into the quarry and the potential for seepage from the Thames River. The number and location of

representative tributary streams in the Site Vicinity is currently being determined in consultation with the

groundwater discipline in order to characterize baseflow conditions in areas potentially affected by groundwater

levels, as well as the ecology discipline where potential changes in stream base flows may impact fish and aquatic

habitat. To date, four monitoring locations have been identified on the drainage features (creeks and municipal

drains) surrounding the proposed landfill and the existing Carmeuse Quarry to the west, north and east. Two

further monitoring locations have been identified on the Thames River, one upstream and one downstream of the

site.

Grab surface water samples will be collected on a seasonal basis (spring, summer, fall and winter), in addition to

data available from the existing annual monitoring program, in an effort to capture the full range of flow conditions

present at the Site, in the Thames River, upstream and downstream and in the representative tributary streams.

Each sample will be analyzed by a certified laboratory for surface water quality indicator parameters (e.g., metals

and hydrocarbons), including target parameters that are routinely tested for the detection of leachate. In addition,

standard water quality parameters, such as total suspended solids (TSS), dissolved oxygen, pH, conductivity,

temperature and oxygen reduction potential (ORP), will be collected at each station using appropriate in-situ water

quality meters.

During each sampling event, surface water quantity, in the form of discharge rates, will be measured at each

sampling station using an industry standard flow meter. A cross-section will be measured at each station, (if not

previously determined) and flow measurements will be collected following standard flow measurement protocols.

In order to better understand the surface water flow within the vicinity of the Site, automatic level recording gauges

(data loggers) will be installed at key locations (minimum two on Site, one on the Thames River and at

representative tributary streams in the Site Vicinity). With respect to both the methods noted above, the MOECC,

including the Source Programs Protection Branch, will be consulted prior to the finalization of the technical work

plans to ensure that the proposed methods for the collection and analysis of environmental monitoring data are

consistent at a minimum with any monitoring requirements which may be required by the MOECC in subsequent

approvals under the Ontario Water Resources Act or the Environmental Protection Act. Further, methods for

sample analysis will be of sufficient sensitivity to quantify water concentrations at the levels of the Provincial Water



Quality Objectives. Where an objective does not exist for a water quality variable, an objective will be determined

in consultation with the MOECC.

9.0 DATA ANALYSIS Groundwater

The relevant federal and provincial criteria and standards to be used in the hydrogeological assessment will be

finalized. The background and field data collected will be used to summarize and assess the water quality

conditions to establish a baseline for the site. The proposed wells will be used to assess the groundwater flow

regime and water quality in both the overburden and bedrock at selected depths and locations in order to fulfill the

requirements of the baseline hydrogeological assessment for the EA and O. Reg. 232/98.

The baseline hydrogeological assessment will be used to develop a conceptual hydrogeological model, which will

provide a framework for evaluating potential impacts on nearby groundwater receptors (e.g., private and municipal

water wells, discharges to surface water) as a result of the proposed site development.

A key aspect of the baseline hydrogeological assessment will be its integration with the hydrological component,

ensuring effective assessment of overall water balance conditions and evaluation of the landfill water discharge.

The landfill design and available existing environmental conditions will be reviewed to identify potential project-

environment interactions and, where feasible, potential in-design mitigation measures will be incorporated and

assessed.

Groundwater Flow Modeling

A three-dimensional groundwater flow model will be developed to support the landfill design and approvals

process. The groundwater flow model will be calibrated to existing conditions and used to assess the

hydrogeological aspects of the design and net environmental effects in the operating and post-closure stages of

the landfill. The modeling will be utilized to assess the degree of natural hydraulic containment through inward

groundwater flow to the engineered landfill facility. From the model, groundwater seepage estimates will be

developed that will be utilized for landfill design and a water balance. The modeling will also be used to evaluate

groundwater and surface water interactions along adjacent water courses and to evaluate feasible contingency

measures that can be employed in the event of a failure in the liner system.

Water Balance

A water balance will be developed by incorporating data from an Environment Canada water budget, analysis of

quarry pumping records, groundwater seepage estimates from the modeling, surface water inputs and modeling

of the landfill infiltration. This information will be used to estimate the groundwater and surface water inputs and

outputs related to the landfill design. The water balance will also provide analysis of groundwater-surface water

interactions. The water balance will include conceptual models for existing conditions and the operational and

post-closure stages of the proposed landfill.

Hydrogeological Net Effects Assessment

A hydrogeological assessment will be conducted to evaluate the potential net effects of the proposed landfill on

surrounding groundwater and surface water resources and receptors (including the surrounding water wells). This



will include an analysis of the hydraulic containment scenario under operating conditions and post closure

conditions.

In addition to the above assessment of potential effects, the following list of activities will be conducted:

The degree of potential effects will be compared using applicable criteria and indicators;

A groundwater monitoring program will be developed and proposed trigger mechanisms will be set for the

implementation of a contingency plan; and,

The potential for leachate from the landfill impacting adjacent properties will be assessed.

Prediction of future environmental conditions will be completed using modelling and other methods, and

appropriate objectives, standards, policies and legislation. Additional mitigation measures, if required, will be

identified and refined as necessary. This will specifically identify, recognize and determine any potential effects

upon the Wellhead Protection Areas (WHPA) associated with the municipal drinking water wells, Highly Vulnerable

Aquifers (HVA) and Significant Groundwater Recharge Areas (SGRA) identified in the source water protection

studies. Further, the County of Oxford will be consulted with to identify any pre-existing plans for municipal well

field expansion, and incorporate those into the evaluation.

It is noted that the modelling of future baseline conditions for the proposed undertaking will include specific

consideration of the ongoing dewatering and rehabilitation of the quarries currently operated by Carmeuse Lime

(Canada) Ltd.

The Geology and Hydrogeology discipline, in consultation with the EA Management Team and the Design &

Operations Team, will provide input to determine if further mitigation measures are required (i.e., in addition to the

in-design mitigation measures).

Finally, the prediction of future environmental effects, assuming all mitigation measures are implemented, will be

undertaken. The remaining effects or ‘net effects’, if any, will be documented. The outcome of this step will be

presented in tables documenting the net effects for each environmental component.

Landfill Gas

As noted above, landfill gas migration controls will included the extension of the liner to ground surface at the

landfill perimeter, to provide a physical barrier to landfill gas migration, and the operation of a gas collection system,

to reduce or eliminate positive gas pressure within the landfill. Potential for landfill gas migration in the subsurface

will be assessed through:

A review of the subsurface soil and groundwater characteristics, obtained through the groundwater field data

program noted above, in the context of the facility characteristics to evaluate potential migration pathways for

landfill gas through the subsurface; and,

A review of the location and extent of potential receptors and migration pathways, including subsurface utility

corridors and buildings in the site vicinity.

The results of this review and consultation with the EA Management Team and the Design & Operations Team,

will provide input to determine if further mitigation measures are required (i.e., in addition to the in-design mitigation

measures).



Surface Water

Baseline environmental conditions for water quality and quantity will be considered to identify potential adverse

effects of the project and identify potential mitigation measures.

The Surface Water assessment will utilize modelling, as described below.

Baseline Flow Assessment

An assessment of the existing flow regime in the Thames River and local tributaries will be complete using existing

flow information from nearby hydrometric stations and measurements collected during the field programme. The

flow records will be prorated to account for drainage area as required. Key flow statistics, including baseflows,

return period low flows, and peak flows will be assessed for points of interest within the study area. This

information will be used to inform or verify model results and as a baseline for assessment of effects of developing

the landfill.

Modelling

The OTTHYMO hydrological computer model (or alternatively HEC-HMS) will be used to calculate surface water

runoff and peak flows in the On-Site and Site-Vicinity areas under existing conditions. The design storm (i.e.,

greater of the Regional Storm or 1:100 Year Storm), as set out in O. Reg. 232/98, will be evaluated using this

model. Flood events ranging up to the 250 year return period flow will also be considered in the affects

assessment.

An estimate of the quality and quantity of any discharges from the landfill and/or the leachate treatment system

will be provided for the purposes of the EA. Based on the conceptual design document, future surface water runoff

and peak flows and quality conditions associated with the proposed landfill will be predicted and assessed (utilizing

the hydrological computer model). These predictions will be compared to existing conditions and changes and

potential adverse effects (i.e., on flooding, erosion and water quality) on downstream water courses will be

identified. If mitigation measures are required, a conceptual mitigation plan will be developed (e.g., engineered

storm water management measures/facilities.)

Effects Assessment

The degree of potential effects will be compared using the criteria and indicators for the surface water component.

The Surface Water discipline, in consultation with the EA Management Team and the Design & Operations Team,

will provide input to determine if further mitigation measures are required (i.e., in addition to the in-design mitigation

measures). This will include consideration of any measures necessary to prevent the potential flooding of the site

by the Thames River during extreme flood events.

Finally, the prediction of the effects of future environmental conditions on Surface Water, considering all mitigation

measures, will take place. The remaining effects or ‘net effects’, if any, will be documented. The outcome of this

step will be presented in tables documenting the net effects for each environmental component.

Stormwater Monitoring Program

A stormwater monitoring program will be prepared that is appropriate for the preferred alternative, based on the

conceptual design. As part of this task, a conceptual contingency plan approach will be outlined.



10.0 REPORTING The Groundwater and Surface Water assessment report will be structured to address each of the major objectives

set out previously in Section 2.0 of this work plan. Detailed appendices containing data and analyses carried out

in the course of the study will be included in the report, along with other pertinent information to support the

conclusions.

GOLDER ASSOCIATES LTD.

Kevin MacKenzie, M.Sc., P.Eng. Keith G. Lesarge, M.Sc., P.Geo. Associate, Water Resources Engineer Principal, Senior Environmental Scientist

CAB/KGL/cab/ly

Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation.

https://golderassociates.sharepoint.com/sites/13349g/2000 hydrogeology/correspondence/reports/r01/1664706-r01 final oct 2017.docx



11.0 REFERENCES

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME), Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines.

Environment Canada.

Environmental Planning Policy Manual for UTRCA, June 2006.

Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Ontario Regulation 347 General – Waste Management (as amended).

Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Ontario Regulation 232/98 Landfilling Sites (as amended).

Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Safe Drinking Water Act, 2002, Ontario Regulation 169/03 Ontario

Drinking Water Quality Standards.

Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Water Management – Policies, Guidelines and Provincial Water Quality

Objectives” (Guideline B-1-3).

Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Guideline B-7 Incorporation of the Reasonable Use Concept into MOEE

Groundwater Management Activities.

Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Guideline B-7-1 Determination of Contaminant Limits and Attenuation

Zones.

Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Ontario Regulation 166/06 - Development, Interference with Wetlands

and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses.

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR), 2002. Technical Guide: River and Stream System Flooding

Hazard Limits.

Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Ontario Regulation 166/06 - Development, Interference with Wetlands

and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses.

Ontario Conservation Authorities Act.

Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Ontario Water Resources Act, 1990.

Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change, 2007. Guide to Permit to Take Water Application

Form, PIBS 5046E.

Technical Guide: River and Stream System Erosion Hazard Limits, OMNR, 2002 Upper Thames River

Conservation Authority (UTRCA).



12.0 CONTACT INFORMATION For more information about this work plan and the Southwestern Landfill Environmental Assessment:

In-Person/Mail: Darren Fry, Project Director

Walker Environmental, 160 Carnegie Street,

Ingersoll, ON N5C 4A8

Website: www.walkerea.com

Phone: 1-855-392-5537

Email: [email protected]

You may register to receive the Southwestern Landfill EA newsletter by mail by contacting our office or receive the newsletter by email by subscribing at www.walkerea.com/subscribe.

OVERBURDEN

(~72ft; 22m)

BEDROCK

(~105ft; 32m)

PROJECTION OF

EXISTING

A

C

D

B

250

235

268

QUARRY FLOOR

AP

PR

OX

IM

AT

E E

LE

VA

TIO

N (m

a

msl)

LUCAS

AMHERSTBURG

290

227

LO

WE

R (2

30

m) F

LO

W Z

ON

E

241

UP

PE

R F

LO

W Z

ON

E

(~

25

ft; 7

.5

m)

(~

19

.7

ft, 6

m)

(~

68

.9

ft; 2

1m

)

(~

19

.7

ft, 6

m)

(~

19

.7

ft, 6

m)

(9

.8

ft-1

9.7

ft)

(3

-6

m)

OVERBURDEN

(~72ft; 22m)

BEDROCK

(~105ft; 32m)

PROJECTION OF

EXISTING

A

C

D

B

250

235

268

QUARRY FLOOR

AP

PR

OX

IM

AT

E E

LE

VA

TIO

N (m

a

msl)

LUCAS

AMHERSTBURG

290

227

LO

WE

R (2

30

m) F

LO

W Z

ON

E

241

UP

PE

R F

LO

W Z

ON

E

(~

25

ft; 7

.5

m)

(~

19

.7

ft, 6

m)

(~

68

.9

ft; 2

1m

)

(~

19

.7

ft, 6

m)

(~

19

.7

ft, 6

m)

(9

.8

ft-1

9.7

ft)

(3

-6

m)

SCHEMATIC SKETCHES OF

BOREHOLES/MONITORING WELLS

(LOCATIONS 1 AND 2)

FIGURE 2A

GROUNDWATER/SURFACE WATER

ASSESSMENT WORK PLAN

BEACHVILLE, ONTARIO

BOREHOLE/MONITORING WELL LOCATION 1

NOTES

10-14 PACKER TESTS/BOREHOLE A

4 RISING HEAD TESTS / 16 GROUNDWATER SAMPLES

GENERAL NOTES

THIS DRAWING IS SCHEMATIC ONLY AND IS TO BE READ IN

CONJUNCTION WITH ACCOMPANYING TEXT.

ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE.


NOTES



AutoCAD SHX Text

TITLE

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROJECT No.

AutoCAD SHX Text

FILE No.

AutoCAD SHX Text

CADD

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECK

AutoCAD SHX Text

SCALE

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROJECT

AutoCAD SHX Text

REVISION TO CONTRACT 1

AutoCAD SHX Text

ZJB

AutoCAD SHX Text

SEPT 25/17

AutoCAD SHX Text

1

AutoCAD SHX Text

REV. 1

AutoCAD SHX Text

1664706-R01002

AutoCAD SHX Text

1664706

AutoCAD SHX Text

NTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

DCH/ZJB

AutoCAD SHX Text

Oct. 5/17

OVERBURDEN

(~39ft; 12m)

BEDROCK

(~105ft; 32m)

PROJECTION OF

EXISTING

A

C

D

B

250

235

268

(~

25ft; 7.5m

)

QUARRY FLOOR

AP

PR

OX

IM

AT

E E

LE

VA

TIO

N (m

am

sl)

LUCAS

AMHERSTBURG

280

227

LO

WE

R (230m

) F

LO

W Z

ON

E

241

UP

PE

R F

LO

W Z

ON

E

(~

68.9ft; 21m

)

(~

19.7ft, 6m

)

(~

19.7ft, 6m

)

(~

19.7ft, 6m

)

(9.8ft-19.7ft)

(3-6m

)

(~

33ft, 10m

)

A

B

238

PROJECTION OF

EXISTING

QUARRY FLOOR

AP

PR

OX

IM

AT

E E

LE

VA

TIO

N (m

am

sl)

LUCAS

AMHERSTBURG

218

(~

66ft, 20m

)

LO

WE

R (230m

) F

LO

W Z

ON

E

(~

19.7ft, 6m

)

(~

19.7ft, 6m

)



(LOCATIONS 3 AND 4)

FIGURE 2B



BEACHVILLE, ONTARIO


NOTES



NOTES

5 PACKER TESTS/BOREHOLE A


GENERAL NOTES





AutoCAD SHX Text

TITLE

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROJECT No.

AutoCAD SHX Text

FILE No.

AutoCAD SHX Text

CADD

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECK

AutoCAD SHX Text

SCALE

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROJECT

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

ZJB

AutoCAD SHX Text

SEPT 25/17

AutoCAD SHX Text

1

AutoCAD SHX Text

REV. 1

AutoCAD SHX Text

1664706-R01002

AutoCAD SHX Text

1664706

AutoCAD SHX Text

NTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

DCH/ZJB

AutoCAD SHX Text

Oct. 5/17

OVERBURDEN

(~

23ft; 7m

)

BEDROCK

(~

130ft; 40m

)

(~

25ft; 7.5m

)

C

A

250

235

AP

PR

OX

IM

AT

E E

LE

VA

TIO

N (m

a

msl)

268

275

LO

WE

R (2

30

m) F

LO

W Z

ON

EU

PP

ER

F

LO

W Z

ON

E

PROJECTION OF

EXISTING

QUARRY FLOOR

228

D

(6

m)

(~

19

.7

ft, 6

m)

(9

.8

ft-1

9.7

ft)

(3

-6

m)

B

(~

19

.7

ft, 6

m)

(~

68.9ft; 21.0m

)

OVERBURDEN

(~

23ft; 7m

)

BEDROCK

(~

50ft; 15m

)

(~

25ft; 7.5m

)

THAMES

RIVER

B

A

MP

250

235

AP

PR

OX

IM

AT

E E

LE

VA

TIO

N (m

a

msl)

268

275

LO

WE

R (2

30

m) F

LO

W Z

ON

EU

PP

ER

F

LO

W Z

ON

E

PROJECTION OF

EXISTING

QUARRY FLOOR

228

C

(~

19

.7

ft, 6

m)

(9

.8

ft-1

9.7

ft)

(3

-6

m)

(~

19

.7

ft, 6

m)



(LOCATIONS 5 AND 6)

GENERAL NOTES



FIGURE 2C




BEACHVILLE, ONTARIO



NOTES



NOTES



AutoCAD SHX Text

TITLE

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROJECT No.

AutoCAD SHX Text

FILE No.

AutoCAD SHX Text

CADD

AutoCAD SHX Text

CHECK

AutoCAD SHX Text

SCALE

AutoCAD SHX Text

PROJECT

AutoCAD SHX Text


AutoCAD SHX Text

ZJB

AutoCAD SHX Text

SEPT 25/17

AutoCAD SHX Text

1

AutoCAD SHX Text

REV. 1

AutoCAD SHX Text

1664706-R01002

AutoCAD SHX Text

1664706

AutoCAD SHX Text

NTS

AutoCAD SHX Text

DCH/ZJB

AutoCAD SHX Text

Oct. 5/17


September 2017 Report No. 1664706-R01

APPENDIX A Environmental Assessment Criteria and Studies

Study that will be primarily responsible for addressing criterion. Note: Many of the studies will provide key input to criteria that will be address through other impact assessment studies.

May 7, 2013 Page A-1

Studies Addressing the Criteria Study Areas Duration

Criteria

Definition/ Rationale

Agr

icu

ltu

re

Air

Qu

alit

y

Arc

hae

olo

gy/

Cu

ltu

ral

He

rita

ge

Eco

logy

Eco

no

mic

/

Fin

anci

al

Gro

un

dw

ate

r/

Surf

ace

Wat

er

Lan

d U

se

No

ise

/Vib

rati

on

Soci

al

Traf

fic

Vis

ual

/

Lan

dsc

ape

On

-Sit

e &

Sit

e

Vic

init

y

Alo

ng

the

Ha

ul

Ro

ute

s

Wid

er

Are

a

Op

era

tio

nal

Pe

rio

d

Po

st-C

losu

re

Pe

rio

d

Public Health & Safety 1 Explosive hazard due to

combustible gas accumulation in confined spaces.

Gas produced within a waste disposal facility (e.g., methane) can move through the ground and accumulate in confined spaces (e.g., manholes, basements, etc.) on or immediately adjacent to the waste disposal facility. There is potential for the gas to combust, creating an explosion and fire hazard.

2 Effects due to exposure to air emissions.

Waste disposal facilities can produce gases containing contaminants that degrade air quality if they are emitted to the atmosphere. Other operations, such as leachate collection facilities, can also produce emissions that could degrade air quality in the vicinity of the site. Air quality in the vicinity of the site should meet regulated air quality standards in order to protect public health.

3 Effects due to fine particulate exposure.

Construction, operation, and truck haulage activities at a waste disposal facility can lead to increased levels of particulate (dust) in the air. Airbourne fine particulate is a health concern in certain size ranges exposure durations.

4 Effects due to contact with contaminated groundwater or surface water.

Contaminants associated with a waste disposal site have the potential to seep into the groundwater or surface water. This could pose a public health concern if it enters local drinking water supplies, or if it mixes with surface water.

5 Flood hazard. The construction of a waste disposal facility can disrupt natural surface water drainage patterns, causing a potential for increased flooding.

6 Disease transmission via insects or vermin.

Insects and vermin drawn to a waste disposal facility may have the potential to transmit diseases.

7 Potential for traffic collisions. The risk of traffic collisions may increase along the haul routes to the waste disposal facility. This includes the risk to pedestrian, bicycle and farm machinery.




Criteria


Agr

icu

ltu

re

Air

Qu

alit

y

Arc

hae

olo

gy/

Cu

ltu

ral

He

rita

ge

Eco

logy

Eco

no

mic

/

Fin

anci

al

Gro

un

dw

ate

r/

Surf

ace

Wat

er

Lan

d U

se

No

ise

/Vib

rati

on

Soci

al

Traf

fic

Vis

ual

/

Lan

dsc

ape

On

-Sit

e &

Sit

e

Vic

init

y

Alo

ng

the

Ha

ul

Ro

ute

s

Wid

er

Are

a

Op

era

tio

nal

Pe

rio

d

Po

st-C

losu

re

Pe

rio

d

Public Health & Safety (continued) 8 Aviation impacts due to bird

interference. Birds may be attracted to waste disposal facilities. This can pose a risk of bird strikes on aircraft in the vicinity of the site, especially during take-off and landing altitudes.

Social and Cultural 9 Displacement of residents

from houses. Any residents living on a future waste disposal site will have to relocate, which can cause inconvenience and stress to the residents.

10 Disruption to use and enjoyment of residential properties.

Potential nuisance effects associated with the waste disposal facility operation, or traffic moving to and from the waste disposal facility along the haul route, may disturb the daily activities and uses of residential properties. Disturbances could result from noise, dust, litter, odour, visibility, birds and traffic congestion.

11 Disruption to use and enjoyment of public facilities and institutions.

Potential nuisance effects associated with waste disposal facility operations, or traffic moving to and from the waste disposal facility, may disturb the daily activities at community facilities. Disturbances could result from noise, dust, litter, odour, visibility, birds and traffic congestion.

12 Disruption to local traffic networks.

Increased traffic volume resulting from a waste disposal facility could disturb the overall traffic flow along the haul routes, and effectively reduce the available road capacity.

13 Visual impact of the waste disposal facility.

Development and operation of a waste disposal facility can affect the visual appeal of a landscape.

14 Nuisance associated with vermin.

Waste disposal facilities can attract vermin and birds, which can be a nuisance and lead to a decrease in property enjoyment by area residents. Vermin and birds can also be a nuisance to agricultural operations.




Criteria


Agr

icu

ltu

re

Air

Qu

alit

y

Arc

hae

olo

gy/

Cu

ltu

ral

He

rita

ge

Eco

logy

Eco

no

mic

/

Fin

anci

al

Gro

un

dw

ate

r/

Surf

ace

Wat

er

Lan

d U

se

No

ise

/Vib

rati

on

Soci

al

Traf

fic

Vis

ual

/

Lan

dsc

ape

On

-Sit

e &

Sit

e

Vic

init

y

Alo

ng

the

Ha

ul

Ro

ute

s

Wid

er

Are

a

Op

era

tio

nal

Pe

rio

d

Po

st-C

losu

re

Pe

rio

d

Social and Cultural (continued) 15 Displacement/disturbance of

cultural/heritage resources. Cultural resources (including heritage buildings, cemeteries and cultural landscapes) are an important component of human heritage. These non-renewable cultural resources may be displaced by the construction of a waste disposal facility. The use and enjoyment of cultural resources may also be disturbed by the ongoing operation and traffic. Disturbances could result from noise, dust, odour, visibility, birds, litter and traffic congestion.

16 Effects on land resources, traditional activities or other interests of Aboriginal communities.

Major new developments of any type may have positive or negative effects on the interests of Aboriginal communities (i.e., businesses opportunities, joint ventures)

17 Displacement/destruction of archaeological resources.

Archaeological resources are non-renewable cultural resources that can be destroyed by the construction and operation of a waste disposal facility.

18 Level of public service provided by the waste disposal facility.

The presence of a waste disposal operation within a municipality can provide an increased level of public service (e.g., convenient access to waste disposal services) to local residents and businesses, as well as those in the broader community(ies).

19 Effects on other public services.

The presence of a waste disposal facility may have positive or negative spin-off effects on other public services in the community (e.g., leachate trucking, waste water treatment capacity, if there is discharge to the sewer system).

20 Changes to community character/cohesion.

Community character and cohesion refer to physical characteristics, social stability, attractiveness as a place to live and patterns of social interaction. A waste disposal facility may actually or perceptually interfere with these important community attributes.




Criteria


Agr

icu

ltu

re

Air

Qu

alit

y

Arc

hae

olo

gy/

Cu

ltu

ral

He

rita

ge

Eco

logy

Eco

no

mic

/

Fin

anci

al

Gro

un

dw

ate

r/

Surf

ace

Wat

er

Lan

d U

se

No

ise

/Vib

rati

on

Soci

al

Traf

fic

Vis

ual

/

Lan

dsc

ape

On

-Sit

e &

Sit

e

Vic

init

y

Alo

ng

the

Ha

ul

Ro

ute

s

Wid

er

Are

a

Op

era

tio

nal

Pe

rio

d

Po

st-C

losu

re

Pe

rio

d

Social and Cultural (continued) 21 Compatibility with municipal

land use designations and official plans.

A waste disposal facility has the potential to affect the viability of present and future land uses, which may have an effect on planning decisions made in the surrounding community.

Economics 22 Displacement/disruption of

businesses or farms. Any on-site businesses or farms would be displaced by a waste disposal facility, and there could be financial losses as a result of relocation. Some types of businesses located in the site vicinity or along the haul routes may suffer financial losses due to the potential nuisance effects or perceived effects associated with the operation of a waste disposal facility such as noise, litter, dust, odour, visibility, birds, vermin and traffic congestion.

23 Property value impacts. The establishment and operation of a waste disposal facility may adversely affect property values in the site vicinity or along the haul routes.

24 Direct employment in waste disposal facility construction and operation.

A waste disposal facility may create new employment opportunities both in the construction and day-to-day operation.

25 Indirect employment in related industries and services.

A waste disposal facility has the potential to have impacts on employment opportunities in local firms supplying products or services directly, or as secondary suppliers.

26 New business opportunities related directly to waste disposal facility construction and operation.

A large capital project, such as the construction and operation of a waste disposal facility, can create new opportunities for local businesses supplying products or services.




Criteria


Agr

icu

ltu

re

Air

Qu

alit

y

Arc

hae

olo

gy/

Cu

ltu

ral

He

rita

ge

Eco

logy

Eco

no

mic

/

Fin

anci

al

Gro

un

dw

ate

r/

Surf

ace

Wat

er

Lan

d U

se

No

ise

/Vib

rati

on

Soci

al

Traf

fic

Vis

ual

/

Lan

dsc

ape

On

-Sit

e &

Sit

e

Vic

init

y

Alo

ng

the

Ha

ul

Ro

ute

s

Wid

er

Are

a

Op

era

tio

nal

Pe

rio

d

Po

st-C

losu

re

Pe

rio

d

Economics (continued) 27 New business opportunities in

related industries and services. New opportunities may be created for local businesses, or as secondary suppliers to industries working for the waste disposal facility (e.g., restaurants, gas stations, machine shops, repair shops, welding shops, equipment rentals, etc.).

28 Public costs for indirect liabilities.

Some public services may have to be upgraded to accommodate the establishment and operation of a waste disposal facility (e.g., snow removal, sewer and water connections, etc.).

29 Effects on the municipal tax base.

A waste disposal facility has the potential to affect municipal tax revenues from the site it occupies.

30 Effect on the cost of service to customers.

The costs of constructing a waste disposal facility will effect the price of tipping fees to the site. This affects the cost of service to customers in Oxford County and the Province.

31 Effects on the provincial/ federal tax base.

A waste disposal facility has the potential to affect provincial/federal tax revenues.

Natural Environment & Resources 32 Loss/displacement of surface

water resources. Construction of a waste disposal facility may cause the removal of all or part of a natural stream or pond.

33 Impact on the availability of groundwater supply to wells.

A waste disposal facility can impact the availability of groundwater supply if groundwater is pumped from aquifers or if recharge to aquifers is reduced.

34 Effects on stream baseflow quantity/quality.

The presence of a waste disposal facility has the potential to affect the quality or quantity of baseflow to surface water.




Criteria


Agr

icu

ltu

re

Air

Qu

alit

y

Arc

hae

olo

gy/

Cu

ltu

ral

He

rita

ge

Eco

logy

Eco

no

mic

/

Fin

anci

al

Gro

un

dw

ate

r/

Surf

ace

Wat

er

Lan

d U

se

No

ise

/Vib

rati

on

Soci

al

Traf

fic

Vis

ual

/

Lan

dsc

ape

On

-Sit

e &

Sit

e

Vic

init

y

Alo

ng

the

Ha

ul

Ro

ute

s

Wid

er

Are

a

Op

era

tio

nal

Pe

rio

d

Po

st-C

losu

re

Pe

rio

d

Natural Environment & Resources (Continued) 35 Loss/disturbance of terrestrial

ecosystems. Terrestrial ecosystems refer to the land-based habitats connected through the vegetation cover; their protection and integration maintains and regulates ecological health. Waste disposal facility operations and/or traffic may remove or disturb the functioning of these systems.

36 Loss/disturbance of aquatic ecosystems.

Aquatic ecosystems refer to the water-based habitats connected through the surface water; their protection and integration maintains and regulates ecological health. Waste disposal facility operations may remove or disturb the functioning of these systems.

37 Displacement of agricultural land.

The establishment of a waste disposal facility has the potential to displace existing or potential agricultural resources, including the loss of prime agricultural land.

38 Disruption of farm operations. The establishment and operation of the waste disposal facility may affect agricultural crop or livestock production and related agriculture activities

39 Sterilization of industrial mineral resources.

The establishment of a waste disposal facility may limit the opportunity to extract industrial mineral resources located beneath the site.

40 Displacement of forestry resources.

The establishment of a waste disposal facility may limit the opportunity to utilize forestry resources on or near the site.

41 Loss/disruption of recreational resources.

Waste disposal facility operations and traffic may displace/disrupt existing recreational resources in the area, which could adversely affect the community at large. Disturbances could result from noise, dust, odour, visibility, birds and traffic congestion. Recreational resources include naturalist and interpretive opportunities.

Golder Associates Ltd.

309 Exeter Road, Unit #1

London, Ontario, N6L 1C1

Canada

T: +1 (519) 652 0099

Groundwater/Surface Water Assessment Work Plan€¦ · GROUNDWATER/SURFACE WATER ASSESSMENT WORK...

Documents

Transcript of Groundwater/Surface Water Assessment Work Plan€¦ · GROUNDWATER/SURFACE WATER ASSESSMENT WORK...