Date post: | 05-Apr-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | stanescu-bogdan |
View: | 225 times |
Download: | 0 times |
of 40
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
1/40
Bunbury Harvey Regional Council
Report for Stanley Road Landfill
Hydrogeological Assessment
Feburary 2008
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
2/40
61/23254/82838 Stanley Road Landfill
Hydrogeological Assessment
ContentsExecutive Summary i
1. Introduction 1
2. Scope of Work 2
2.1 Desktop Review 2
2.2 Site Visit 3
2.3 Hydrogeological Conceptual Site Model 3
3. Site Characterisation 4
3.1 Site Location 4
3.2 Site Description and Layout 4
3.3 Topography 4
3.4 Regional Geology 5
3.5 Regional Hydrogeology 5
3.6 Natural Surface Water Receptors 5
3.7 Landfill Construction 63.8 Review of Existing Historical Reports 6
3.9 Groundwater Monitoring Program 8
4. LANDFILL REVIEW RESULTS 10
4.1 Review of Historical Data Trends 10
4.2 Review Bore Construction 12
5. Site Hydrogeology and Conceptual Model 14
5.1 Aquifers 14
5.2 Groundwater Levels 14
5.3 Groundwater Migration Direction 15
5.4 Site Conceptual Model 15
6. Conclusions 16
7. Recommendations 17
8. Limitations of this Report 18
9. References 19
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
3/40
61/23254/82838 Stanley Road Landfill
Hydrogeological Assessment
Table Index
Table 1 Historical Report Summaries 7
Table 2 Existing Well Locations 8
Table 3 Groundwater Monitoring Schedule and Analytical
Suites 9
Figure Index
Figure 1 Regional Location 1
Figure 2 Site Layout 1
Figure 3 Groundwater Levels and Flow Direction (July 2008) 1Figure 4 Hydrogeological Transect Lines 1
Figure 5 Cross-section through Landfill (North-Southeast) 1
Figure 6 Cross-section through Landfill (East-West) 1
Appendices
A Historical Groundwater Monitoring Results
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
4/40
i61/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
Executive Summary
The Bunbury Harvey Regional Council commissioned GHD to undertake a Hydrogeological Assessment
of the Stanley Road Landfill Site in accordance with the Department of Environment and Conservation
landfill operating licence (L7067/1997/11).
The objectives of the assessment were to assess the effectiveness of the current monitoring program
and network in identify landfill impacts to the groundwater, the potential impacts to environmental
receptors and the requirement for improvements in the groundwater monitoring program.
The scope of works included the following tasks:
A review of available historical reports; A review of available geological and topographical data;
A site walkover;
An assessment of historical laboratory analysis data;
An assessment of groundwater levels; and
Construction of a hydrogeological conceptual site model identifying the source/s, pathways and
receptors of any potential landfill contamination impacts.
The Site is located approximately 160 km south of Perth, 20 km northeast of Bunbury. The Site
encompasses an area of approximately 1.3 km2
of which landfill and sand mining activities currently
occupy approximately one quarter of the area. These activities are currently confined to the southwest
corner and southern areas of the Site. The remainder of the Site is uncleared bushland.
The Site was commissioned as a Class 2 Landfill in 1991 and currently consists of three unlined cells
(leachate uncontrolled). Sand excavation is occurring in two areas adjacent to the landfill. During the Site
walkover undertaken on the 20 January 2009, verbal communication with the landfill manager, Mr Tony
Battersby, and landfill staff established that the landfill historically collected municipal type wastes as well
as tyres, asbestos cladding and building products and limited medical, quarantine and offal wastes.
Earlier this year the landfill began to separate green wastes, recyclable tyres and building materials. Mr
Battersby confirmed the life time of the landfill was expected to continue for another 6 years.
The Site currently has twelve serviceable groundwater monitoring wells located at 6 locations around the
landfill accessing shallow and deep groundwater at each location (one shallow well is dry). Three
production bores are known to be in use in the vicinity, one onsite production bore (max 200L/day) and a
production bore on each of the neighbouring sites to the west and south of the landfill, inferred as
significant water supply bores to satisfy the on-site activities (dust suppression etc).
Based on the soil bore and monitoring well installation information, the hydrogeology of the Site
comprises a shallow sand aquifer (saturated thickness of 2 -7m) underlain by clays (approx. 6-8m thick)
which is in turn underlain by deeper sand aquifer (>6 m thick). The clays are inferred to be laterally
continuous beneath the Site and likely separate and limit the hydraulic connectivity between the shallow
and deeper sand aquifers.
Although some of the geological logging information is incomplete (logged by drilling contractors),groundwater levels at the Site support the presence of a laterally continuous clay layer, with groundwater
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
5/40
ii61/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
levels in the shallow aquifer approximately 4 to 5 metres higher that the groundwater levels in the deeper
aquifer.
Groundwater flow directions in the deeper aquifer indicate that groundwater discharges towards the
Wellesley/Brunswick River, located approximately 600m to the south-east of the Site. While it is likely
that the shallow aquifer also discharges into the Wellesley/Brunswick River, the groundwater flow
direction could not be determined from the available data. During GHDs Site walkover groundwater
levels were not obtainable in at least one of the shallow groundwater monitoring wells given gas
exhalation and extensive bubbling of the water column in the well (possibly methane production). The
proximity of groundwater abstraction wells, likely screened within the shallow aquifer at the adjacent site
and possible monitoring well survey errors may also limit the determination of the shallow groundwater
flow direction and usefulness of the data.
The base of the unlined landfill is reported as above the shallow aquifer groundwater levels and given theinferred hydraulic separation of the shallow and deeper aquifer (clays), potential landfill impacts should
be limited to the shallow aquifer.
The groundwater laboratory analysis data (collated quarterly) indicates that landfill impacts, identified by
lower pH levels, increased concentrations of nitrogen, potassium and chloride, are impacting
groundwater quality of the shallow aquifer immediately to the south and the southeast of the landfill. The
presence of these impacts supports that the groundwater flow direction in the shallow aquifer is in a
south-easterly direction (towards the Wellesley/Brunswick River).
The groundwater laboratory analysis data indicates that landfill impacts appear to be migrating from the
shallow aquifer into the deeper aquifer (at one monitoring well location), possibly through the migration of
shallow water into the deeper aquifer via an inadequate monitoring well seal (bentonite/cement),or
considered less likely, via a discontinuity in the clay layer (hole).
The review of the available information (geological, laboratory analysis and hydrogeological) indicates
that the distribution and fate and transport of groundwater impacts derived from the landfill are not well
understood. As a consequence the following further investigations are recommended.
The groundwater levels and flow direction in the shallow aquifer should be confirmed by undertaking the
following:
Reinstallation of a shallow dry monitoring well to determine groundwater flow directions, during which
the presence/continuity of the clay layer beneath the well area should also be confirmed.
Undertake high frequency gauging of water levels in the monitoring wells screened in the shallowaquifer, initially monthly and then quarterly (as dictated by data variation and seasonal fluctuations in
water levels).
Obtain an estimate of the groundwater levels in the shallow monitoring wells impacted from gas
exhalation by temporarily displacing bubbling well column via introducing a slug of water into the well
(following water level stabilisation). Consideration should be given to sampling of the monitoring well gas
to confirm the presence of methane and derivation from the landfill.
Identify the location, screened interval and abstraction rates/times of the production bore(s), located
in the adjacent off site landfill (and influence on shallow groundwater levels).
Undertake resurveying of the current onsite wells to provide confirmation and increased confidence in
the current and future groundwater level data.
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
6/40
iii61/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
Following confirmation of the shallow groundwater flow direction, an assessment should be undertaken
to determine additional monitoring well requirements to confirm and the extent, distribution andconcentration of the groundwater landfill impacts and, potential fate and transport and impacts to the
sensitive receptors (Wellesley/Brunswick River).
Following the above investigative works, a regular groundwater monitoring program should be optimised
with an aim to provide a long term monitoring program suitable for landfill closure whilst minimising the
costs to the Bunbury Harvey Regional Council.
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
7/40
161/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
1. Introduction
The Bunbury Harvey Regional Council (BHRC) comprises the City of Bunbury and the Shire of Harvey
and was established to oversee and manage the development of a regional landfill located at lot 45
Stanley Road, Wellesley (the Site). The Site commenced operation in 1991 and has operated as a
licensed Class 2 Landfill since January 1997, with its license renewed annually.
The BHRC commissioned GHD to undertake a Hydrogeological Assessment of the Site in accordance
with the Department of Environment and Conservation landfill licence (L7067/1997/11).
The main objectives of the assessment were to:
1. Undertake a review of any available existing data to characterise hydrological and hydrogeologicalconditions at the Site and to identify any potential data gaps;
2. Assess the hydrogeology characteristics influencing the Site; and
3. Make recommendations for improvements to the current groundwater monitoring network, and
updates to the current monitoring program, if necessary.
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
8/40
261/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
2. Scope of Work
The scope of work completed by GHD is described below.
2.1 Desktop Review
GHD undertook a review of available published information to characterise hydrological and
hydrogeological conditions at the Site and to identify any potential data gaps. GHD completed the
following tasks as part of the desktop study:
A review of the local and regional geology, including a review of bore logs of the current onsite
bores, to ascertain soil type and geological formations underlying the Site that are influencing
groundwater flow patterns;
A review of the local and regional hydrology and hydrogeology, including a review of historical
groundwater depths and flow direction, to assess the groundwater regime at the Site and identify
potential contamination receptors, if any;
A review of the local topography and surface waters to assess potential surface water flow
patterns and identify potential contamination receptors, if any;
A review of any available landfill construction data detailing the Sites layout, surface drainage, pit
linings and leachate flow regimes;
A review of any existing historical reports regarding environmental, hydrological, hydrogeological,
and/or contamination issues at the Site made available to GHD by the client;
A review of any existing historical data trends to assess past and present groundwater quality
impacting the Site and potentially impacting hydrological receptors; and
A review of the construction details of the current onsite bores to assess the integrity, quality and
efficiency of their construction.
Material provided by BHRC for review during the desktop study included:
Rust PPK, 1995, Numerical Stimulation of Groundwater Abstraction in the Bunbury Region,
August 1995, Document number 93G049A:PR2:0348:Rev B;
Rust PPK, 1995, Hydrogeological Investigation of the Australind Solid Waste Landfill Site, October
1995, Document number 98G067A:PR2:0334:RevB;
ATA Environmental, 2005, Letter, Advice on the Location and Operation of Bores Stanley Road
Landfill, December 2005, Document number BHR-2003-001_012_nd;
ATA Environmental, 2006, Stanley Road Landfill 2005 Annual Groundwater Monitoring Report,
May 2006, Document number 2006/101;
GHD, 2007, Report for Stanley Road Landfill Groundwater Monitoring October 2007 Results,
Document number 61/14716/12/73577; and
BCE Surveying, 2008, Bunbury Harvey Regional Tip Stanley Road Topography Figure, Plan
number E2472-01.
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
9/40
361/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
2.2 Site Visit
A Site visit was undertaken on the 20 January 2009 to assess Site conditions, potential surface flowregimes and potential environmental issues. The aim of the Site visit was to gain further knowledge of
the landfill operations, the layout and construction of the landfill, surface water drainage and leachate
production and management.
Photographs of the Site were taken and are documented in this report.
During the Site visit, personnel with knowledge of the Site were interviewed, where possible, to ascertain
available knowledge as to the construction, operation and contents of the landfill, past management
practices and the life of the landfill.
2.3 Hydrogeological Conceptual Site ModelGHD developed conceptual cross-sectional hydrogeological models of the Site to illustrate sources of
potential contamination, potential surface water and groundwater pathways, and any identified potential
environmental and human health receptors of such contamination.
The report presents conceptual site models based on GHDs understanding of the groundwater regime,
surface water drainage and landfill operation. The report also provides an assessment of the current
groundwater monitoring network and recommendations for changes to the current monitoring program, if
required.
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
10/40
461/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
3. Site Characterisation
3.1 Site Location
The Site is located approximately 160 km south of Perth and 20 km northeast of Bunbury at lot 45
Stanley Road, Wellesley (Figure 1). The Site lies to the east of the Australind Bypass Road,
approximately 500m west of Old Coast Road and 2 km south of Marriott Road. Access to the Site is via
Stanley Road.
3.2 Site Description and Layout
The Site, located on lot 45, encompasses an area of approximately 1.3 km2. The landfill area currently
occupies approximately one quarter, 0.24 km2, of the Site. Landfill activities are currently confined to the
southwest corner and southern half of the Site. The remainder of the Site is uncleared bushland
dissected by fire tracks. The site is shown in Figure 2.
Prior to being commissioned for use as an unlined landfill in 1991, the Site was vacant land. Since
opening the landfill has operated as a Class 2 Landfill and currently consists of three unlined cells
referred to as cells 1, 2 and 3 (Figure 2).
Sand excavation is occurring in two areas, west of cell 3 and east of cell 2. The area immediately to the
west of cell 3 has been cleared to allow for the separate collection of green wastes.
Two surface water sumps, one south of cell 1 and one east of cell 2, act as temporary passive surface
water collection points for intermittently directed surface water runoff from the landfill.
Entrance to the Site is via Stanley Road to the south west and graded access tracks run along side each
of the cells. Numerous fire tracks run the perimeter and divide the remainder of the Site. The site office
stands at the entry of the Site.
A designated wetlands conservation area exists towards the northern Site boundary (Figure 2).
3.3 Topography
A review of the local topography was undertaken with reference to the following materials:
BCE Surveying, 2008, Bunbury Harvey Regional Tip Stanley Road Topography Figure, Plan
number E2472-01
Biggs, E.R. (1979). Harvey-Lake Preston Urban Geology, Parts of Sheets 2031 I and 2031 IV.
Perth: Geological Survey of Western Australia;
Western Australian Land Information Authority, 2009, Shared land Information Platform (SLIP)
Enabler, www2.landgate.wa.gov.au (accessed February 9 2009); and
NATMAP, 1981, Bunbury Western Australia Sheet 2031 Edition 1 National Topographic Map
Series, Commonwealth of Australia;
Rust PPK, 1995, Hydrogeological Investigation of the Australind Solid Waste Landfill Site, October
1995, Document number 98G067A:PR2:0334:RevB.
The Site lies within the high sand dunes of the coastal plain where land heights generally range between
15 to 25m AHD (Biggs, 1979 and NATMAP, 1981). The regional landscape slopes gently downward to
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
11/40
561/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
the west towards the Leschenault Estuary and more sharply to the east towards the Wellesley River. The
local topography also consists of undulated dunal systems however this has been extensively modifieddue to the excavation and landfill activities that have taken place.
Prior to these activities, the natural topography generally appears to have been lowest in the north of the
Site, less than 15m AHD, gently sloping up to 15m AHD towards the centre of the Site and continuing to
increase, though not exceeding 20m AHD in the south of the Site. Three dune peaks are identifiable in
the northwest corner of the Site, exceeding 20m AHD, in the southwest of the Site, exceeding 26m AHD,
and in the southeast of the Site, exceeding 20m AHD (Landgate and Rust PPK, 1995).
Beyond the Site boundary, the natural topography generally decreases in a south easterly direction
towards the Wellesley/Brunswick River.
The northern half and eastern portion of the Site remains predominantly unchanged due to the
excavation and landfill activities that have occurred in the south-western quarter. However, it is the
southern half, particularly the southwest corner, which has undergone the greatest landscape alterations.
The three unlined cells were excavated to approximately 14m AHD to accommodate waste and following
waste deposition are approximately 27m AHD.
3.4 Regional Geology
The regional geology of the Site is described as high sand dunes associated with Tamala Limestone
overlying Tamala Limestone at varying depths (GSWA, 1982). The Guildford Formation underlying the
superficial deposits is described predominantly as alluvial sandy clays (GSWA, 1982).
A review of the drillers bore logs supplied in Rust PPKb
(1995) and ATA Environmental (2005) generallyindicates surficial soils consists of undifferentiated sands overlying inter-bedded clays and sands at
depth.
3.5 Regional Hydrogeology
The Water Authority of Western Australia (1994) describe the hydrogeology of the area to comprise of an
unconfined aquifer and series of confined aquifers resulting from alternating sand and clay layers make
up the superficial formations underlying the Site. The superficial formations overlay a micaceous shale
unit at approximately 35-40m bgl which forms the confining layer to the Leederville aquifer. The
Leederville aquifer is underlain by the Yarragadee aquifer (WAWA, 1994).
Regional groundwater flow is expected to flow towards the coast to the west. However, groundwater flow
at the Site is expected to flow towards the nearest discharge boundary likely to be the
Wellesley/Brunswick River, located approximately 0.6 km to the southeast.
3.6 Natural Surface Water Receptors
The nearest surface water drainage feature to the Site is the Wellesley River, approximately 0.6 km
southeast. The Wellesley River joins the Brunswick River approximately 0.65 km south of the Site which
in turn discharges to the Leschenault Estuary and Koombana Bay of the Indian Ocean, approximately
8.5 and 12 km southwest of the Site, respectively.
It is considered that most surface water at the Site infiltrates the landfill or is evaporated, and it is unlikelythat surface water runoff from the Site would migrate and impact the Wellesley/Brunswick River.
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
12/40
661/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
Two conservation wetland areas are in the vicinity of the landfill, one is centrally located in the north of
the Site and the other lies just south of the Site, to the southeast of cell 2. The wetlands are reportedlyseasonally inundated (Figure 2).
Surface water runoff from the landfill is unlikely to flow towards these areas given most surface water
infiltrates the landfill or is evaporated.
3.7 Landfill Construction
Landfill activities are confined to three cells referred to as cells 1, 2 and 3 (Figure 2). Cells 1 and 2, along
the southern boundary are currently in use and appear to have merged into one large cell. Cell 3 lies
adjacent cell 2 to the north and is not currently in use. The current height of all three cells is estimated at
approximately 27m AHD. Finishing heights are anticipated to reach 32m AHD in 6 years time (estimated
landfill life, pers comm. Landfill Manager, Mr Tony Battersby).
The base of the cells is at 14m AHD maintaining a 3m clearance above the watertable. The cells were
excavated from quartz sands and are unlined. Leachate is not controlled through onsite drainage
systems nor collected. Any leachate produced as a result of rainfall infiltration is anticipated to leach
directly into the underlying aquifer.
In an effort to minimise leachate production, surface water above the cells was, temporarily directed to
surface water sumps south of cell 1 and east of cell 2 according to onsite staff (pers comm. Jack
Stidworthy) (Figure 2). However, the installed PVC drainage lines were lost and/or destroyed over the
course of land filling and have not been replaced.
3.8 Review of Existing Historical Reports
GHD reviewed three existing reports provided by BHRC regarding previous hydrogeological
investigations undertaken at the landfill. Major findings from these reports are summarised in the Table 1
below.
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
13/40
761/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
Table 1 Historical Report Summaries
Document Summary
Rust PPK, 1995,Hydrogeological Investigationof the Australind Solid WasteLandfill Site, October 1995,Document number98G067A:PR2:0334:RevB;
Rust PPK (Rust), then Mackie Martin PPK completed a hydrologicalinvestigation of the southern section of lot 45.
The report concluded that geology at the Site consists of an uppersand unit overlying continual clay horizon above a lower sand unit.
In addition, shallow groundwater was present within the upper sandunit, perched above the clay and flowed in a broadly westwardsdirection. However it was stated that flow varied in a south-easterly tosouth-westerly direction. Further it was suggested that dischargemay occur to the coast or towards the Brunswick River.
A lower aquifer is present in the lower sand unit partially confined byclay. Limited downward leakage may occur from upper to loweraquifer.
Groundwater analysis showed no evidence of any impact ongroundwater quality from the landfill
Further groundwater monitoring recommended.
ATA Environmental, 2005,Letter, Advice on the Locationand Operation of Bores Stanley Road Landfill,December 2005, Document
number BHR-2003-001_012_nd
The BHRC requested advice and clarification from ATAEnvironmental regarding groundwater monitoring being undertakenat the Site.
ATA reported that the western (WS) bore was drilled and screened at
similar depths as the other shallow bores however due to the geologyat this location did not encounter water. The driller reported that thiswell was dry at the time of drilling.
The document considered that a relatively large number of boresexist onsite and relatively low impact is being encountered, thereforethere appears no urgency to replace WS.
The deep bore in the area may be accessing the only aquifer in thearea as a shallow aquifer may not exist in this location due togeological variation.
The document stated geology and hydrogeology of the landfill isslightly unusual in that there is a clearly defined clay layer present at10 m bgl across much of the Site. This clay layer is acting as a
barrier and greatly retarding movement of water between the upperand lower aquifers. As a result, it would be expected that landfillimpacts would be confined to the upper aquifer.
Shallow monitoring bores terminate within the clay layer and areintended to be the primary means of detecting and monitoring landfillimpacts to groundwater.
Deeper bores were drilled through clay layer to depths of 24-25m bgland terminate in a second impermeable layer of micaceous shale.They are screened over 9m of the lower aquifer for the purpose ofdetecting any contamination leaking through the clay barrier. Thedocumented reported there was no evidence of impacts from thelandfill within the deeper aquifer.
It is reported that the available data did show some evidence ofimpacts to water quality in the upper aquifer, however the level of
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
14/40
861/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
impact is low and is not expected to extend large distances (0.5-1km). Further the nature of the nutrients and organic contaminantswould result in their dispersion and dilution naturally within 10-20years following closure. ATA were doubtful that landfill impacts wouldbe detectable in domestic bores down gradient unless they werewithin 0.5-1 km of the Site. Within 500m of the Site the water shouldbe fit for irrigation and stock supply.
ATA found no pressing case for additional bores to be installed otherthan the re-drilling of bore WS to intersect water.
ATA Environmental, 2006,Stanley Road Landfill 2005Annual GroundwaterMonitoring Report, May 2006,
Document number 2006/101
ATA Environmental undertook the quarterly groundwater monitoringfor 2005.
Depth to groundwater data indicated a significant difference ingroundwater flow direction in the upper and lower aquifer. Based onthe available data, ATA were unable to definitively depictgroundwater flow directions in the upper and lowers aquifers.
Assessment of the laboratory results most notably concluded:
seasonal fluctuations of most parameters;
increased nitrogenous compounds in several bores;
increasing trends in copper and zinc in some bores; and
generally low concentrations of nutrients and metals in most bores.
No severe impacts to groundwater were detected and the documentreported the groundwater quality to indicate an overall improving
trend.Further groundwater monitoring and assessment of hydrogeologicalconditions was recommended.
3.9 Groundwater Monitoring Program
Quarterly groundwater monitoring is currently undertaken at twelve wells in six locations across the Site.
The six locations are described in Table 1 and shown in Figure 3.
Table 2 Existing Well Locations
Well ID Easting* Northing* WellDepth**(m bgl)
ScreenedInterval**(m bgl)
Top ofCasing***(m AHD)
WS 50383491 6321081 10.00 4.0-10.0 20.97
WD 50383491 6321081 24.00 18.0-24.0 20.97
SWS 50383645 6320980 10.00 4.0-10.0 13.84
SWD 50383645 6320980 24.00 18.0-24.0 13.85
1S 50383948 6320967 10.60 4.6-10.6 15.29
1D 50383948 6320967 26.40 17.4-26.4 15.23
SES 50384122 6320978 10.00 4.0-10.0 15.33
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
15/40
961/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
Well ID Easting* Northing* Well
Depth**(m bgl)
Screened
Interval**(m bgl)
Top of
Casing***(m AHD)
SED 50384122 6320978 24.00 18.0-24.0 15.33
2S 50384921 6321431 10.40 4.4-10.4 17.61
2D 50384921 6321431 23.60 17.6-23.6 17.56
ES 50385004 6321720 10.00 4.0-10.0 17.43
ED 50385004 6321720 24.00 18.0-24.0 17.43
Note: * Eastings and Northings were recorded from a handheld GPS unit on the day of the Site Visit.
**Depth of wells and screened intervals was sourced from supplied bore logs (ATA Environmental, 2005)
*** Surveyed top of casing information was sourced from Table 1 (ATA Environmental, 2006).
The monitoring schedule and corresponding analytical suites are presented in Table 2.
Table 3 Groundwater Monitoring Schedule and Analytical Suites
Frequency Timing Analytical Suite
Quarterly January, April, July, October Inorganic (physical parameters,
major nutrients, major ions,
heavy metals (8))
Annually October Organic (polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons, organochlorine
pesticides, organophosphorus
pesticides, triazine herbicides,
polychlorinated biphenyls, total
recoverable hydrocarbons,
benzene, toluene, ethylbezene
and xylenes)
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
16/40
1061/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
4. LANDFILL REVIEW RESULTS
4.1 Review of Historical Data Trends
GHD have reviewed analytical data of groundwater monitoring from February 2005 to October 2008.
Historical graphs relating to physical parameters (pH, electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids),
major nutrients, major ions and heavy metals are presented in Appendix D. A review of this data is
summarised below.
4.1.1 Physical Parameters
Historical data trends indicate groundwater pH exhibits a slightly lower range in the shallow
monitoring (3.5-7) wells than in the deeper monitoring wells (4-8).
The lower pH is particularly evident in shallow wells SES and SWS, located on the southern
boundary of the landfill which displays an average historical pH of approximately 4.5 and 5, respectively.
The corresponding deep wells, SED and SWD, have recorded higher historical averages of
approximately 6 and 6.5, respectively.
Electrical conductivity (EC) and TDS appears relatively low and stable in most wells with the
exception of shallow monitoring wells 1S and SES. These shallow wells show elevated and fluctuating
EC and TDS, and are located on the southern boundary of the landfill.
4.1.2 Nitrogen Compounds
The historical total nitrogen concentrations in the majority of the wells indicate generally low
concentrations (less than 5 mg/L), with the following exceptions:
Weakly elevated and fluctuating concentrations in shallow monitoring well 1S (maximum 10 mg/L),
located on the southern boundary,
A weak increasing trend in deep monitoring well SWD (maximum 7 mg/L), located on the southern
boundary, evident since October 2007
The historical ammoniacal-nitrogen concentrations in the majority of the wells indicate generally low
concentrations (less than 5 mg/L), with exception of the following:
Moderately elevated and fluctuating concentrations in shallow monitoring wells 1S (maximum 15mg/L), located on the southern boundary (although currently low at 2 mg/L).
A moderate increasing trend in deep monitoring well SWD (maximum 7 mg/L), located on the
southern boundary, evident since February 2005
Excluding weak historical fluctuations prior to January 2008 (less than 3 mg/L)The historical nitrate-
nitrogen graphs indicate low concentrations of nitrate in the shallow and deep wells across the site(less
than 1 mg/L).
4.1.3 Selected Major Ions
The historical chloride concentrations are generally stable with concentrations across the site ranging
between 500 to 500 mg/L with exception of the following:
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
17/40
1161/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
Moderately elevated and fluctuating concentrations of chloride in shallow monitoring well 1S
(maximum 1050 mg/L), located on the southern boundary. However, over the last two years ofmonitoring the concentrations have stabilised and are less than 500 mg/L
Moderately elevated and fluctuating concentrations of chloride in shallow monitoring well SES
(maximum 1900 mg/L), located on the southern boundary. Although fluctuating, the long term trend in
concentrations appears to be increasing. The fluctuations may reflect seasonal influences, possibly
relating to rainfall infiltration through the landfill.
The historical potassium concentrations are generally stable with concentrations across the site
generally ranging between 1 to 10 mg/L with exception of the following:
Moderately elevated and fluctuating concentrations of potassium in shallow monitoring well 1S
located on the southern boundary (maximum 13 mg/L),. However, over the last two years of monitoring
the concentrations have stabilised and are less than 7 mg/L
Moderately elevated and fluctuating concentrations of potassium in shallow monitoring well SES
(maximum 20 mg/L), located on the southern boundary. Although fluctuating, the long term trend in
concentrations appears to be increasing. The fluctuations may reflect seasonal influences.
4.1.4 Heavy Metals
The concentrations of metals (arsenic, cadmium, chromium copper, lead, nickel and zinc) over the
historical monitoring period are generally low and although the concentrations fluctuate, the
concentrations do not indicate increasing trends.
The occurrence of low level metal fluctuations can be a reflection of using alternate sampling laboratoriesand site collection methodologies over the monitoring period, which is supported by the apparent random
occurrence of fluctuating metal concentrations in both shallow and deep wells, and in wells located in
both, up and down hydraulic gradient, of the landfill.
Excluding well 2D, the concentrations of manganese are low and stable in all wells (less than 0.1 mg/L).
The occurrence of weakly elevated manganese in well 2D likely reflects background concentrations (and
groundwater redox), given the well is located up-gradient of the landfill.
4.1.5 Organic Compounds (2007/2008)
The following organic compounds were not identified above the limits of reporting in 2007 and 2008 from
all shallow and deep groundwater wells:
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (except naphthalene);
Organochlorine pesticides;
Benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylenes;
Total recoverable hydrocarbons;
Organophosphorus pesticides (2008 only); and
Polychlorinated biphenyls (2008 only).
The following organic compounds were detected in the following wells during the single monitoring event
in 2008.
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
18/40
1261/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
Naphthalene detected in a deep well located on the western boundary of the landfill (0.02 ug/L).
Low level hydrocarbons detected in shallow well 1S, and deep wells 1D and 2D (78, 48 and 210
ug/L, respectively).
4.2 Review Bore Construction
Bore logs of the current onsite wells were presented in a letter from ATA Environmental (2005) provided
to GHD by the BHRC.
According to the bore logs, groundwater wells 1S, 1D and 2S, 2D were installed by the Bunbury Drilling
Company in 1999. These wells were constructed of 50mm, Class 9 blank and slotted PVC. The annular
space around the bores was backfilled to the surface with a graded quartz gravel pack except for a
betonite plug that was placed from 12-13m bgl below the shallow wells (10.4-10.6m bgl) and above thescreen (17.4-17.6m bgl) of the deep wells. The bores were capped at either end.
Groundwater wells WS, WD, SWS, SWD, SES, SED, 2S, 2D, ES and ED were installed by Australind
Boring Pty Ltd. The wells were constructed of 50mm, Class 12 blank and slotted PVC. The annular
space around the bores was backfilled with graded sand from approximately 3-10m bgl in the shallow
well and approximately 16-24m bgl in the deep wells. A four metre cement seal filled the annular space
from approximately 12-16m bgl in the deep wells while no seal was installed in the shallow wells. Shallow
and deep wells were backfilled with drill cuttings from approximately 0-3m bgl and 0-12 m bgl,
respectively.
GHDs review of monitoring well construction found bore logs to contain insufficient information on the
geological information (particularly clay continuity) and the integrity and placement of bentonite/cementseals to sufficiently infer monitoring of the separate aquifers (by Australind Boring Pty Ltd logged by
drilling contractors). However, the fact that hydraulic head differentials between aquifers are apparent
infers some degree of hydraulic separation is likely maintained.
4.2.1 Existing Production Bores in the Region
There are three known production bores in the vicinity of the Site confirmed by the landfill manager, Mr
Tony Battersby. One production bore is located onsite, within close proximity to the Site office.
Production bores are also in use on the neighbouring Sites to the west and south, Catalano Pty Ltd and
the Class 1 landfill operated by JW Cross & Sons, respectively.
According to Mr Battersby the one onsite bore is estimated to draw less than 200L/day. The majority ofthe landfills (the Site) water requirements are met by the production bore on the Class 1 landfill operated
by JW Cross & Sons to the south of the Site. This bore is anticipated to be heavily used however
quantifiable amounts are unknown. Pumping rates for the production bore on the neighbouring sand
mining site operated by Catalano Pty Ltd are also unknown.
A Department of Water (DoW) bore database search indicates there are 17 registered bores located
within a 1 km radius of the Site. The database has no record of the bores located on the Site and further
no record of the neighbouring production bores. The nearest recorded bore is located approximately 100
m to the north-west of the Site. This bore is privately owned for domestic/household purposes. Though
this bore would appear to be located up gradient of groundwater flow it is pertinent to note that
unregistered bores may exist around the Site, down gradient of groundwater flow, which could also be
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
19/40
1361/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
used for domestic/household purposes and potentially even for human and animal consumption. Such
bores would therefore constitute potential contamination receptors.
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
20/40
1461/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
5. Site Hydrogeology and Conceptual Model
5.1 Aquifers
A review of historical bore logs for the Site identified that the local geology comprises fine to medium
grained quartz superficial sands overlying a confining layer of clays and sandy clays. Superficial sands
vary in thickness from approximately 4 to 17m. The saturated thickness of the upper shallow aquifer
ranges from approximately 2-7m.
The underlying confining layer is estimated to range from approximately 6 to 8m thickness and is inferred
as relatively continuous beneath the Site and is likely to separate and limit the hydraulic connectivity
between the shallow and deeper sand aquifers.
The confining clay layer is in turn underlain by deeper sands that extend beyond documented bottom of
hole depths (>6 m thick).
A review of the geological logging data found some information contradictory, assumedly logged by
drilling contractors, in regards to the continuous presence of a confining layer across the Site. However,
groundwater level difference between the shallow and deep aquifers at the Site supports the presence of
a laterally continuous clay layer.
5.2 Groundwater Levels
Historical data reports water levels in the shallow wells lie between 4.2 and 7.5m below ground level (bgl)
(8-11m AHD) summer/post summer and 3.4 to 6.7m bgl (10-14.3m AHD) in the winter and post wintermonths.
Depth to groundwater in the deep wells was gauged between 8.3 and 14.8m bgl (4-6.5m AHD) during
the summer/post summer months and 7.7 to 14.1m bgl (4.8-6.9m AHD) in the winter and post winter
months.
The above data indicates that shallow groundwater levels are approximately of 4 to 5 metres higher than
the underlying deeper groundwater levels, and that a downward hydraulic head potential exists between
the upper shallow aquifer and the deeper aquifer. The existence of the hydraulic head potential supports
that the clay confining layer is continuous beneath the site.
5.2.1 Anomalous Groundwater Levels
It is noted that during GHDs Site walkover groundwater levels were not obtainable in at least one of the
shallow groundwater monitoring wells (SES) given gas exhalation and extensive bubbling of the water
column in the well (possibly methane production). Previously gauged water levels from monitoring well
SES and potentially wells 1S and SWS may therefore prove inaccurate.
The difficulty in determining groundwater flow in the upper aquifer may also be impeded by the proximity
of the groundwater abstraction well, likely screened within the shallow aquifer, at the southerly adjacent
site and the developing cone of depression associated with abstraction. Further, the surveying of the
monitoring wells onsite appears erroneous and possibly indicates that stand-up steel casings were
surveyed rather than the PVC of the individual wells given numerous wells are reported at the same
height. Such survey errors may also limit the determination of the shallow groundwater flow direction
and usefulness of the data.
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
21/40
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
22/40
1661/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
6. Conclusions
Based on the hydrogeological assessment undertaken the following conclusions can be drawn.
The hydrogeology of the Site comprises a shallow sand aquifer (saturated thickness of 2-7m)
underlain by clays (approx. 6-8m thick) which is in turn underlain by a deeper sand aquifer (>6 m
thick). The clays are inferred to be laterally continuous beneath the Site and likely separate and limit
the hydraulic connectivity between the shallow and deeper sand aquifers.
Although some of the geological logging information is incomplete and contradictory (logged by
drilling contractors), groundwater levels at the Site support the presence of a laterally continuous clay
layer, with groundwater levels in the shallow aquifer approximately 4 to 5 metres higher that the
groundwater levels in the deeper aquifer.
Groundwater flow directions in the deeper aquifer indicate that groundwater discharges towards the
Wellesley/Brunswick River, located approximately 0.6 km to the south-east of the Site. While it is
likely that the shallow aquifer also discharges into the Wellesley/Brunswick River, the groundwater
flow direction could not be determined from the available data.
During GHDs Site walkover groundwater levels were not obtainable in at least one of the shallow
groundwater monitoring wells given gas exhalation and extensive bubbling of the water column in the
well (possibly methane production). The proximity of groundwater abstraction wells, likely screened
within the shallow aquifer at the adjacent site and possible monitoring well survey errors may also
limit the determination of the shallow groundwater flow direction and usefulness of the data.
The base of the unlined landfill is reported to be above groundwater levels in the shallow aquifer and
given the inferred hydraulic separation of the shallow and deeper aquifer (clays), potential landfill
impacts should be limited to the shallow aquifer.
The groundwater laboratory analysis data (collated quarterly) indicates that landfill impacts, identified
by lower pH levels, increased concentrations of nitrogen, potassium and chloride, are impacting
groundwater quality of the shallow aquifer immediately to the south and the southeast of the landfill.
The presence of these impacts supports that the groundwater flow direction in the shallow aquifer is
in a south-easterly direction (towards the Wellesley/Brunswick River).
The groundwater laboratory analysis data indicates that landfill impacts appear to be migrating from
the shallow aquifer into the deeper aquifer (at one monitoring well location), possibly through themigration of shallow water into the deeper aquifer via an inadequate monitoring well seal
(bentonite),or considered less likely, via a discontinuity in the clay layer (hole).
The current groundwater monitoring program is considered adequate. Quarterly groundwater
monitoring is considered thorough and the 2008 inorganic and organic analytical suites are
considered comprehensive.
A review of monitoring well construction found insufficient information to adequately infer monitoring
of the separate aquifers. However, the fact that hydraulic head differentials between aquifers are
apparent infers some degree of hydraulic separation is likely maintained.
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
23/40
1761/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
7. Recommendations
The review of the available information (geological, laboratory analysis and hydrogeological) indicates
that the distribution and fate and transport of groundwater impacts derived from the landfill are not well
understood. As a consequence the following further investigations are recommended.
The groundwater levels and flow direction in the shallow aquifer should be confirmed by undertaking the
following:
Reinstallation of a shallow dry monitoring well to determine groundwater flow directions, during
which the presence/continuity of the clay layer beneath the well area should be confirmed.
Undertake high frequency gauging of water levels in the monitoring wells screened in the shallow
aquifer, initially monthly and then quarterly (as dictated by data variation and seasonal fluctuations in
water levels).
Obtain an estimate of the groundwater levels in the shallow monitoring wells impacted from gas
exhalation by temporarily displacing bubbling well column via introducing a slug of water into the well
(following water level stabilisation). Consideration should be given to sampling of the monitoring well gas
to confirm the presence of methane and derivation from the landfill.
Identify the location, screened interval and abstraction rates/times of the production bore(s),
located in the adjacent off site landfill (and influence on shallow groundwater levels).
Undertake resurveying of the current onsite wells to provide confirmation and increased
confidence in the current and future groundwater level data.
Following confirmation of the shallow groundwater flow direction, an assessment should be undertaken
to determine additional monitoring well requirements to confirm and the extent, distribution and
concentration of the groundwater landfill impacts and, potential fate and transport and impacts to the
sensitive receptors (Wellesley/Brunswick River).
Following the above investigative works, a regular groundwater monitoring program should be optimised
with an aim to provide a long term monitoring program suitable for landfill closure whilst minimising the
costs to the Bunbury Harvey Regional Council.
.
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
24/40
1861/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
8. Limitations of this Report
This report presents the results of a Hydrogeological Site Assessment prepared for the purpose of this
commission. The data and advice provided herein relate only to the project and structures described
herein and must be reviewed by a competent engineer/scientist before being used for any other purpose.
GHD Pty Ltd accepts no responsibility for other use of the data.
Where drill hole or test pit logs, laboratory tests, geophysical test and similar work have been performed
and recorded by others the data is included and used in the form provided by others. The responsibility
for the accuracy of such data remains with the issuing authority, not with GHD.
It should be noted that because of the inherent uncertainties in subsurface evaluations, changed or
unanticipated subsurface conditions may occur that could affect total project cost and/or execution. GHD
does not accept responsibility of the consequences of significant variances in the conditions and the
requirements for execution of the work.
During remediation or subsequent investigations the subsurface and surface earthworks and excavations
should be examined by a suitably qualified and experienced Engineer/Scientist who shall judge whether
the revealed conditions accord with both the assumptions in this report and/or the design of the
remediation works. If they do not accord, the Engineer/Scientist shall modify the advice in this report
and/or design of the works to accord with the circumstances that are revealed.
An understanding of the subsurface site conditions depends on the integration of many pieces of
information, some regional, some site specific, some structure specific and some experience based.
Hence this report should not be altered, amended or abbreviated, issued in part or issued incomplete in
any way without prior checking and approval by GHD. GHD accepts no responsibility for any
circumstances which arise from the issue of the report which has been modified in any way as outlined
above.
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
25/40
1961/23254/82838 Stanley Road LandfillHydrogeological Assessment
9. References
ATA Environmental, 2005, Letter, Advice on the Location and Operation of Bores Stanley Road
Landfill, December 2005, Document number BHR-2003-001_012_nd
ATA Environmental, 2006, Stanley Road Landfill 2005 Annual Groundwater Monitoring Report, May
2006, Document number 2006/101
BCE Surveying, 2008, Bunbury Harvey Regional Tip Stanley Road Topography Figure, Plan number
E2472-01
Geological Survey of Western Australia (GSWA), (1982), Harvey-Lake Preston Urban geology, Parts of
Sheets 2031 I and 2031 IV, 1:50 000, Urban Geology Series, Geological Survey of Western Australia,Perth
GHD, 2007, Report for Stanley Road Landfill Groundwater Monitoring October 2007 Results, Document
number 61/14716/12/73577
NATMAP, 1981, Bunbury Western Australia Sheet 2031 Edition 1 National Topographic Map Series,
Commonwealth of Australia
Rust PPKa, 1995, Numerical Stimulation of Groundwater Abstraction in the Bunbury Region, August
1995, Document number 93G049A:PR2:0348:Rev B
Rust PPKb, 1995, Hydrogeological Investigation of the Australind Solid Waste Landfill Site, October
1995, Document number 98G067A:PR2:0334:RevB
Water Authority of Western Australia (WAWA), 1994, Bunbury Groundwater Area Management Plan,
Water Authority of Western Australia, Report No. WG198
Western Australian Land Information Authority, 2009, Shared land Information Platform (SLIP) Enabler,
www2.landgate.wa.gov.au (accessed February 9 2009)
Western Australian Land Information Authority, 2009, LANDGATE Survey Channel Map Viewer,
www.landgate.com.au (accessed February 7 2009)
http://www.landgate.com.au/http://www.landgate.com.au/7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
26/40
61/23254/82838 Stanley Road Landfill
Hydrogeological Assessment
Figures
Figure 1 Regional Location
Figure 2 Site Layout
Figure 3 Groundwater Levels and Flow Direction (July 2008)
Figure 4 Hydrogeological Transect Lines
Figure 5 Cross-section through Landfill (North-Southeast)
Figure 6 Cross-section through Landfill (East-West)
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
27/40
370,000
370,000
385,000
385,000
6,
315,
000
6,
315,
000
6,
330,
000
6,
330,
000
Figure 1G:\61\23254\GIS\mxds\6123254-G001.mxd
0 1.5 3 4.5 60.75
km
LEGEND
2009. While GHD has taken care to ensure the accuracy of this product, GHD and LANDGATE make no representations or warranties about its accuracy, completeness or suitability for any particular purpose.GHD and LANDGATE cannot accept liability of any kind (whether in contract, tort or otherwise) for any expenses, losses, damages and/or costs (including indirect or consequential damage) which are or may be incurred as a re sult ofthe product being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in any way and for any reason.
Job Number
Revision 0
61-23254
Date 25 MAR 2009
oBunbury-Harvey Reg Council
Hydrogeological Assessment ofStanley Rd Landfill
Regional Location
Data Source: GHD: Subject Land Boundary - 20090224; Landgate: Travellers Atlas 2004 Edition - 2004. Created by: xntan
GHD House, 239 Adelaide Terrace Perth WA 6004 T 61 8 6222 8222 F 61 8 6222 8555 E [email protected] Wwww.ghd.com.au
Map Projection: Transverse MercatorHorizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA)
Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 5 0
Subject Land Boundary
1:150,000 (at A4)
mailto:[email protected]://www.ghd.com.au/http://www.ghd.com.au/mailto:[email protected]7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
28/40
GHD House, 239 Adelaide Terrace Perth WA 6004 T 61 8 6222 8222 F 61 8 6222 8555 [email protected] Wwww.ghd.com.au
"/
"/
!>!>
!>!>
!>!>
!>!>!>!>
!>!>
Cell 1 Cell 2
Cell 3
Catalano Pty LtdSandmine &Storage Area
Site Entry
SiteOffice
Sand
Excavations
Sand Excavations
Surface WaterSump
Kemerton Industrial AreaVegetated Buffer Zone
WetlandsConservation Area
NeighbouringFarmland
WetlandsConservation Area
JW Cross & SonsSand Excavation& Class 1 Landfill
Surface WaterSump
Welle
sley
River
Green WasteCollection Point
PERTH-BUNBURYHWY
STANLEY RD
MARINE
DR
PERTH-BUNBURYHWY WSWD
ESED
2S2D
1S1DSWS
SWD
SESSED
382,750
382,750
383,500
383,500
384,250
384,250
385,000
385,000
6,
321
,000
6,3
21
,750
G:\61\23254\GIS\mxds\6123254-G002.mxd
2009. WhileGHD has takencare to ensurethe accuracy ofthis product, GHD and LANDGATE make no representationsor warranties about itsaccuracy, completenessor suitability for any particular purpose. GHD and LANDGATE cannot accept liabilityof any kind (whether in contract,tort or otherwise) for anyexpenses, losses,damages and/or costs(including indirect or consequential damage) which are or maybe incurred as a result of the product being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in anyway and for anyreason.
LEGEND
0 75 150 225 30037.5
Metres
Map Projection: Transverse MercatorHorizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA)
Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 50
Bunbury-Harvey Reg Council
Hydrogeological Assessment ofStanley Rd Landfill
Figure 2
Job Number
Revision 0
61-23254
25 MAR 2009
Site Layouto
Date
Data Source: GHD: Bore Locations - 20090223, Lot Boundary- 20090224, Surface Water Sump- 20090324,Surface Water Flow Direction - 20090325; Landgate: Bunbury2006 Mosaic - SLIP 20090224. Created by: xntan
1 :7 ,500 ( at A3)
!
!
!
!
!
INDIAN OCEAN
EATONBUNBURY
BUREKUP
AUSTRALIND
LESCHENAULT
Locality Map
!> Bore Location
Lot Boundary
Subject Land Boundary
"/ Surface Water Sump
Surface Water Flow Direction
mailto:[email protected]://www.ghd.com.au/http://www.ghd.com.au/mailto:[email protected]7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
29/40
GHD House, 239 Adelaide Terrace Perth WA 6004 T 61 8 6222 8222 F 61 8 6222 8555 [email protected] Wwww.ghd.com.au
!>
!>
!>
!>!>
!>
Welle
sley R
iver
STANLEY RD
PERTH-BUNBURYHWY
MARINE
DR
PERTH-BUNBURYHWY
5.2
5.0
5.46.0
6.2
6.6
5.8
6.4
6.8
5.6
WD
6.66
ED
5.19
2D
4.93
1D
5.58
SWD
6.17
SED
5.19
382,750
382,750
383,500
383,500
384,250
384,250
385,000
385,000
6,3
21
,000
6,3
21
,750
G:\61\23254\GIS\mxds\6123254-G003.mxd
2009. WhileGHD has takencare to ensurethe accuracy ofthis product, GHD and LANDGATE make no representationsor warranties about itsaccuracy, completenessor suitability for any particular purpose. GHD and LANDGATE cannot accept liabilityof any kind (whether in contract,tort or otherwise) for anyexpenses, losses,damages and/or costs(including indirect or consequential damage) which are or maybe incurred as a result of the product being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in anyway and for anyreason.
LEGEND
0 75 150 225 30037.5
Metres
Map Projection: Transverse MercatorHorizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA)
Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 50
Bunbury-Harvey Reg Council
Hydrogeological Assessment ofStanley Rd Landfill
Groundwater Levels &
Figure 3
Job Number
Revision 0
61-23254
25 MAR 2009
Flow Direction (July 2008/Deep Wells)o
Date
Data Source: GHD: Bore Locations - 20090223, Groundwater Contour - 20090224; Landgate: Bunbury2006 Mosaic- SLIP 20090224; GHD: Lot Boundary- 20090224. Created by:xntan
1 :7 ,500 ( at A3)
!> Bore Location
Lot Boundary
Groundwater Contour (mAHD)
Groundwater Flow Direction
!
!
!
!
!
INDIAN OCEAN
EATON
BUNBURY
BUREKUP
AUSTRALIND
LESCHENAULT
Locality Map
mailto:[email protected]://www.ghd.com.au/http://www.ghd.com.au/mailto:[email protected]7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
30/40
GHD House, 239 Adelaide Terrace Perth WA 6004 T 61 8 6222 8222 F 61 8 6222 8555 [email protected] Wwww.ghd.com.au
!>
!>
!>
!>
!>
!>!>
!>
!>
!>!>
!>!>
!>!>
!>!>!>!>
!>!>
Welle
sley R
iver
STANLEY RD
Cell 1 Cell 2
Cell 3
NORTH
SOUTH-EAST
WESTEASTSee Figure 5
See
Figure
6
PERTH-BUNBURYHWY
MARINE
DR
PERTH-BUNBURYHWY A1
M1
B4
M2
B1
D1
C1
B1
B4A
WSWD
ESED
2S2D
1S1DSWSSWD SESSED
382,750
382,750
383,500
383,500
384,250
384,250
385,000
385,000
6,3
21
,000
6,3
21
,750
G:\61\23254\GIS\mxds\6123254-G004.mxd
2009. WhileGHD has takencare to ensurethe accuracy ofthis product, GHD and LANDGATE make no representationsor warranties about itsaccuracy, completenessor suitability for any particular purpose. GHD and LANDGATE cannot accept liabilityof any kind (whether in contract,tort or otherwise) for anyexpenses, losses,damages and/or costs(including indirect or consequential damage) which are or maybe incurred as a result of the product being inaccurate, incomplete or unsuitable in anyway and for anyreason.
LEGEND
0 75 150 225 30037.5
Metres
Map Projection: Transverse MercatorHorizontal Datum: Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA)
Grid: Map Grid of Australia 1994, Zone 50
Bunbury-Harvey Reg Council
Hydrogeological Assessment ofStanley Rd Landfill
Figure 4
Job Number
Revision 0
61-23254
25 MAR 2009
Hydrogeological Transect Lineso
Date
Data Source: GHD: Bore Locations - 20090223, Hydrogeological Transect Lines- 20090226; Landgate: Bunbury2006 Mosaic - SLIP 20090224; GHD: Former InvestigationBores - 20090223. Createdby: xntan
1 :7 ,500 ( at A3)
Lot Boundary
!> Groundwater Well
!> Former Investigation Bore (No Longer E xisting)
Hydrogeological Transect Lines
Cross Section through Landfill (North-South-East)
Cross Section through Landfill (East-West)
!
!
!
!
!
INDIAN OCEAN
EATONBUNBURY
BUREKUP
AUSTRALIND
LESCHENAULT
Locality Map
mailto:[email protected]://www.ghd.com.au/http://www.ghd.com.au/mailto:[email protected]7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
31/40
B1
M2 M
1 A1
1S
1D
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
32/40
WSWD
SWS
SWD
A1
1S
1D
B1
SES
SED
C1
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
33/40
61/23254/82838 Stanley Road Landfill
Hydrogeological Assessment
Appendix A
Historical Groundwater Monitoring Results
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
34/40
pH
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar
-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Electrical Conductivity
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Conductivity(uS/cm)
Total Dissolved Solids
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Concentration(mg/L)
61/23254 Bunbury Harvey Regional Council
Hydrogeological Assessment of the Stanley Road Landfill
Historical Groundwater Monitoring Results
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
35/40
Cadmium Concentrations
0
0.0005
0.001
0.0015
Feb-05
Apr-05
Jul-05
Oct-05
Jan-06
Apr-06
Jul-06
Oct-06
Mar-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-08
Jul-08
Oct-08
Concentration(mg/L)
Chromium Concentrations
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar
-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Conc
entration(mg/L)
Arsenic Concentrations
0
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.01
0.012
0.014
0.016
0.018
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Concentration(m
g/L)
61/23254 Bunbury Harvey Regional Council
Hydrogeological Assessment of the Stanley Road Landfill
Historical Groundwater Monitoring Results
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
36/40
Total Nitrogen Concentrations
0
5
10
15
20
25
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar
-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Concentration(mg/L)
Nitrate-Nitrogen Concentrations
0
1
2
3
4
Feb
-05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan
-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar-07
Oct-07
Jan
-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Concentration(mg/L)
Ammoniacal-Nitrogen Concentrations
0
3
6
9
12
15
18
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar
-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Co
ncentration(mg/L)
61/23254 Bunbury Harvey Regional Council
Hydrogeological Assessment of the Stanley Road Landfill
Historical Groundwater Monitoring Results
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
37/40
Copper Concentrations
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar
-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Concentration(mg
/L)
Lead Concentrations
0
0.001
0.002
0.003
0.004
0.005
0.006
0.007
0.008
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Concentration(mg/L)
Manganese Concentrations
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Concentration(mg/L)
61/23254 Bunbury Harvey Regional Council
Hydrogeological Assessment of the Stanley Road Landfill
Historical Groundwater Monitoring Results
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
38/40
Total Phosphorus Concentrations
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Concentration(mg
/L)
Potassium Concentrations
0
5
10
15
20
25
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar
-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Co
ncentration(mg/L)
Chloride Concentrations
0
500
1000
1500
2000
Feb-05
Apr-05
Jul-05
Oct-05
Jan-06
Apr-06
Jul-06
Oct-06
Mar-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-08
Jul-08
Oct-08
Concentration(mg/L)
Nickel Concentrations 61/23254 Bunbury Harvey Regional Council
Hydrogeological Assessment of the Stanley Road Landfill
Historical Groundwater Monitoring Results
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
39/40
Nickel Concentrations
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar
-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Concentration(mg/L)
Zinc Concentrations
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
Feb-
05
Apr-0
5
Jul-0
5
Oct-0
5
Jan-06
Apr-0
6
Jul-0
6
Oct-0
6
Mar-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-0
8
Jul-0
8
Oct-0
8
Concentration(mg/L)
1S 1D 2S 2D ES ED
SES SWS SED SWD WD
61/23254 Bunbury Harvey Regional Council
Hydrogeological Assessment of the Stanley Road Landfill
Historical Groundwater Monitoring Results
7/31/2019 GHD Hydro Assessment
40/40
GHD
GHD House, 239 Adelaide Tce. Perth, WA 6004
P.O. Box Y3106, Perth WA 6832
T: 61 8 6222 8222 F: 61 8 6222 8555 E: [email protected]
GHD 2008
This document is and shall remain the property of GHD. The document may only be used for the purpose
for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission.
Unauthorised use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited.
Document Status
Reviewer Approved for IssueRevNo.
AuthorName Signature Name Signature Date
0 A. Barron P. Hamer P. Hamer
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]