Technical Report 2012/06/06/GENV
Geohydrological and Engineering Geological investigation at the existing Harding Landfill Site
Prepared for: USK Consulting
Environmental and
Waste Engineering
Final Report
June 2012
Technical Report: 2012/06/06/GENV
ii
Prepared by
Technical Report: 2012/06/06/GENV
iii
Geohydrological and Engineering Geological investigation at the existing Harding Landfill Site
21 June 2012
Prepared For:
USK Consulting Environmental and Waste Engineering 23 Ray Craib Cr. Beacon Bay East London 5241
Compiled By:
WS Blay (BSc Hons, Geohydrology)
Project Team:
J. A Myburgh (BSc Hons, Geology) Pr.Sci.Nat
W. S Blay (BSc Hons, Geohydrology)
O. K Skenjana (BSc. Hons, Environmental Geology)
H. Briel (GIS & Data)
F. N De Jager (BSc Hons, Engineering Geology) Pr.Sci.Nat
EASTERN CAPE PROVINCE: 10 Sansom Road, Vincent East London, Postnet 203, Private Bag X9063, East London,5200 Tel: +27-(0)43-726 2070 Fax: +27 (0)43 726 9232 www.ages-group.com
Offices: Eastern Cape Gauteng Limpopo Province Namibia North-West Province Western Cape Zimbabwe
AGES Board of Directors: SJ Pretorius JA Myburgh JJP Vivier JH Botha THG Ngoepe SM Haasbroek R Crosby
JC Vivier FN de Jager AS Potgieter DP van der Westhuijzen AGES Eastern Cape Directors: JA Myburgh FN de Jager J Clark
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
iv
REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST
Name Institution
Mr Steve Kalule USK Consulting Environmental and Waste Engineering
DOCUMENT HISTORY
Report no Date Version Status
2012/06/06/GENV 21 June 2012 1.0 Final Report
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
v
Although AGES (Pty) Ltd exercises due care and diligence in rendering services and preparing documents, AGES (Pty) Ltd accepts no liability, and the client, by receiving this document, indemnifies AGES (Pty) Ltd and its directors, managers, agents and employees against all actions, claims, demands, losses, liabilities, costs, damages and expenses arising from or in connection with services rendered, directly or indirectly by AGES (Pty) Ltd and by the use of the information contained in this document.
This document contains confidential and proprietary information of AGES (Pty) Ltd and is protected by copyright in favour of AGES (Pty) Ltd and may not be reproduced, or used without the written consent of AGES (Pty) Ltd, which has been obtained beforehand. This document is prepared exclusively for USK Consulting Environmental and Waste Engineering and is subject to all confidentiality, copyright and trade secrets, rules, intellectual property law and practices of South Africa.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
vi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviation Description
DRIT Double Ring Infiltration Test
EC Electrical Conductivity
K Hydraulic Conductivity
MAE Mean Annual Evaporation
MAP Mean Annual Precipitation
MAR Mean Annual Runoff
MBGL Meter Below Ground Level (i.e. depth)
mS/m milliSiemens / meter
SWL Static Water Level
T Transmissivity
WWTW Wastewater Treatment Works
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
vii
Table of contents
1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
1.1 TERMS OF REFERENCE ............................................................................................... 1
1.2 SCOPE OF WORK........................................................................................................ 1
1.3 PROJECT AREA AND LOCATION .................................................................................... 1
1.4 AVAILABLE INFORMATION ............................................................................................ 2
2 SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................ 4
2.1 GEOLOGICAL SETTING ................................................................................................ 4
2.2 HYDROGEOLOGICAL SETTING...................................................................................... 5
3 RESULTS ............................................................................................................ 6
3.1 GENERAL .................................................................................................................. 6
3.2 GENERALISED SOIL CONDITIONS ................................................................................ 6
3.3 LABORATORY TESTING ............................................................................................... 7 3.3.1 Hillwash Material ............................................................................................................... 8 3.3.2 Ferruginised Residual Siltstone Material ........................................................................... 8 3.3.3 Siltstone Bedrock Material ................................................................................................. 9
3.4 SOIL PERMEABILITY ................................................................................................. 10
3.5 POSITION IN RESPECT OF DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY .................................................. 11
3.6 GEOPHYSICAL PROFILING ......................................................................................... 14
3.7 SITE HYDROGEOLOGY .............................................................................................. 16
3.8 AQUIFER TESTING .................................................................................................... 19
3.9 WATER CHEMISTRY .................................................................................................. 19
3.10 SITE DRAINAGE ..................................................................................................... 20
3.11 SITE TOPOGRAPHY ............................................................................................... 21
4 SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 22
5 RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................... 25
6 REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 26
7 PROJECT MAPS ............................................................................................... 27
List of Figures
Figure 1: Harding Existing Landfill Site Locality map (Topographical background) ............................... 3 Figure 2: Karoo Supergroup Stratigraphy (Tankard et al, 1982) ............................................................ 4 Figure 3: Distribution of test pits excavated over the project area (Google Earth with elevation profile) 9 Figure 4: Geophysical profiles at Harding waste site. ........................................................................... 15 Figure 5: Harding waste site elevation profile. ...................................................................................... 16 Figure 6: Harding waste site conceptual model (not to scale). ............................................................. 18
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
viii
List of Tables
Table 1: Double Ring Infiltrometer Test – Permeability Data ................................................................ 10 Table 2: Summarised Hydrocensus Data ............................................................................................. 13 Table 3: Detailed Processed Soil Test Results ..................................................................................... 13
List of Photos
Photo 1: Waste pit with visible vertical joints in the siltstone .................................................................. 5 Photo 2: General soil excavatability conditions – Trial Pit HTP5 ............................................................ 7 Photo 3: Farm borehole used for drinking water purposes. .................................................................. 11 Photo 4: Water tanks with dark brown mineral precipitation. ................................................................ 12
List of Appendixes
Appendix A –Double Ring Infiltrometer Test Data
Appendix B –Test Pit Logs
Appendix C –Geophysical Survey Data
Appendix D –Aquifer Testing Data
Appendix E –Water Chemistry Analyses Data
Appendix F –Soil Test Data
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
1
1 INTRODUCTION
A multi-disciplinary geohydrological and engineering geological investigation was carried out at the existing Harding landfill site for the further use and possible expansion of the waste facility for the town of Harding in the Umuziwabantu Local Municipality of the KwaZulu Natal Province.
1.1 Terms of reference
AGES (PTY) LTD was appointed by USK Consulting after submitting a detailed quotation for the geohydrological and engineering geological inputs required for the geohydrological and engineering geological site characterization of the existing landfill site. The AGES geohydrological and geotechnical units followed a multi-disciplinary approach to meet the said objectives of the investigation.
1.2 Scope of work
The geohydrological and engineering geological site characterization entailed the following actions:
• Conduct a hydrocensus of the region 1 – 3 Km radius from the centre of the proposed site. • Investigate water resources near the site in this radius, level, water quality, yield, structural details etc. • Conduct at a risk assessment of contamination of water resource in the region from the landfill site. • Detailed mapping of the hydrogeological structures and features. • Investigation of general geology of the site • Underlying soil and geological features assessment • Assess the suitability of the site from a contamination barrier point of view and look at availability and
suitability of cover material. • Digging of trial pits, soil mechanisms and laboratory investigation, mapping and literature review.
1.3 Project area and location
The landfill site is located 600m east of Harding Town next to the N2 road in the Umuziwabantu Local Municipality of the KwaZulu Natal Province. The regional locality of the site is indicated in Figure 1 with the centre point of the sites roughly located at the following coordinate (WGS84; Geographic Projection):
Harding landfill site:
• Latitude 30.570571° S
• Longitude 29.911280° E
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
2
1.4 Available information
The following sources of information were used during the investigation:
Geological maps
- 3128 KOKSTAD, 1981; scale 1 : 250 000.
Topographical map
- 3029DB HARDING, Third edition, 1981; scale 1 : 50 000.
Geohydrological map
- 2928 DURBAN, First edition, scale 1 : 500 000.
Satellite Imagery
- Google Earth. AfriGIS (Pty) Ltd 2012.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
3
Figure 1: Harding Existing Landfill Site Locality map (Topographical background)
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
4
2 SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 Geological setting
According to the geological map 3028 KOKSTAD the project area is underlain by dark-grey shale, medium-grained buff sandstone, siltstone and mudstone of the Ecca Group that is part of the Karoo Supergroup sequence of rocks. The regional geology is indicated in Map 2. The stratigraphical position of the Ecca Group within the Karoo Supergroup is indicated in Figure 2 below.
Dolerite sills have intruded the horizontally orientated sedimentary rocks of the Ecca Group in the region. The Harding waste site is located on the western edge of a dolerite sill striking north east to south west as indicated by the geological map. It is assumed that the dolerite sill extends westward underneath the project area as dolerite could be observed in close proximity to the project area and the presence of a prominent non-perennial spring to the north of the project area. The site is not located close to any major fault zones or dolerite dyke intrusions according to the available geological maps.
The siltstone has a general dip of 3 degrees to the west with prominent sub-vertical WNW trending joints noted in places where the rock is exposed on site, as can be seen in Photo 1. These joints could be associated with the dolerite sheet intrusion below the site causing fractures and joints in the overlying sedimentary formations. The brown precipitation visible in Photo 1 is an indication of groundwater flow along these joints and fractures. These vertical joints and fractures have the potential to increase groundwater flow velocities as well as influence groundwater flow directions.
Quaternary deposits (Alluvium) occur to the north of the landfill site associated with the Mzimkhulwana river.
The geological map does not indicate the presence of any water-soluble rocks or sediments within the project
Figure 2: Karoo Supergroup Stratigraphy (Tankard et al, 1982)
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
5
area. Soluble rocks include dolomite and limestone and are prone to the formation of sinkholes and subsidence. These conditions are therefore not expected in the project area.
Photo 1: Waste pit with visible vertical joints in the siltstone
2.2 Hydrogeological setting
The hydrogeological map 2928 DURBAN describes the project area as being underlain by predominantly argillaceous rocks (shale, carbonaceous shale, mudstone and siltstone) with groundwater generally located intergranular and in fractured zones with expected borehole yields varying from 0.5 to 2.0 l/s at successful boreholes and water quality characterised by an EC of approximately 0-70 mS/m.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
6
3 RESULTS
3.1 General
A site reconnaissance survey of the existing site was conducted during the last week of April 2012 during which the general geology, geohydrology and engineering geology of the site was assessed, and further site investigation planned. The detailed investigation carried out from 24 to 25 April 2012 at the existing site comprised of the following general actions:
• Conduct a hydrocensus of the region 1 – 3 Km radius from centre of the proposed site.
• Risk assessment of contamination of water resource in the region from the landfill site.
• Detailed mapping of the hydrogeological structures and features.
• Investigation of general hydrogeology of the site
• Underlying soil and geological features assessment
• Assess the suitability of the site from a contamination barrier point of view
3.2 Generalised Soil Conditions
Due to some existing waste sells being open in the western portion of the site, soils could be inspected in this area. Trial pit positions were identified in areas where additional information on soil conditions was needed, especially where weathering could be expected associated with geological structures that could constitute preferential pathways for contaminant transport.
A total of 5 trial pits, numbered TP1 to TP5, were excavated on the 17th of May 2012 utilising a CAT 416 D-type excavator. It was possible excavate to depth of between 1.3 to 2.50 mbgl (mean 1.98 mbgl), after which excavation refused on Siltstone bedrock or excavation was stopped as the TLB-type excavator neared its maximum reach. Excavation refused on 3 of the trial pits with Siltstone bedrock, generally occurring from a depth between 0.6 to 1.4 mbgl (0.9 mbgl). The localities of the test pits are indicated in Figure 3 for reference.
A portion of the project area is covered by Soil of human origin as encountered in 2 of the trial pits. The material consists of sandy silt to sandy clay with scattered to abundant ferricrete nodules, siltstone cobbles, building rubble and other waste.
The project area is generally covered by a layer of hillwash material that is composed of sandy silt to sandy clay that exhibits a firm consistency and a micro-shattered soil structure. The material extends from surface to a depth between 0.20 to 0.60 mbgl (mean 0.33 mbgl).
The transported hillwash material is underlain by Ferruginised Residual Siltstone material that is composed of sandy clay with scattered to abundant ferricrete nodules and siltstone gravel, with a firm consistency and an intact to micro-shattered structure. The material has a thickness between 0.2 and 0.6 m (mean 0.3 m),
The Ferruginised Residual Siltstone material is underlain by Siltstone bedrock material that was encountered in 3 of the trial pits. The siltstone bedrock material is highly weathered to moderately weathered, fine grained, thickly jointed. Joint surfaces are narrow, stained and slightly rough. The material was encountered at depth of between 0.6 to 1.4 mbgl (mean 0.9 mbgl).
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
7
The sidewalls of trial pits remained stable to moderately stable during profiling with little to no collapse and overbreak occurring.
No groundwater seepage was encountered during the investigation. Ferruginised soil conditions were encountered over the entire project area, indicating that the seasonal occurrence of perched groundwater is likely.
The generalised soil conditions are indicated in the Photo below with logs attached in Appendix A.
Photo 2: General soil excavatability conditions – Trial Pit HTP5
3.3 Laboratory Testing
A total of 5 disturbed soil samples, 2 bulk disturbed samples and 3 undisturbed samples were taken for detailed laboratory analysis as part of the investigation. The samples were submitted to an accredited materials laboratory in East London for detailed analysis on the 28th of May 2012.
Processed results are discussed in the paragraphs below and summarized in Table 3. Laboratory instructions and analysis certificates are attached in Appendix F for reference.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
8
3.3.1 Hillwash Material
The hillwash is generally composed of 32.8% sand, 52.2 % silt, 11% clay, with little or no gravel.
The material classifies as CL: Sandy Lean Clay according to the A.S.T.M. standard on the United Soil Classification system.
The material exhibits is low plasticity, with a liquid limit of 22 %, a plasticity index of 8, a weighted plasticity index of 6.6, and a linear shrinkage of up to 4.5 %.
Mechanical behaviour
• The material is not deemed to be potentially expansive.
• The material is potentially moderately collapsible / compressible with a calculated differential settlement of up to 18 mm.
• The material was not tested for dispersivity, but is considered to be potentially moderately to highly dispersive.
• The material has an A-4 subgrade rating according to AASHTO, classifying as fair for use as subgrade.
The material has a maximum dry density of 2003 kg/m3 and an optimum moisture content of 9.6%. The CBR of the material increases slightly with compaction from 9 at 90% MOD AASHTO to 13 at 95% MOD AASHTO and 19 at 100% MOD AASHTO. The swell of the material is up to 0.6 %. The material classifies as G9 according to TRH14 guidelines
3.3.2 Ferruginised Residual Siltstone Material
The Ferruginised Residual Siltstone material is generally composed of 40.3-51% sand, 28.7-41.9 % silt, 7-20% clay, and up to 9% gravel.
The material classifies as SC: Clayey sand according to the A.S.T.M. standard on the United Soil Classification system.
The fines fraction of the material is medium plastic, with a liquid limit of 29-49 %, a plasticity index of 11-23, a weighted plasticity index of 6.6-12.2, and a linear shrinkage of up to 11.5 %.
Mechanical behaviour
• The material is deemed to be potentially slightly expansive with a calculated heave of up to 28mm.
• The material is potentially moderately collapsible / compressible with a calculated differential settlement of up to 47.5 mm.
• The material was not tested for dispersivity, but is considered to be potentially moderately to highly dispersive.
• The material has a A-7-5 subgrade rating according to AASHTO, classifying as poor for use as subgrade.
The material has a maximum dry density of 1887 kg/m3 and an optimum moisture content of 14.8%. The CBR of the material increases slightly with compaction from 7 at 90% MOD AASHTO to 12 at 95% MOD AASHTO and 19 at 100% MOD AASHTO. The swell of the material is up to 0.3 %. The material classifies as G9 according to TRH14 guidelines.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
9
3.3.3 Siltstone Bedrock Material
The Siltstone Bedrock material is generally composed of 21.3-59% sand, 20.9-39.7 % silt, 11-17% clay, and up to 22% gravel.
The material classifies as SC: Clayey sand and CL: Gravelly Lean Clay with sand according to the A.S.T.M. standard on the United Soil Classification system.
The fines fraction of the material is medium plastic, with a liquid limit of 33-34%, a plasticity index of 16, a weighted plasticity index of 5.8-9.6, and a linear shrinkage of up to 7.5 %.
Mechanical behaviour
• The material is not deemed to be potentially expansive.
• The material is potentially moderately collapsible / compressible with a calculated differential settlement of up to 27.5 mm.
• The material was not tested for dispersivity, but is considered to be potentially moderately to highly dispersive.
• The material has a A-2-5 subgrade rating according to AASHTO, classifying as good for use as subgrade.
Figure 3: Distribution of test pits excavated over the project area (Google Earth with elevation
profile)
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
10
3.4 Soil Permeability
A total of 3 Double Ring Infiltrometer permeability tests were conducted within the Ferruginised Residual Siltstone (2 tests) and hillwash (1 tests). Permeability test results are summarised in Table 1 below with permeability data and graphs attached in Appendix A for reference.
Table 1: Double Ring Infiltrometer Test – Permeability Data
The measured soil permeabilities of both the transported and Weathered Siltstone materials are generally slightly permeable. The transported and residual soil material of the Harding waste site at DRIT TP1 and TP3 has the most favourable soil permeability for landfill site purposes resulting in the lowest calculated daily flow rate of all three sites.
Assuming a SWL of 5 mbgl follows the topography, the following scenarios were calculated to determine the number of days for surface water to reach the SWL if there is no confining layers, no evaporation, a homogeneous soil profile up to the SWL and no surface runoff. The formula used is as follows: 5.0 m / Calculated Daily Flow Rate = Days for seepage water to reach the SWL.
DRIT TP1 – Ferruginised Residual Siltstone = 52.63 days
DRIT TP2 - Ferruginised Residual Siltstone = 30.49 days
DRIT TP3 - Hillwash = 52.63 days
The assumption is made that it will take any seepage water between 30 and 53 days to reach the SWL.
Conclusion:
Soil permeabilities at the Harding waste site render it suitable for usage as cover material. Shallow soil depths could be a limiting factor should large volumes need to be sourced on site. Perched groundwater conditions do occur over the project area especially during the rainy season when groundwater recharge is at a maximum. Lining of the trenches is recommended to prevent groundwater contamination where perched groundwater occurs and jointing is prominent. Zones where perched groundwater conditions can be expected are delineated in Map 4 as part of this report.
Number Depth (mbgl) Material
DRIT TP 1 0.2 Ferr Res Siltstone 1.10E-04 0.095 Slightly Permeable
DRIT TP 2 0.8 Ferr Res Siltstone 1.90E-04 0.164 Slightly Permeable
DRIT TP 3 0.1 Hillwash 1.10E-04 0.095 Slightly Permeable
DRIT Test InformationMEASURED
PERMEABILITY
(cm/sec)
CALCULATED
DAILY FLOW
RATE (m) COMMENTS
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
11
3.5 Position in respect of domestic water supply
A hydrocensus of the existing site and its surroundings was conducted during site investigations. From information collected at Harding municipality, the town used to be serviced by septic tanks. A number of privately owned boreholes are located in the town. Two geosites were identified in close proximity to the project area as indicated in Table 2.
A borehole (Neil Camp 1) is located approximately 550m downstream and north of the landfill boundary and another borehole (MM 1) identified 1170 m south of the landfill boundary within the town itself. Both were identified for sampling. The borehole (Neil Camp 1) is equipped and is used by a commercial farmer for drinking and domestic water purposes as it is the only available water. The water level of this borehole was measured to be 2.55 mbgl. Dark brown precipitation was noted on the water tanks to which the borehole pumps to storage tanks as indicated in Photo 3.
The borehole (MM 1) located in the town was the only borehole sampled south of the project area. The SWL of borehole MM 1 could not be measured during the investigation due to pump obstruction not allowing access for measuring equipment. Although it is reported that numerous other privately owned boreholes occur within the town at private plots, this borehole was selected for monitoring due to it being the closest borehole upstream of the waste site.
Photo 3: Farm borehole used for drinking water purposes.
Several non-perennial seepage zones were identified to the north and east of the landfill site as indicated in Map 1. At the time of site investigation, the seeps did not have water emanating from it although dampness was noted at some. It is assumed that seeps are associated with seasonal perched groundwater in the area which might be controlled by the top and bottom contacts of the dolerite sheet where it outcrops below the site.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
12
Hydrocensus data is summarised in Table 2 for reference and local geosite localities are indicated in Map 1 to 3. A water sample (Neil Camp 1) was taken from the borehole indicated in Photo 2 located directly north of the landfill site. This sample was taken to get an indication of the general downstream groundwater quality.
In order to determine the water quality upstream of the landfill site and to identify other sources of pollution a water sample was taken from the borehole MM1 located in the town of Harding.
Photo 4: Water tanks with dark brown mineral precipitation.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
13
Table 2: Summarised Hydrocensus Data
Table 3: Detailed Processed Soil Test Results
Site type Description Latitude Longitude Altitude (mamsl)
Distance from
Landfill (m)
Static Water
Level (mbgl)
Sample
Taken
Borehole Neil Camp 1 -30.5621 29.91467 819 550 2.55 Yes
Borehole MM 1 -30.5723 29.89448 847 1170 - Yes
Stream Stream Sample -30.5612 29.91028 808 720 - Yes
HARDING HYDROCENSUS AND SAMPLING TABLE
GRAD ING ANALYSES ATTERBERG LIM ITS LS POTENT IALLY ADV ERSE GEOTECHN ICAL CHARACTERIST ICS
Number Dept h Orig in Gravel Sand Silt C lay LL PI PI ' % A .S.T .M . TRH 14 Expansiveness Dispersivit y
(m - m) % % % % %
pH
Conduct iv
it y
(mS/ m)
% Wat er
Sat urat ion
HTP 1/1 0.80 - 1.30 Siltstone Bedrock 22 21.3 39.7 17 34 16 9.6 7.0 - - -CL: Gravelly Lean Clay with
Sand- Low Risk Medium Risk - Medium to High Risk
HTP 3/1 0.10 - 0.50 Hillwash 4 32.8 52.2 11 22 8 6.6 4.5 - - - CL: Sandy Lean Clay G9 Low Risk High Risk - Medium to High Risk
HTP 3/2 0.70 - 2.30 Ferruginised Residual Siltstone 11 40.3 28.7 20 49 23 12.2 11.5 - - - SC: Clayey Sand G9 Medium Risk Medium Risk - Medium to High Risk
HTP 5/1 0.30 - 0.50 Slight ly Ferruginised Residual Siltstone 0 51.1 41.9 7 29 11 6.6 5.5 - - - SC: Clayey Sand - Low Risk Medium Risk - Medium to High Risk
HTP 5/2 0.70 - 1.20 Siltstone Bedrock 9 59.1 20.9 11 33 16 5.8 7.5 - - - SC: Clayey Sand - Low Risk Medium Risk - Medium to High Risk
DETAILED PROCESSED SOIL TEST RESULTS - GENV HARDING LANDFILL SITE INVESTIGATION
SOIl CHEM ISTRYCorrosivenes
s
( Conduct ivit
y)
M ATERIALS CLASSIF ICAT IONSAM PLE INFORM ATION
Co llapse /
Compressib il i t y
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
14
3.6 Geophysical profiling
From geological maps and site mapping, a prominent dolerite sheet was found to outcrop approximately 500m south-east of the eastern boundary of the waste site. Remote sensing and geophysical geo-magnetic profiling has confirmed the presence of this dolerite sheet which is expected to extend towards the west below the waste facility. This dolerite sheet is expected to occur approximately 40m below the waste site and localised seeps were noted, possibly associated with the upper contact of the sheet. Occurrences of these seeps are indicated in Map 1 and 3.
• Geophysical profile H1 was conducted in a north to south direction on the southern boundary of the landfill site. The data of profile H1 is indicative of a dolerite sill from start to end of the profile with a total length of 300m
• Profile H2 was conducted in a west to east direction for a total of 860m along the local airport runway to determine if there are any dolerite dykes or faults striking through the landfill site in a north south direction. The profile did not indicate the presence of any dolerite dykes, only the presence of a dolerite sill throughout the profile.
• Profile H3 was conducted on the north western boundary of the landfill site with a length of 340m to determine the possibility of a structure striking through the drainage visible from 135m to 215m on the profile. The data does indicate an anomaly between 135m and 215m which could be interpreted as a dolerite dyke or fault. This structure is the most probable cause of the drainage having developed at this locality and should be taken into account for future monitoring purposes.
• The last profile H4 was conducted north of the landfill site with a length of 250m. The data from this profile indicated the presence of a dolerite sill throughout the profile.
It is imperative that monitoring boreholes be drilled upstream and downstream of the proposed waste site directly into the dolerite sheet. Positions of proposed monitoring boreholes are indicated in Map 3.
The observation is that non-perennial seeps occur associated with the dolerite sheet and that groundwater movement takes place along this sheet.
Results from the geophysical surveys are attached in Appendix C for reference.
Conclusion:
Groundwater flow velocities will be enhanced along joints and seams related to the underlying dolerite sill and its top and bottom contact with the siltstone, resulting in possible faster transport of contaminants or pollutants along these joints and seams in a westerly and northerly direction.. Flow velocities will also increase in areas where there are possible fault zones in the dolerite sheet. It is highly recommended that monitoring boreholes be drilled in the positions specified in Map 3 of the waste site in order to determine the presence of pollutants.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
15
Figure 4: Geophysical profiles at Harding waste site.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
16
3.7 Site Hydrogeology
The Harding landfill site is located at an elevation of approximately 860 mamsl on the northern slope of a ridge. The whole site is underlain by Ecca shale/mudstone/siltstone which dips approximately 3 degrees to the west with a dolerite sheet underlying these formations with approximately the same orientation. Dendritic precipitation is visible in the well jointed Ecca formation. Site hydrogeology is therefore dictated by the horizontally orientated sedimentary layers with very low vertical hydraulic conductivities expected in the range of 0.095 m/d to 0.164 m/d. The site overlays a dolerite sheet and it is expected for this dolerite sheet’s top contact to occur at approximately 30m-40m below the waste site itself.
Groundwater movement is expected to mimic the topography due to no groundwater abstraction taking place in the direct vicinity of the site. Groundwater movement is further influenced by prominent WNW trending joints that occur in siltstones noted on the site itself. Groundwater at the waste site is therefore expected to flow in a general north-westerly direction. A conceptual model was constructed as indicated in Figure 6 to illustrate the expected depth to static water level below the waste site as well as it’s relation to the nearby rivers, the downstream borehole and the dolerite sheet.
The waste site is located approximately 700 m north of the Mzimkhulwana river and 630 m south of the Mzimkhulwana river.
Figure 5: Harding waste site elevation profile.
Conclusion:
Groundwater at the Harding waste site is expected to flow in a north-westerly direction. Flow will be influenced by the dip angle of sedimentary rocks and the dolerite sheet that occurs approximately 32 m below the site as well as WNW trending joints and fractures noted in the siltstone on site Joints and fractures could possibly increase groundwater flow velocities. The static groundwater level is expected to be approximately 9 m below surface at the waste site facility with seasonal perched water expected during the rainy season. Excavation beyond 4m depths on site will bring contaminants within 5m of the expected static water level which is unacceptable. Waste sells will need to be sealed should this be the case. A monitoring borehole will have to be drilled as a matter of urgency to confirm the exact depth to groundwater on site.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
17
Should any dolerite material be intersected during excavation on site, it will be an indication that the underlying sheet is irregular in form or possibly have secondary dykes associated with it that could not be identified through site mapping or geophysical surveys. Precaution with then have to be taken by sealing such waste sells as the dolerite contacts are deemed to be a preferential flow path which could link pollutants to downstream groundwater users.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
18
Figure 6: Harding waste site conceptual model (not to scale).
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
19
3.8 Aquifer Testing
Aquifer testing was conducted on the existing borehole (Neil Camp 1) during the second site visit. The existing pump in the borehole was used for the test while the water level response was monitored within the borehole. The borehole was measured to be 55m deep and the SWL was 2.55 mbgl before the pump was switched on.
A constant discharge test was conducted at 0.40 l/s which resulted in a total drawdown of 10.1 m over a period of 360 minutes after which the pump was switched off to allow recovery. The borehole recovered 96.42% over a period of 90 minutes.
The drawdown and recovery curves of the test data indicated an average transmissivity of 1.0 m2/d.
Conclusion:
The low T value can be ascribed to small fractures in the formation where low flow velocities occur. The hydraulic conductivity (K) is also very low due to the correlation between T and K where:
K (m/d) = T (m2/d) / Aquifer thickness (m).
In the case of the downstream borehole Neil Camp 1 it can be assumed that the aquifer is approximately 52.45 m thick which will result in a K value of 0.02 m/d. This indicated that contaminants will travel at 0.02 m/d through the aquifer where it is homogeneous. More prominent fractures in the geological formation as those noted on site can increase the T and K values. Should pollutants therefore reach the aquifer, it will take more than 70 years to reach the nearest groundwater user. This period will however decrease significantly should fractures or dolerite contacts be intersected by waste cell construction. It is concluded that expected groundwater flow velocities through the siltstone that occurs on site is sufficiently low to warrant the operation of a well-managed waste facility, given the precautions stated in this report are adhered to.
Aquifer testing results are attached in Appendix D for reference.
3.9 Water chemistry
Water samples were taken from an existing downstream borehole (Neil Camp 1), a stream (Stream Sample) leading to the downstream dam north of the project area and a borehole (MM1) located in the town of Harding to determine the general groundwater quality of the area.
The water from the borehole (Neil Camp 1) classifies as DWAF Drinking Water Class 4 (Completely Unacceptable water quality) due to a Total and Faecal Coliforms count of 1000 and 1200 respectively and the water from this borehole also classifies as DWAF Drinking Water Class 3 (Poor water quality) due to a Manganese concentration of 1.4 mg/l.
The water sample taken from the stream (Stream Sample) classifies as DWAF Drinking Water Class 3 (Poor water quality) due to a Total Coliforms count of 400 and 21.8 Turbidity units. The Total Coliforms could be the result of occasional waste water spillage or overflows into the stream from the waste water treatment works that occurs 2.8 km west of the dam and sampling point.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
20
Water from the borehole (MM 1) located in the town of Harding classifies as DWAF Drinking Water Class 1 (Good water quality) with elevated concentrations of Chloride, Iron, Magnesium and Electrical Conductivity.
Chemical water analyses results are attached in Appendix E for reference.
Conclusion:
The occurrence of elevated Manganese concentrations (1.4 mg/l) in the water from the Neil Camp 1 borehole is expected to originate from manganese rich dendrites in the form of the mineral pyrolusite, which is occasionally found in Ecca formations. Such precipitates were noted in rock exposures on site and is most probably the cause of brown to black staining noted on water tanks into which this borehole discharges. The water from this borehole has been classified as DWAF Class 4 due to Total and Faecal Coliforms counts, 1000 and 1200 respectively, resulting in the water having unacceptable quality. Elevated faecal concentrations are most likely due to a nearby septic tank or the cattle kraals and activity in direct vicinity of the borehole. It is likely that this borehole is also not constructed with sufficient sanitary seals to protect it from pollutants originating from surface.
3.10 Site drainage
The existing landfill site is located in the Quaternary Catchment T52K within the MVOTI to UMZIMKULU water management area. The waste site drains by means of surface flow primarily in a northern and western direction to the Mzimkhulwana River which drains in a regional southern direction to the Indian Ocean. Slope angles are moderate to low as the site is located on a hillcrest to side slope as can be seen in the conceptual model – Figure 6.
The existing waste water treatment works is located 2.15 km north west of the landfill site as indicated in Map 1 and 3. If spillage occurs at the WWTW, it can reach the Mzimkhulwana river which will result in the dam north and downstream of the landfill site to be contaminated with Faecal and Total Coliforms.
Harding town used to be serviced by septic tank systems which could have caused localised groundwater contamination in the town. The results of the borehole MM1 sampled in town did however not have any Coliform contamination which predicts that there is a positive response in the aquifer due to the septic tank-eradication programme that the municipality is busy with.
Conclusion:
The landfill site is well drained and the site drainage conditions are suitable to be used as landfill site as the low slope angles are preferred for the construction of landfill sites depending on the type of landfill to be used. It is recommended that an efficient surface run-off control system be implemented to prevent excessive run-off of water by creating soil berms. Seasonal shallow groundwater conditions can be expected towards the central parts of the site due to seasonal groundwater seepage occurring in the area as indicated in Map 4.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
21
3.11 Site topography
The general calculated slope of the landfill site is derived from the 20m contours of the topographical map and Google Earth Pro. The landfill site is located on the northern sideslope of the hill on which the local airport runway is located as seen in Map 1.
The landfill site has an average slope angle of 3.48°, dipping to the north and west as indicated in Figure 6.
Conclusion:
The landfill site has a low general slope of 3.48°. The site topography is suitable for the use of a landfill site due to the low slope angle and topographical setting.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
22
4 SUMMARY
Based on the results and the conclusions of the geohydrological and engineering geological investigation, the following summary and recommendations are made for the existing landfill site at Harding Town:
• A multi-disciplinary geohydrological and engineering geological investigation was carried out at the existing Harding landfill site for the further use and possible expansion of the waste facility for the town of Harding in the Umuziwabantu Local Municipality of the KwaZulu Natal Province.
• Harding existing waste site is located 600m east of Harding Town next to the N2 road in the Umuziwabantu Local Municipality of the KwaZulu Natal Province. The regional locality of the site is indicated in Figure 1.
• According to the geological map 3028 KOKSTAD the project area is underlain by dark-grey shale, medium-grained buff sandstone, siltstone and mudstone of the Ecca Group that is part of the Karoo Supergroup sequence of rocks. The regional geology is indicated in Map 2.
• The siltstone has a general dip of 3 degrees to the west with prominent sub-vertical WNW trending joints noted in places where the rock is exposed on site, as can be seen in Photo 1. These joints could be associated with the dolerite sheet intrusion below the site causing fractures and joints in the overlying sedimentary formations. The brown precipitation visible in Photo 1 is an indication of groundwater flow along these joints and fractures. These vertical joints and fractures have the potential to increase groundwater flow velocities as well as influence groundwater flow directions. Quaternary deposits (Alluvium) occur to the north of the landfill site associated with the Mzimkhulwana river.
• The geological map does not indicate the presence of any water-soluble rocks or sediments within the project area. Soluble rocks include dolomite and limestone and are prone to the formation of sinkholes and subsidence. These conditions are therefore not expected in the project area
• The hydrogeological map 2928 DURBAN describes the project area as being underlain by predominantly argillaceous rocks (shale, carbonaceous shale, mudstone and siltstone) with groundwater generally located intergranular and in fractured zones with expected borehole yields varying from 0.5 to 2.0 l/s at successful boreholes and water quality characterised by an EC of approximately 0-70 mS/m.
• A site reconnaissance survey of the existing site was conducted from 24 to 25 April 2012 during which the general geology, geohydrology and engineering geology of the site was assessed, and further site investigation planned.
• A total of 5 disturbed soil samples, 2 bulk disturbed samples and 3 undisturbed samples were taken for detailed laboratory analysis as part of the investigation. The samples were submitted to an accredited materials laboratory in East London for detailed analysis on the 28th of May 2012.
• The project area is generally covered by a layer of hillwash material that is composed of sandy silt to sandy clay that exhibits a firm consistency and a micro-shattered soil structure. The material extends from surface to a depth between 0.20 to 0.60 mbgl (mean 0.33 mbgl).
• A total of 3 Double Ring Infiltrometer permeability tests were conducted within the Ferruginised Residual Siltstone (2 tests) and hillwash (1 tests). Permeability test results are summarised in Table 1
• The measured soil permeabilities of both the transported and Weathered Siltstone materials are generally slightly permeable. The transported and residual soil material of the Harding waste site at DRIT TP1 and TP3 has the most favourable soil permeability for landfill site purposes resulting in the lowest calculated daily flow rate of all three sites.
• A hydrocensus of the existing site and its surroundings was conducted during site investigations. From
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
23
information collected at Harding municipality, the town used to be serviced by septic tanks. A number of boreholes are located in the town. Two geosites were identified in close proximity to the project area as indicated in Table 2. A borehole (Neil Camp 1) is located approximately 550m downstream and north of the landfill boundary and another borehole (MM 1) identified 1170 m south of the landfill boundary within the town itself. Both were identified for sampling. The borehole (Neil Camp 1) is equipped and is used by a commercial farmer for drinking and domestic water purposes as it is the only available water. The water level of this borehole was measured to be 2.55 mbgl. Dark brown precipitation was noted on the water tanks to which the borehole pumps to storage tanks as indicated in Photo 3.
The borehole (MM 1) located in the town was the only borehole sampled south of the project area. The SWL of borehole MM 1 could not be measured during the investigation due to pump obstruction not allowing access for measuring equipment. Although it is reported that numerous other privately owned boreholes occur within the town at private plots, this borehole was selected for monitoring due to it being the closest borehole upstream of the waste site.
• From geological maps and site mapping, a prominent dolerite sheet was found to outcrop approximately 500m south-east of the eastern boundary of the waste site. Remote sensing and geophysical geo-magnetic profiling has confirmed the presence of this dolerite sheet which is expected to extend towards the west below the waste facility. This dolerite sheet is expected to occur approximately 40m below the waste site and localised seeps were noted, possibly associated with the upper contact of the sheet. Occurrences of these seeps are indicated in Map 1 and 3. Geophysical profile H1 was conducted in a north to south direction on the southern boundary of the landfill site. The data of profile H1 is indicative of a dolerite sill from start to end of the profile with a total length of 300m. Profile H2 was conducted in a west to east direction for a total of 860m along the local airport runway to determine if there are any dolerite dykes or faults striking through the landfill site in a north south direction. The profile did not indicate the presence of any dolerite dykes, only the presence of a dolerite sill throughout the profile. Profile H3 was conducted on the north western boundary of the landfill site with a length of 340m to determine the possibility of a structure striking through the drainage visible from 135m to 215m on the profile. The data does indicate an anomaly between 135m and 215m which could be interpreted as a dolerite dyke or fault. This structure is the most probable cause of the drainage having developed at this locality and should be taken into account for future monitoring purposes. The last profile H4 was conducted north of the landfill site with a length of 250m. The data from this profile indicated the presence of a dolerite sill throughout the profile.
• The Harding landfill site is located at an elevation of approximately 860 mamsl on the northern slope of a ridge. The whole site is underlain by Ecca shale/mudstone/siltstone which dips approximately 3 degrees to the west with a dolerite sheet underlying these formations with approximately the same orientation. Dendritic precipitation is visible in the well jointed Ecca formation. Site hydrogeology is therefore dictated by the horizontally orientated sedimentary layers with very low vertical hydraulic conductivities expected in the range of 0.095 m/d to 0.164 m/d. The site overlays a dolerite sheet and it is expected for this dolerite sheet’s top contact to occur at approximately 30m-40m below the waste site itself. Groundwater movement is expected to mimic the topography due to no groundwater abstraction taking place in the direct vicinity of the site. Groundwater movement is further influenced by prominent WNW trending joints that occur in siltstones noted on the site itself. Groundwater at the waste site is therefore expected to flow in a general north-westerly direction. A conceptual model was constructed as indicated in Figure 6 to illustrate the expected depth to static water level below the waste site as well as it’s relation to the nearby rivers, the downstream borehole and the dolerite sheet. The waste site is located approximately 700 m north of the Mzimkhulwana river and 630 m south of the Mzimkhulwana river.
• Aquifer testing was conducted on the existing borehole (Neil Camp 1) during the second site visit. The existing pump in the borehole was used for the test while the water level response was monitored within the borehole. The borehole was measured to be 55m deep and the SWL was 2.55 mbgl before the
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
24
pump was switched on. A constant discharge test was conducted at 0.40 l/s which resulted in a total drawdown of 10.1 m over a period of 360 minutes after which the pump was switched off to allow recovery. The borehole recovered 96.42% over a period of 90 minutes. The drawdown and recovery curves of the test data indicated an average transmissivity of 1.0 m2/d.
• In the case of the downstream borehole Neil Camp 1 it can be assumed that the aquifer is approximately 52.45 m thick which will result in a K value of 0.02 m/d. This indicated that contaminants will travel at 0.02 m/d through the aquifer where it is homogeneous. More prominent fractures in the geological formation as those noted on site can increase the T and K values. Should pollutants therefore reach the aquifer, it will take more than 70 years to reach the nearest groundwater user. This period will however decrease significantly should fractures or dolerite contacts be intersected by waste cell construction. It is concluded that expected groundwater flow velocities through the siltstone that occurs on site is sufficiently low to warrant the operation of a well-managed waste facility, given the precautions stated in this report are adhered to.
• The occurrence of elevated Manganese concentrations (1.4 mg/l) in the water from the Neil Camp 1 borehole is expected to originate from manganese rich dendrites in the form of the mineral pyrolusite, which is occasionally found in Ecca formations. Such precipitates were noted in rock exposures on site and is most probably the cause of brown to black staining noted on water tanks into which this borehole discharges. The water from this borehole has been classified as DWAF Class 4 due to Total and Faecal Coliforms counts, 1000 and 1200 respectively, resulting in the water having unacceptable quality. Elevated faecal concentrations are most likely due to a nearby septic tank or the cattle kraals and activity in direct vicinity of the borehole. It is likely that this borehole is also not constructed with sufficient sanitary seals to protect it from pollutants originating from surface.
• The existing landfill site is located in the Quaternary Catchment T52K within the MVOTI to UMZIMKULU water management area. The waste site drains by means of surface flow primarily in a northern and western direction to the Mzimkhulwana River which drains in a regional southern direction to the Indian Ocean. Slope angles are moderate to low as the site is located on a hillcrest to side slope as can be seen in the conceptual model – Figure 6. The existing waste water treatment works is located 2.15 km north west of the landfill site as indicated in Map 1 and 3. If spillage occurs at the WWTW, it can reach the Mzimkhulwana river which will result in the dam north and downstream of the landfill site to be contaminated with Faecal and Total Coliforms. Harding town used to be serviced by septic tank systems which could have caused localised groundwater contamination in the town. The results of the borehole MM1 sampled in town did however not have any Coliform contamination which predicts that there is a positive response in the aquifer due to the septic tank-eradication programme that the municipality is busy with.
• The landfill site has a low general slope of 3.48°. The site topography is suitable for the use of a landfill site due to the low slope angle and topographical setting.
• Based on available information it is expected that mechanical excavation will be possible to depths of 3m in weathered siltstone.
• The siltstone bedrock classifies as G9 material according to the TRH14 guidelines and is suitable for use during construction. Shallow soil depths could be a limiting factor should large volumes need to be sourced on site.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
25
5 RECOMMENDATIONS
• Based on hydrogeological findings, the further usage of the Harding Waste Facility can only be considered if the following recommendations are strictly adhered to:
• A site characterisation borehole should be drilled associated with the structure that was noted from geophysical surveys along the north-western boundary of the site as a matter of urgency. This borehole will serve to confirm the depth to static water level as well as possible increased flow velocities associated with the structure which occurs here. This borehole should be tested as well.
• At least 2 additional up- and downstream monitoring boreholes should be drilled as part of the implementation of the future monitoring programme.
• Waste cells constructed in the delineated increased perched groundwater zone (MAP 4) should be sealed if perched groundwater is noted during excavation.
• Excavation beyond 4m depths on site will bring contaminants within 5m of the expected static water level which is unacceptable. Waste sells will need to be sealed should this be the case. This will only be possible to quantify once the recommended immediate borehole is drilled.
• Should any dolerite material be intersected during excavation on site, it will be an indication that the underlying sheet is irregular in form or possibly have secondary dykes associated with it that could not be identified through site mapping or geophysical surveys. Precaution with then have to be taken by sealing such waste sells as the dolerite contacts are deemed to be a preferential flow path which could link pollutants to downstream groundwater users and surface water bodies.
• Non-perennial seeps occurring east and north of the site should be included in the monitoring protocol – specifically in the rainy season when perched groundwater conditions and seepage is expected. These seeps should be fenced off to prevent any use of the water during the rainy season.
• Surface water sampling downstream of the waste facility should be included in the monitoring protocol.
• Historically used full waste cells should all be re-visited to ensure that efficient storm water control measures are in place to prevent the ingress of any surface water.
• It is highly recommended that a community awareness programme be conducted to inform the local community about the health and pollution risks associated with landfill sites.
• Elevated faecal concentrations noted at the privately owned borehole downstream of the waste facility is most likely due to a nearby septic tank or the cattle kraals and activity in direct vicinity of the borehole. It should be recommended to the farmer not to use this borehole unless water is treated or reconstructed to protect it from pollutants originating from surface around the borehole.
• Any un-monitored increased abstraction of groundwater by the possible future drilling of boreholes within a 1km radius of the waste site can increase flow gradients and velocities and will have to be discouraged should it be considered by the municipality or land users.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
26
6 REFERENCES
• Second edition of the South African Water Quality Guidelines (DWAF, 1996) and Health Guidelines: Drinking Water Quality (Department of Health, 1995)
• Engineering Geology of Southern Africa, Vol. 3. Building Publications, Pretoria. BRINK, A B A, 1979.
• Soil Mechanics, Sixth Edition. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Dundee UK. CRAIG RF, 1997.
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
27
7 PROJECT MAPS
MAP 1: Topographical Map
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
28
MAP 2: Geological Map
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
29
MAP 3: Ortho Map
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
30
MAP 4: Expected Perched Groundwater Map
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
31
APPENDIX A
Double ring infiltrometer test data
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
32
PROJECT:
Inner Ring Dia.: 30 cm
Ring Height: 20 cm
Test No.:
Test Depth:
Material:
Date:
Time (sec) Cum. Infilt
0 0.0
15 -0.1
30 -0.5
45 -0.6
60 -0.6 1 min
90 -0.7
120 -0.7 2 min
150 -0.8
180 -1.0 3 min
210 -1.0
240 -1.2 4 min
270 -1.3
300 -1.3 5 min
360 -1.4 6 min
420 -1.5 7 min
480 -1.6 8 min
540 -1.8 9 min
600 -2.0 10 min
900 -2.2 15 min
1200 -2.9 2 0 min
1500 -3.0 2 5 min
1800 -3.1 3 0 min
2700 -3.3 4 5 min
3600 -3.6 1 HOUR
4500 -4.0 1 hr 15 min
5400 -4.1 1 hr 3 0 min
6300 -4.2 1 hr 4 5 min
7200 -4.3 2 HOURS
8100 2 hr 15 min
9000 2 hr 3 0 min
9900 2 hr 4 5 min
10800 3 HOURS
h1 = 4.0 init ial height ( cm)
h2 = 4.3 f inal height ( cm)
���� t = 2700 t ime d if f erence ( sec)
km = 1.1E-04 cm.s-1
Ferr Res Siltstone
DOUBLE-RING INFILTROMETER TEST
TP 1
0.2 mbgl
HARDING LANDFILL SITE INVESTIGATION
2012/05/17
-5.0
-4.0
-3.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
0 60
0
12
00
18
00
24
00
30
00
36
00
42
00
48
00
54
00
60
00
66
00
72
00
78
00
84
00
90
00
96
00
10
20
0
10
80
0
CU
MU
LA
TIV
E IN
FIL
TR
AT
ION
(c
m)
TIME (seconds)
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
33
PROJECT:
Inner Ring Dia.: 30 cm
Ring Height: 20 cm
Test No.:
Test Depth:
Material:
Date:
Time (sec) Cum. Infilt
0 0.0
15 0.0
30 0.0
45 0.0
60 0.0 1 min
90 0.0
120 -0.1 2 min
150 -0.1
180 -0.1 3 min
210 -0.1
240 -0.2 4 min
270 -0.2
300 -0.2 5 min
360 -0.2 6 min
420 -0.2 7 min
480 -0.2 8 min
540 -0.2 9 min
600 -0.3 10 min
900 -0.3 15 min
1200 -0.5 2 0 min
1500 -0.6 2 5 min
1800 -0.6 3 0 min
2700 -0.6 4 5 min
3600 -0.7 1 HOUR
4500 -0.8 1 hr 15 min
5400 -1.0 1 hr 3 0 min
6300 -1.1 1 hr 4 5 min
7200 -1.3 2 HOURS
8100 2 hr 15 min
9000 2 hr 3 0 min
9900 2 hr 4 5 min
10800 3 HOURS
h1 = 0.8 init ial height ( cm)
h2 = 1.3 f inal height ( cm)
���� t = 2700 t ime d if f erence ( sec)
km = 1.9E-04 cm.s-1
DOUBLE-RING INFILTROMETER TESTHARDING LANDFILL SITE INVESTIGATION
TP 2
0.8 mbgl
Ferr Res Siltstone
2012/05/17
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
0 60
0
12
00
18
00
24
00
30
00
36
00
42
00
48
00
54
00
60
00
66
00
72
00
78
00
84
00
90
00
96
00
CU
MU
LA
TIV
E IN
FIL
TR
AT
ION
(c
m)
TIME (seconds)
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
34
PROJECT:
Inner Ring Dia.: 30 cm
Ring Height: 20 cm
Test No.:
Test Depth:
Material:
Date:
Time (sec) Cum. Infilt
0 0.0
15 0.0
30 -0.1
45 -0.1
60 -0.1 1 min
90 -0.2
120 -0.2 2 min
150 -0.2
180 -0.2 3 min
210 -0.2
240 -0.2 4 min
270 -0.2
300 -0.2 5 min
360 -0.3 6 min
420 -0.4 7 min
480 -0.4 8 min
540 -0.4 9 min
600 -0.4 10 min
900 -0.5 15 min
1200 -0.5 2 0 min
1500 -0.5 2 5 min
1800 -0.6 3 0 min
2700 -0.9 4 5 min
3600 -1.1 1 HOUR
4500 -1.2 1 hr 15 min
5400 -1.4 1 hr 3 0 min
6300 -1.5 1 hr 4 5 min
7200 -1.6 2 HOURS
8100 2 hr 15 min
9000 2 hr 3 0 min
9900 2 hr 4 5 min
10800 3 HOURS
h1 = 1.4 init ial height ( cm)
h2 = 1.6 f inal height ( cm)
���� t = 1800 t ime d if f erence ( sec)
km = 1.1E-04 cm.s-1
DOUBLE-RING INFILTROMETER TESTHARDING LANDFILL SITE INVESTIGATION
TP 3
0.1 mbgl
Hillwash
2012/05/17
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
0 60
0
12
00
18
00
24
00
30
00
36
00
42
00
48
00
54
00
60
00
66
00
72
00
78
00
84
00
90
00
96
00
CU
MU
LA
TIV
E IN
FIL
TR
AT
ION
(c
m)
TIME (seconds)
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
35
APPENDIX B
Test Pit Logs
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
36
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
37
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
38
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
39
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
40
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
41
APPENDIX C
Geophysical survey data
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
42
115
140
165
190
215
27820
27840
27860
27880
27900
27920
27940
27960
27980
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
Resistivity (Ohm/m)
Magnetic (nanotesla)
Station number (m)
HARDING LANDFILL SITE INVESTIGATIONProfile H 1
Magnetic & Resistivity Profiling (Wenner Configuration)
MAGNETIC RESISTIVITY
115
140
165
190
215
27750
27800
27850
27900
27950
28000
28050
28100
0
20
40
70
110
150
190
230
270
310
350
390
430
470
510
550
590
630
670
710
750
790
830
Resistivity (Ohm/m)
Magnetic (nanotesla)
Station number (m)
HARDING LANDFILL SITE INVESTIGATIONProfile H 2
Magnetic & Resistivity Profiling (Wenner Configuration)
MAGNETIC RESISTIVITY
115
140
165
190
215
27750
27800
27850
27900
27950
28000
28050
28100
28150
28200
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
Resistivity (Ohm/m)
Magnetic (nanotesla)
Station number (m)
HARDING LANDFILL SITE INVESTIGATIONProfile H 3
Magnetic & Resistivity Profiling (Wenner Configuration)
MAGNETIC RESISTIVITY
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
43
115
140
165
190
215
27850
27900
27950
28000
28050
28100
28150
28200
0
40
80
120
160
200
240
Resistivity (Ohm/m)
Magnetic (nanotesla)
Station number (m)
HARDING LANDFILL SITE INVESTIGATIONProfile H 4
Magnetic & Resistivity Profiling (Wenner Configuration)
MAGNETIC RESISTIVITY
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
44
APPENDIX D
Aquifer Testing Data
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
45
CONSTANT DISCHARGE TEST AND RECOVERY
BOREHOLE NO. : 0 PROJECT: Harding CLIENT: 0
ALTERNATIVE NO. : 0 SITE NAME: Harding
DEPTH OF PUMP (mbdl): 45.00 PUMP TYPE USED: Electric Submersible OPERATOR: Martin / Gert
INLET DIAMETER (mm): 32 EXISTING EQUIPMENT: 0 CONTRACTOR: Intaba Construction
TEST DATE: 2012/05/03 TEST DATE: 2012/05/03 TOTAL TIME - PUMPED (min): 360 TOTAL TEST TIME (min): 450
STARTED TIME: 7:30 AM COMPLETED TIME: 3:00 PM TOTAL TIME-RECOVERY(min): 90 AVERAGE YIELD (l/s): 0.41
DISCHARGE BOREHOLE OBSERVATION BOREHOLE 1 OBSERVATION BOREHOLE 2 OBSERVATION BOREHOLE 3
CASING HEIGHT (magl): 0.00 No. : No. : No. :
CASING DEPTH (mbdl): 0.00 DATUM LEVEL (magl): DATUM LEVEL (magl): DATUM LEVEL (magl):
CASING ID (mm): 165.00 CASING DEPTH (mbgl): CASING DEPTH (mbgl): CASING DEPTH (mbgl):
BOREHOLE DEPTH (mbgl): 0.00 BOREHOLE DEPTH : BOREHOLE DEPTH : BOREHOLE DEPTH :
WATER LEVEL (mbgl): 2.55 WATER LEVEL: WATER LEVEL: WATER LEVEL:
DATUM LEVEL (magl): 0.00 DISTANCE (m): DISTANCE (m): DISTANCE (m):
Time Drawdown Yield Recovery Time Drawdown Recovery Time Drawdown Recovery Time Drawdown Recovery
(min) (m) (l/s) (m) (min) (m) (m) (min) (m) (m) (min) (m) (m)
1 0.89 0.46 8.80 1 1 1
2 1.40 0.46 8.40 2 2 2
3 1.65 0.46 7.40 3 3 3
5 1.92 0.46 5.79 5 5 5
7 2.15 0.46 4.67 7 7 7
10 2.43 0.46 4.40 10 10 10
15 2.96 0.45 4.20 15 15 15
20 3.45 0.45 3.44 20 20 20
30 4.13 0.44 2.10 30 30 30
40 4.65 0.40 1.15 40 40 40
60 5.65 0.38 0.82 60 60 60
90 6.56 0.37 0.37 90 90 90
120 7.40 0.38 120 120 120
150 8.00 0.35 150 150 150
180 8.53 0.35 180 180 180
210 9.00 0.35 210 210 210
240 10.33 0.35 240 240 240
300 10.00 0.35 300 300 300
360 10.10 0.35 360 360 360
420 420 420 420
480 480 480 480
540 540 540 540
600 600 600 600
720 720 720 720
840 840 840 840
960 960 960 960
1080 1080 1080 1080
1200 1200 1200 1200
1320 1320 1320 1320
1440 1440 1440 1440
1560 1800 1800 1800
1680 2280 2280 2280
1800 2880 2880 2880
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
46
BOREHOLE NUMBER: 0
CALIBRATION TEST AND RECOVERY
Discharge 1: 0.00 Discharge 2: Discharge 3: Discharge 4: Discharge 5: Discharge 6:
Drawdown 1: 0.00
Drawdown 2: 0.00
Drawdown 3: 0.00
Drawdown 4: 0.00
Drawdown 5: 0.00
Drawdown 6: 0.00
Duration 1: 0
Duration 2: 0
Duration 3: 0
Duration 4: 0
Duration 5: 0
Duration 6: 0
Recovery (m): 0.00
Recovery (min): 0
STEPPED DISCHARGE TEST AND RECOVERY
Discharge 1: Discharge 2: Discharge 3: Discharge 4: Discharge 5: Discharge 6:
Drawdown 1: 0.00
Drawdown 2: 0.00
Drawdown 3: 0.00
Drawdown 4: 0.00
Drawdown 5: 0.00
Drawdown 6:
Duration 1: 0
Duration 2: 0
Duration 3: 0
Duration 4: 0
Duration 5: 0
Duration 6: 0
Recovery (m): 0.00
Recovery (min): 0
CONSTANT DISCHARGE TEST AND RECOVERY
TEST INFORMATION
Date tested 03-May-12 Water level (mbgl) 2.55 Depth of pump (mbgl) 45
CD duration 360 CD discharge rate 0.41 CD drawdown 10.33
Available drawdown (m) 42.45 % Recovery after CD 96 % after 90 min
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
1 10 100 1000
TIME (t) IN MINUTES
DRAWDOWN (s) IN M
ETRES
Constant discharge rate
Recovery
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1 100 10000
TIME (t) IN MINUTES
DRAWDOWN (s) IN
METRES
Discharge rate 1
Discharge rate 2
Discharge rate 3
Recovery
Step 2
Step 3
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1 10 100
TIME (t) IN MINUTES
DRAWDOWN (s) IN
METRES Discharge Rate 1
Discharge Rate 2
Recovery
Discharge Rate 3
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
47
APPENDIX E
Water Chemistry data
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
48
Harding Landfill Site
Borehole Id Neil Camp 1
Date Sampled 04-May-12
Drinking water class 4
Sample Number 7401
Class
Viable organisms 0
Faecal coliforms 1000.00 4
Total coliforms 1200.00 4
Electrical Conductivity EC mS / m 84.00 1
Total Dissolved Salts TDS mg / l 438.00 0
pH Value pH 6.90 0
Turbidity NTU 0
Arsenic As mg / l 0.00 0
Cadmium Cd mg / l 0.01 2
Calcium Ca mg / l 58.00 0
Chloride Cl mg / l 131.00 1
Copper Cu mg / l 0
Fluoride F mg / l 0.36 0
Iron Fe mg / l 0.01 1
Total Hardness CaCO 3 mg / l 0
Magnesium Mg mg / l 19.00 0
Manganese Mn mg / l 1.40 3
Nitrate N mg / l 0.01 0
Nitrate NO 3 mg / l 0
Potassium K mg / l 1.50 0
Sodium Na mg / l 25.40 0
Sulphate SO 4 mg / l 156.00 0
Zinc Zn mg / l 0.06 0
Ammonia NH 4 mg / l 0.13
P - Alkalinity CaCO 3 mg / l
M - Alkalinity CaCO3 mg / l
Calcium Hardness CaCO3 mg / l
Magnesium Hardness CaCO3 mg / l
Carbonate CaCO3 mg / l
Bicarbonate HCO 3 mg / l
Silica Si mg / l
Phosphor P0 4 as P mg / l
Micro-
biological
properties
Physical
Properties
Chemical properties
Chemical properties
(not required for the clasification of
domestic drinking w
ater supply)
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
49
Harding Landfill Site
Borehole Id MM 1
Date Sampled 04-May-12
Drinking water class 2
Sample Number 7402
Class
Viable organisms 0
Faecal coliforms 0.00 1
Total coliforms 0.00 1
Electrical Conductivity EC mS / m 78.00 1
Total Dissolved Salts TDS mg / l 309.00 0
pH Value pH 7.60 0
Turbidity NTU 0
Arsenic As mg / l 0.00 0
Cadmium Cd mg / l 0.01 2
Calcium Ca mg / l 45.00 0
Chloride Cl mg / l 106.00 1
Copper Cu mg / l 0
Fluoride F mg / l 0.38 0
Iron Fe mg / l 0.01 1
Total Hardness CaCO 3 mg / l 0
Magnesium Mg mg / l 30.00 1
Manganese Mn mg / l 0.02 0
Nitrate N mg / l 0.59 0
Nitrate NO 3 mg / l 0
Potassium K mg / l 1.20 0
Sodium Na mg / l 0.88 0
Sulphate SO 4 mg / l 190.00 0
Zinc Zn mg / l 0.02 0
Ammonia NH 4 mg / l 0.08
P - Alkalinity CaCO 3 mg / l
M - Alkalinity CaCO3 mg / l
Calcium Hardness CaCO3 mg / l
Magnesium Hardness CaCO3 mg / l
Carbonate CaCO3 mg / l
Bicarbonate HCO 3 mg / l
Silica Si mg / l
Phosphor P0 4 as P mg / l
Micro-
biological
properties
Physical
Properties
Chemical properties
Chemical properties
(not required for the clasification of
domestic drinking w
ater supply)
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
50
Harding Landfill Site
Borehole Id Stream Sample
Date Sampled 04-May-12
Drinking water class 3
Sample Number 7400
Class
Viable organisms 0
Faecal coliforms 0.00 1
Total coliforms 400.00 3
Electrical Conductivity EC mS / m 25.00 0
Total Dissolved Salts TDS mg / l 104.00 0
pH Value pH 7.10 0
Turbidity NTU 21.80 3
Arsenic As mg / l 0
Cadmium Cd mg / l 0
Calcium Ca mg / l 9.10 0
Chloride Cl mg / l 19.00 0
Copper Cu mg / l 0
Fluoride F mg / l 0.33 0
Iron Fe mg / l 0.01 0
Total Hardness CaCO 3 mg / l 51.00 0
Magnesium Mg mg / l 6.80 0
Manganese Mn mg / l 0
Nitrate N mg / l 1.43 0
Nitrate NO 3 mg / l 0
Potassium K mg / l 3.70 0
Sodium Na mg / l 18.00 0
Sulphate SO 4 mg / l 6.60 0
Zinc Zn mg / l 0
Ammonia NH 4 mg / l 3.06
P - Alkalinity CaCO 3 mg / l 10.00
M - Alkalinity CaCO3 mg / l 65.00
Calcium Hardness CaCO3 mg / l 23.00
Magnesium Hardness CaCO3 mg / l 28.00
Carbonate CaCO3 mg / l
Bicarbonate HCO 3 mg / l
Silica Si mg / l
Phosphor P0 4 as P mg / l
Micro-
biological
properties
Physical
Properties
Chemical properties
Chemical properties
(not required for the clasification of
domestic drinking w
ater supply)
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
51
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
52
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
53
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
54
APPENDIX F
Soil Test data
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
55
Sample Number Depth Origin Swell TRH14 Class
MDD Kg/m3 OMC % 100 98 95 93 90
HTP 3/1 0.10 - 0.50 Hillwash 2003 9.6 19 17 13 12 9 0.6 G9
HTP 3/2 0.70 - 2.30 Ferruginised Residual Siltstone 1887 14.8 19 16 12 10 7 0.3 G9
MOD. AASHTO CBR at % MOD.AASHTO
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
88 90 92 94 96 98 100 102
% CBR
MOD AASHTO (%)
CBR vs Relative Density
HTP 3/1
HTP 3/2
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
56
USK Consulting – Harding Landfill Site Geohydrological and Engineering Geological Site Investigation
57
Top Related