April 2020 Ref: 1752-01

Hydrogeological Risk Assessment Golf Club, ,

Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

Contents 1. Introduction ...... 1 2. The Site...... 1 2.1. Location ...... 1 2.2. Environmental Setting ...... 2 2.3. Site History ...... 4 2.4. Development Summary ...... 4 3. Geology and Hydrogeology ...... 4 3.1. Geology ...... 4 3.2. Hydrogeology ...... 5 3.3. Hydrology ...... 6 4. Conceptual Model ...... 6 4.1. General ...... 6 4.2. Source ...... 6 4.2.1. Waste Acceptance Controls ...... 6 4.2.2. Material Types ...... 8 4.3. Pathways ...... 9 4.4. Receptors ...... 9 4.5. Qualitative Risk Assessment ...... 9 5. Risk Assessment...... 11 5.1. Potential Linkages ...... 11 5.2. Management of Spills and Non-conforming Wastes ...... 11 5.3. Monitoring ...... 11 5.4. Rogue Load Assessment ...... 12 5.4.1. Methodology ...... 12 5.4.2. Sensitivity Analysis ...... 13 5.4.3. Quantification of Rogue Loads ...... 13 5.4.4. Input Parameters ...... 13 5.5. Assessment of Results ...... 15

April 2020 Page i Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

6. Summary and Conclusions ...... 18

Appendix 1 Consim Files

Disclaimer This report has been prepared by McDonnell Cole with reasonable skill and care, based on information provided by the client and in accordance within the terms and conditions of agreement with the client. The report is intended for the sole use of the client and McDonnell Cole accepts no liability to third parties. No part of this document may be reproduced without the prior written agreement of McDonnell Cole.

April 2020 Page ii Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

1. Introduction

Leen Valley Golf Club was established in 1994. It is currently seeking to redevelop its facilities to include greater variety, with the aim of attracting new and younger members. This will include an adventure golf course and a toboggan run. To enable the redevelopment, some recontouring of the southern portion of the golf course will take place and this will require the import of approximately 120,000m3 of engineering fill. To this end a Waste Recovery Plan was prepared by AA Environmental Limited (AAe) in 2019 and this has been approved by the Environment Agency. A planning application is now in process. This Hydrogeological Risk Assessment (HRA) is prepared to support an environmental permit application.

Information sources used in this assessment includes the following reports:

 AAe: 2019: Report reference 193082/WRP. Leen Valley Golf Club, Waste Recovery Plan.  Weller Designs Limited: 2019: Course design drawings  AAe: 2020: Report reference 193082/ESSD. Leen Valley Golf Club, Environmental Setting and Site Design.  Envireau Water: 2020: Flood Risk and Drainage Assessment

2. The Site 2.1. Location

The site is located on the north side of Wigwam Lane, Hucknall, north Nottingham, NG15 7TA. The existing club house can be located by National Grid reference SK 543 492. The area of the site for redevelopment (subsequently referred to as the site) includes the 16th, 17th and 18th holes, the practice range and an area to the north of the club house for the toboggan run, refer to Figure 1 and 2, Site Plans. The main golf course lies further to the north. To the northwest of the site are allotments and a residential area. To the north of the main golf course are playing fields and more residential properties. To the northeast and southeast of the main golf course is the southerly flowing . A disused railway is located west of the River Leen and approximately 300m east of the southeastern boundary of the site. To the southwest of the site is an industrial estate including recycling facilities and ready-mixed concrete.

The club house is at an elevation of 66m AOD. The ground to the north of the club house, proposed as the toboggan run rises to approximately 82m AOD. the ground across the 17th, 18th holes and practice range falls generally from around 80m AOD in the northeast, to 65m AOD in the southwest. The 16th hole, which is furthest to the southeast falls from around 66mAOD on the west to around 60m AOD in the southeast, with a shallow valley feature. The area of the site is approximately 6 ha.

April 2020 Page 1 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

Figure 1: Site Plan (taken from Weller drawing 1745.01.0)

Wigwam Lane ditch

Baker Lane Brook

Figure 2: Site Plan (taken from Weller drawing 1745.02.0)

2.2. Environmental Setting

The site is located to the east of Hucknall on the northern outskirts of Nottingham. This is a former coal mining area, with an active railway to the west and a disused railway to the east. The River Leen flows from north to south past the east of the site. The land rises gently east of the River Leen. The current topography of the site itself has been formed by previous land raising, associated with Hucknall Colliery. Other environmental features are summarised in Table 1.

April 2020 Page 2 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

Table 1: Environmental Features Receptor Nature of receptor Distance from site Residential/Work-Place/Amenity - Industrial estate 20m SW Within 50 m Allotments 50m NW Residential/Work-Place/Amenity - Residential area 100m NW and Between 50 and 250 m 250 m SW Residential/Work-Place/Amenity - Station 300m W Between 250 and 1000 m Residential 350m N Primary and nursery school 400m NW Playing fields 400m N Habitats Habitats Directive sites None within 2km CROW Act 2000 sites Quarries 2.4km N Other habitat sites Hall Park Meadows 1.8km S Groundwater Aquifer Cadeby Formation – dolostone of the Lower Magnesian Limestone Groundwater protection zone None Closest is 200m east Groundwater abstractions Golf course borehole < 20m3/day Hardstaff & Sons 1.2 km NE Nitrate vulnerable zone Yes Surface Water Closest surface water Baker Lane Brook Adjacent to SE River Leen 400m NE and 400m E Direct runoff from site? Controlled by attenuation ponds Surface water abstractions Hanson Quarry Products 200m S Torkard Construction 400m SE Truestar Services 550m E Marshalls Farms 1 km NE Hardstaff & sons 1.2 km N NCC 1.3 km S NCC 2 km W Wells and springs Wells Cobblers Hill 400m E Springs None recorded on OS maps within 1km Air quality management zone No Flood zone Zone 1 – low probability

April 2020 Page 3 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

2.3. Site History

Historical maps show the site was originally open fields. Spoil from the Hucknall No2 colliery, which was directly south of Wigwam Lane, was being brought to site by 1955. This continued in to the 1980s. The golf course was developed by about 1994.

2.4. Development Summary

The area of the golf course proposed for redevelopment is the southern portion closest to Wigwam Lane, as shown by the red outline in Figure 1. The aim of the redevelopment is to provide greater variety for players at all levels, but especially to attract players who are new to the sport. The existing practice range and the 16th, 17th and 18th holes will be remodelled. There will be a new adventure golf course and a toboggan run. A water storage lagoon will be created to the northwest of the practice facility.

3. Geology and Hydrogeology

3.1. Geology

The British Geological Survey (BGS) Geology of Britain viewer shows there to be no superficial geological deposits in the area of the site. The solid geology is shown as the Cadeby Formation and is described as dolostone. This was formerly known as the Lower Magnesian Limestone. The BGS Lexicon of Named Rock Units describes the lithology of the Cadeby Formation as grey to buff grey, commonly oolitic or granular, with subordinate mudstone, dolomitic siltstone and sandstone. The base of the unit is described as organic-rich mudstone (Marl Slate) or where that is absent, Permian basal sands and breccias. The term Lower Permian Marl was formerly in use, understood to represent the lower part of the Cadeby Formation. The outcrop thickens eastwards.

The BGS have records of two boreholes associated with the former Hucknall Colliery on site. These focus on details of Coal Measures at depth and do not describe the near surface strata. There is also a record of the borehole log for the golf course borehole, drilled in 2013. The geological sequence is indicated below. Detailed geological descriptions are not provided.

0 – 4m of backfill, bricks, rubble 4 – 8m of slightly silty CLAY 8 – 90m Coal Measures: Mudstone, siltstone and sandstone with bands of thin coal

The above sequence suggests the dolostone is very thin, or absent from site and the Cadeby Formation is present as a clay/weathered mudstone. The BGS 1990, see references, describes the Cadeby Formation as subdivided between a lower mudstone facies and an upper carbonate facies. It seems likely that it is the mudstone facies which is present on site as a

April 2020 Page 4 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

shallow thickness above the Coal Measures. This is supported by information from the Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, 2009, which describes the influences of local geology on soil conditions. It describes free draining calcareous brown earth soils above the Magnesian Limestone and slowly permeable red clays above the Permian Marl. It states that the latter soil type is found in the area between Woodhouse (northwest of the site) and Hucknall, leading to water logging.

3.2. Hydrogeology

The Cadeby Formation is generally regarded as a principal aquifer. However, as discussed in section 3.1, the thickness of the formation above the Coal Measures in the area of the site is around 4m. The lithology appears to be that of a clay/weathered mudstone. The effectiveness of the Cadeby Formation as an aquifer will be of limited value in this location. Envireau Water, 2020, describe the Cadeby Formation as unproductive strata.

Any groundwater held within the fractures/fissures of the Cadeby Mudstones in the vicinity of the site, is likely to have limited mobility, or to discharge locally to the surface water network.

The underlying Coal Measures are generally considered to be a secondary aquifer. The close proximity of Hucknall No 2 colliery shaft to the site brings with it the recirculation of mining waters. This may make the quality of the groundwater poor locally.

There is a groundwater source protection zone III (SPZ) approximately 400m east of the site. which corresponds with the outcrop of the Triassic sandstones.

Information from the golf course borehole, which is positioned close to the existing club house at an elevation of approximately 65m AOD, shows a water strike during drilling at 44m depth, in sandstone. The rest water level prior to pump testing was recorded as 4m depth. The borehole is used for watering of the greens. Issues with iron have been reported.

The direction of groundwater flow likely to be southeast towards the River Leen. The topography falls from approximately 65 to 58m AOD towards the southeastern corner of the golf course, over a distance of approximately 600m. This suggests hydraulic gradients in the range of 0.01 to 0.005, or shallower.

Local water abstractions within 2km are largely surface water, with the exception of a pond/lagoon recorded as a groundwater source. This is an indication of the lack of resource in the Cadeby Formation locally. There is little evidence of wells, or springs. Issues are noted on current OS maps approximately 400m east of the site, on the eastern side of the River Leen. This location corresponds with a well, as marked on historical maps.

April 2020 Page 5 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

3.3. Hydrology

The site is within the catchment of Baker Lane Brook, which flows in to the site from the west towards the southern end of the golf course, at the point where Wigwam Lane turns to take a more southerly direction, refer to Figure 1. There is also a ditch, referred to as Wigwam Lane Ditch in the 2020 Flood Risk Assessment, which flows parallel to Wigwam Lane along the southern boundary of the site, to join Baker Lane Brook. Approximately 400m to the southeast the Baker Lane Brook joins the River Leen, on the eastern side of the railway line. There are several other smaller drains in the southeastern section of the golf course.

The quality of the Baker Lane Brook has been designated Grade B up to the year 2009. This is good status. Grade B also applies to the River Leen to the east of the site. These general quality assessments were replaced by the Water Framework Directive in 2009.

There are 25 discharge consents within 1km of the site. The closest relate to a number of storm water sewage discharges in the name of Severn Trent. These are downgradient of the site to the south and southeast associated with the River Leen. Hucknall No 2 colliery also has a listed consent around 400m to the southeast, but it is not known whether this is still in use to control mine water. There are several local surface water abstractions, refer to Table 1, including two less than 500m south of the site.

The redesign of the site will include a new water storage lagoon and attenuation pond towards the east and south of the site respectively.

4. Conceptual Model

4.1. General The conceptual model considered in this hydrogeological risk assessment is the import of engineered fill (the source) to reprofile existing soils, over the Cadeby Formation, which is of limited thickness and likely to be of low permeability below the area of reprofiling. This poor aquifer is likely to be of limited vertical permeability. However, it is considered that it may have slightly higher horizontal permeability as a result of the natural partings within the mudstone and this may feed into the local surface water regime.

4.2. Source 4.2.1. Waste Acceptance Controls

The imported material will be inert and will be controlled by inert waste acceptance criteria (WAC). The table below compares inert WAC solids expressed in mg/kg at 10: 1 extract, with the equivalent leachability in mg/l; the UK Drinking Water Standards (UKDWS) and the freshwater environmental quality standards (EQS).

April 2020 Page 6 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

Table 2: Waste Acceptance Criteria Determinand WAC Solid results Equivalent UKDWS EQS (mg/l) (total Leachate (mg/kg) leachability (mg/l) concentration) Criteria (mg/l) (LS=10l/kg) (mg/kg) Arsenic 0.5 0.05 0.01 0.05 Barium 20 2 n/a Cadmium 0.04 0.004 0.005 0.00025 3 Chromium 0.5 0.05 0.05 0.0047 Copper 2.0 0.2 2 0.001 bio.

Mercury 0.01 0.001 0.001 0.00007 MAC (inorganic) Nickel 0.4 0.04 0.02 0.004 bio. Lead 0.5 0.05 0.01 0.0012 bio. Molybdenum 0.5 0.05 n/a n/a Antimony 0.06 0.006 0.005 n/a Selenium 0.1 0.01 0.01 n/a Zinc 4.0 0.4 n/a 0.0109 bio. + background Chloride 800 80 250 250 Fluoride 10 1 1.5 5 Sulphate (SO4)* 1000 100 250 400 Phenol 1.0 0.1 n/a 0.0077 TDS 4000 n/a n/a n/a DOC 500 n/a n/a n/a BTEX (TPH C5 – 6 n/a 0.01 1 (benzene) 0.01 benzene C10) Mineral oil (C10 500 n/a 0.09 1 n/a – C40) PCB 1 n/a n/a n/a PAH (total) 100 n/a 0.0001 0.00017 BaP as marker 1 – World Health Organisation (WHO); 2 - Bio- bioavailable; 3 - EQS for hard water in dolostone catchment

Table 3 highlights where the equivalent leachability exceeds the lower of the UKDWS, or EQS. As an additional precaution leachability testing will be required for those determinands with exceedances. The Importation Protocol (AAe report reference 193082/IP) requires the additional leaching assessment criteria as given in Table 3. The leaching assessment criteria include slightly higher criteria for chloride, fluoride and sulphate than given in the WAC, based on the risk assessment presented in section 5 of this report. Additionally, consideration is also given to European Union Council Decision 2003/33/EC, in relation to sulphate and chloride, which notes:

1) If the waste does not meet the values for sulphate, it may still be considered as complying with the acceptance criteria if the leaching does not exceed either of the

April 2020 Page 7 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

following values: 1 500 mg/l as C0 at L/S = 0,1 l/kg and 6 000 mg/kg at L/S = 10 l/kg. 2) The values for total dissolved solids (TDS) can be used alternatively to the values for sulphate and chloride.

On the basis of the above, slightly higher limits are acceptable and the risk assessment in section 5 is used to demonstrate that there is a low likelihood of adverse impact on the hydrogeological setting of this site.

Table 3: Leaching Assessment Criteria Determinand Leachate Criteria (L:S 10:1 Environmental Assessment Level leachate test) (ug/l) (EAL) Antimony (total) 5 UKDWS Arsenic (total) 10 UKDWS Cadmium (total) 0.25 EQS Chloride 250,000 EQS Chromium (total) 4.7 EQS Copper 1 EQS Fluoride 1500 UKDWS Lead (total) 1.2 EQS Mercury (inorganic) 0.07 EQS Nickel (total) 4 EQS Phenol 7.7 EQS Sulphate 400,000 EQS Zinc 10.9 (=9.5-background) EQS

4.2.2. Material Types The site will import materials that comply with the Landfill Directive definition of inert, as presented in Table 4.

Table 4: Inert Materials Description EWC code Concrete 17 01 01 Bricks 17 01 02 Tiles and ceramics 17 01 03 Mixtures of concrete, bricks, tiles and ceramics 17 01 07 17 05 04 Natural soils and stones (must be proven prior to receipt) 20 02 02 Wastes from mineral non-metalliferous excavation 01 01 02 Waste gravel and crushed rocks 01 04 08 Waste sand and clays 01 04 09 Solids from physical treatment (limited to soil washing silts only) 19 02 06 Minerals from waste facilities 19 12 09 Other wastes (including mixtures of materials) from mechanical 19 12 12 treatment of wastes other than those mentioned in 19 12 11 Solids from soil remediation (limited to soil washing silts only) 19 13 02

April 2020 Page 8 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

4.3. Pathways

The chemical constituents within the incoming inert materials can migrate vertically through the full thickness of fill. From here there will be vertical migration through the unsaturated zone. The unsaturated zone in the vicinity of the golf course borehole is 4m of made ground. This is close to the site entrance where most disturbance to ground can be expected. Further downgradient this is likely to be partly, if not all the clay/weathered mudstone of the Cadeby Formation. The pathway through the saturated zone of the Cadeby Formation below the site is likely to be limited based on its description as 4m of clay. However, as it is designated as an aquifer it is assumed it will have some horizontal permeability through the fractures and fissures. This is the assumption made in order to perform a quantitative risk assessment.

The rate of infiltration through the fill will be equivalent to the effective rainfall, considered to be approximately 110mm per annum in this part of the country.

The vertical hydraulic conductivity of the unsaturated zone will be low and of the order of 1 x 10-8 to 1 x 10-9 m/s for a clay/weathered mudstone. The horizontal hydraulic conductivity of the saturated zone may be enhanced by the presence of fissures and could be an order of magnitude higher.

4.4. Receptors

The groundwater beneath the site is not considered to be the principal receptor, given the low likelihood of significant flow and the likelihood of existing contamination from colliery spoil and coal workings. The local surface water regime is considered to be the most sensitive receptor. This has the potential to be affected either by lateral migration through the Cadeby Formation, or by runoff from the imported fill. Runoff becomes less of a risk once the fill has been seeded and returned to grass. The site’s attenuation pond will be designed to discharge at greenfield rates.

4.5. Qualitative Risk Assessment

A qualitative environmental risk assessment summarising the above is presented in Table 5. The likelihood of impacts to the quality of the surface water regime is addressed in more detail in Section 5.

April 2020 Page 9 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment , Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

Table 5: Qualitative Environmental Risk Assessment Source/Hazard Pathway Receptor Risk Management Probability of exposure Consequence Overall risk technique Imported Fill Rainwater Cadeby Waste acceptance Probability of leachate Release of hazardous Low with the infiltration Formation procedures limit fill to inert entering the substances to potential to through fill and waste, with additional groundwater directly groundwater. Pollution of leach chemical unsaturated leachability controls. This below the site at groundwater by non- determinands at layer should ensure incoming concentrations above hazardous pollutants concentrations wastes can only leach at the UKDWS – Low. above existing above the EAL concentrations below the background EAL. concentrations. Site in Surface water directed to breach of the attenuation pond away Environmental Permitting from fill, to minimise Regulations. infiltration. No source protection zone. Poor aquifer. Consequence considered – Low. Imported Fill Lateral Surface waters Waste acceptance Probability of leachate Contamination of the Low with the migration of Baker Lane procedures limit fill to inert reaching surface water Grade B surface waters to potential to through Brook and River waste, with additional after migration concentrations above leach chemical Cadeby Leen leachability controls. This through the low natural background and determinands at Formation. should ensure incoming permeability Cadeby the EQS. - Medium concentrations wastes can only leach at Formation - Low above the EAL concentrations below the EAL. Surface water directed to attenuation pond away from fill, to minimise infiltration Imported Fill Run off from Baker Lane Waste acceptance Waste acceptance Contamination of a Low with the recontoured Brook procedures limit fill to inert procedures will surface water source potential to areas and waste, with additional minimise leachability. above the EQS - Medium leach chemical greenfield leachability controls. This Run off related to determinands at runoff from should ensure incoming rainfall and not concentrations attenuation wastes can only leach at continuous. This above the EAL. pond to concentrations below the means increased surface water EQS. Discharge control on dilution potential of environment to attenuation pond. brook at time of southeast exposure – Low.

April 2020 Page 10 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

5. Risk Assessment

5.1. Potential Linkages

The qualitative assessment has identified the potential scenarios for groundwater and surface water receptors associated with the site. The risks are considered to be low, however, based on the site’s setting above the Cadeby Formation and with adjacent surface waters, it is considered appropriate to assess the risk quantitatively. If all waste acceptance procedures are adhered to there is a low likelihood that fill could generate leachate at concentrations above the UKDWS, or EQS. However, the quantitative risk assessment will examine the potential effects of unknowingly accepting non-inert waste. This is sometimes referred to as a rogue load assessment.

The first stage in the quantitative risk assessment is to establish a normal operating scenario for wastes accepted in accordance with the Importation Protocol. To be conservative it is assumed that the wastes can leach concentrations equivalent to the Co concentration given in EU Council Decision 2003/33/EC on waste acceptance criteria. These are higher than inert WAC.

5.2. Management of Spills and Non-conforming Wastes

The site will operate an Environmental Management System that will have procedures in place for the management of spillages during the reprofiling works. In addition to the Importation Protocol, visual conformance checks will be made on incoming materials. This will enable a rapid response to the removal of non-conforming materials.

5.3. Monitoring

The site will be designed to have an attenuation pond which will outflow at greenfield rates to the surface water regime downgradient. It is, therefore, recommended that monitoring of the attenuation pond is undertaken for a period after completion of the works. Given the history of the site and the presence of colliery spoil, it is recommended that the quality of the Baker Lane Brook is established prior to works beginning. The recommended monitoring regime is presented in Table 6. Data should be reviewed quarterly to ensure there are no significant changes to background concentrations and that the proposed monitoring regime remains appropriate.

April 2020 Page 11 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

Table 6: Surface Water Monitoring Monitoring Location Determinands Frequency Standard/method Baker Lane Brook – Metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Pre-start Spot sample. upgradient and Hg, Ni, Pb, Sb, Zn) Two samples Sampling in downgradient chloride, fluoride, During development accordance with EA sulphate, phenol, Quarterly sample technical guidance PAH, BTEX Post development M18. Quarterly for 1 year Attenuation pond – Post development downgradient Quarterly sample for sample point 1 year

5.4. Rogue Load Assessment

5.4.1. Methodology

A rogue load assessment (RLA) has been conducted using Consim as the assessment tool. A normal operating scenario is modelled (Leen Valley 1) with leachate concentrations conservatively entered as the Co (2003/33/EC) concentrations. The potential import of hydrocarbons is controlled by concentrations within the soil at inert waste acceptance criteria. It is assumed the inert soils concentrations will not release hydrocarbons at concentrations above the UKDWS. Therefore, within the normal operating scenario hydrocarbons are represented by benzene at the WHO limit for hydrocarbon range EC5 – EC6 in drinking water (in the absence of a UKDWS) and benzo(a)pyrene / benzo 3,4 pyrene at the UKDWS limit for total polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).

The normal operating scenario is used as a starting point for the rogue load assessment. This is to show that if the Importation Protocol is followed, there will be no exceedance of the EAL at the designated receptor. The leachate concentrations are then raised iteratively, up to 10 times, to derive a point at which the EAL would be exceeded, to simulate the impact of a potential rogue load.

The resulting concentrations in water leaching through site soils and migrating laterally to reach surface water receptors are assessed at the 95th percentile. They are compared with the EAL – the values for which are presented in Table 3. The point of assessment is taken to be the Consim default receptor on the downgradient boundary of the site.

April 2020 Page 12 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

5.4.2. Sensitivity Analysis

In conjunction with the normal operating scenario the sensitivity of the Consim model is examined. The principal unknown for the site is the thickness of the unsaturated zone. Two sensitivity models have been run with decreasing unsaturated zone thickness. A further parameter considered in the sensitivity analysis is the hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer.

5.4.3. Quantification of Rogue Loads

Having established that the site, under normal operating conditions and waste acceptance procedures, does not impact upon the groundwater within the aquifer, the Consim model is used iteratively to determine what increases in site wide leachate concentrations could be tolerated without causing impact above the EAL. In reality a rogue load would only affect a discrete area of the site, rather than the whole volume of fill. Two models have been produced. The first assesses a 2-fold increase in leachate concentrations for all input parameters. The second assess a 10-fold increase in input concentrations, or where this cannot be tolerated for some determinands, the inputs have been adjusted until an acceptable solution is produced.

The model summary is presented in Table 7.

Table 7: Model Log Model Name Scenario Leen Valley 1 Normal operations. Waste acceptance procedures adhered to Sensitivity 1 Unsaturated zone thickness reduced to Tri (1, 2,4) Sensitivity 2 Unsaturated zone thickness reduced to Tri (0.5, 1, 4) Sensitivity 3 Hydraulic conductivity of aquifer increase LogTri (1e-8, 5e-8, 1e-7) Sensitivity 4 Hydraulic conductivity of aquifer decrease LogTri (e-9, 5e-9, 1e-7) Leen Valley RLA1 Rogue Load Assessment. Leachate increase x 2 Leen Valley RLA2 Rogue Load Assessment. Leachate increase x 10, or nearest acceptable increase

5.4.4. Input Parameters

The input parameters which characterise the source under normal operations are presented in Table 8. The remaining input parameters for the Consim assessment are presented in Table 9.

April 2020 Page 13 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

Table 8: Chemical Determinands for Rogue Load Assessment Determinand Co value Partition Partition Henry’s Law Half life 2.1.2.1 coefficient coefficient: constant anaerobic 2003/33/EC source (ml/g) Cadeby (ml/g) (unitless) (years) (mg/l) Antimony 0.1 Uni (45,550) 2 Uni (45,550) 2 - - Arsenic (total) 0.06 117 1 Uni (117, 249.6) 1 - - Benzene 0.01 4 0.57 1 0.57 1 0.224 1 0.27 – 1.4 1 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0001 5 Koc = 129000 3 Koc = 129000 3 1.76e-6 3 - Cadmium (total) 0.02 240 1 Uni (222.2, 240) 1 - - Chloride (total) 460 0 0 - - Chromium (total) 0.1 35 1 Uni (35, 965.6) 1 - - Copper 0.6 295 1 Uni (126.8, 295) 1 Fluoride (total) 2.5 0.8 1 0.8 1 - - Lead (total) 0.15 434.6 1 434.6 1 - - Mercury 450 1 3835.4 1 - - 0.002 (inorganic) Nickel (total) 0.12 66 1 Uni (66, 85.7) 1 - - Phenol 0.3 0.22 0.22 1.89e-5 0.13 – 0.82 Sulphate as SO4 1500 0 0 - - Zinc 1.2 26 Uni (20.7, 26) 1 = Consim Help File 2 = US EPA : 1996 : Soil Screening Guidelines: Technical Background Document 3 = Environment Agency : 2008 : Science Report SC050021/SR7, Compilation of Data for Priority Organic Pollutants for Derivation of Soil Guideline Values. 4 = WHO for EC5-EC6 used for benzene as initial control 5 = UKDWS for PAH used as initial control

Notes to Table 8: Values for the partition coefficient taken from Consim are those for unspecified conditions for the source. For the Cadeby clay/weathered mudstone a range of values from the unspecified conditions and glacial till are selected.

Table 9: General Input Parameters Parameter Unit Value Source

Fill: Source 1 Dry Bulk Density g/m3 Uni (1.15, 1.25) Assumed for inert waste Moisture content % 15 Conservatively high for inerts Particle density g/cm3 2.65 Assumed Porosity fraction Calculated by model Thickness m Tri (1, 2, 5) Site profile contours Infiltration mm/yr Normal (110, 11) Effective rainfall

Fraction of organic % 0.5 Conservative carbon

Unsaturated Zone

April 2020 Page 14 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

Parameter Unit Value Source BGS borehole record and Thickness m Tri (2,3,4) conservative estimate for reduction in thickness downgradient Water filled porosity fraction 0.3 Assumed for clay Dry Bulk Density g/cm3 1.8 Clay / weathered mudstone Unsaturated Clay/weathered mudstone – vertical m/s LogTri (5e-10, 1e-9 1e-8) conductivity hydraulic conductivity Vertical dispersivity m 0.04 1% of thickness Aquifer Pathway

Thickness m 4 Golf course borehole log Dry Bulk Density g/cm3 1.9 Weathered mudstone Mixing zone thickness m 4 Thickness of Cadeby Formation LogTri (5e-9, 1e-8, 1e-7) Horizontal hydraulic conductivity Hydraulic conductivity m/s enhanced by partings/fissures

Effective porosity fraction 0.2 Assumed for weathered mudstone Hydraulic gradient - Uni (0.005, 0.01) Surface topography downgradient Longitudinal m 0.5 Assumed for short pathway length dispersivity Lateral dispersivity m 0.05 Assumed for short pathway length

5.5. Assessment of Results

All results have been assessed at the 95th percentile. The compliance point is taken to be the Consim default receptor on the boundary of the site. For non-hazardous substances the compliance point can be 50m downgradient. Therefore, the assessment at the downgradient boundary adds some conservatism.

The results are presented in Table 10 and indicate that under normal operation of the site all determinands are lower than the EAL at the point of assessment.

The results of the sensitivity analysis show that if the thickness of the unsaturated zone was reduced to a most likely thickness of 2m there is little difference. If this is reduced again to 1m there is a slight increase in chloride and sulphate concentrations, but neither exceed the EQS. When the hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer is varied there is little change in results except for chloride and sulphate. Concentrations decrease slightly with decreasing hydraulic conductivity, but there is less change if the hydraulic conductivity is increased.

April 2020 Page 15 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

Table 10: Results (mg/l) (Hazardous substances, UKTAG 2018 in grey)

Determinand Leen Valley 1 Sensitivity 1 Sensitivity 2 Sensitivity 3 Sensitivity 4 RLA x 2 RLA x 10 Reduced Reduced Increased Decreased Or other thickness of thickness of hydraulic hydraulic acceptable unsaturated unsaturated conductivity conductivity of increase zone: Tri (1,2,4) zone: Tri (0.5,1,4) of aquifer aquifer Antimony <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 Arsenic <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 Benzene 4e-8 3e-8 2.5e-8 5.5e-8 6.3e-8 1.3e-7 4.9e-7 Benzo(a) pyrene < 1e-8 < 1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 Cadmium <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 Chloride 62 63 86 65 43 82 229 (x 4) Chromium <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 Copper <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8

Fluoride 1.12 0.99 1.1 1.2 1.14 2.27 1.46 (x 1.3) Lead <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 Mercury <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 Nickel <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 <1e-8 0 for 2000yrs Phenol 8 e-9 4.7e-9 4e-9 1e-8 7.1e-9 1.4e-8 6e-8 Sulphate 206 204 280 213 134 296 380 (x2) Zinc 0 for 2000yrs 0 for 2000yrs 0 for 2000yrs 0 for 2000yrs 0 for 2000yrs 0 for 2000yrs 0 for 2000yrs

Exceeds EQS

April 2020 Page 16 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

The rogue load assessment models have determined that it is possible to increase the leachate concentration of all determinands to varying degrees without exceedance of the EAL. The results are shown below in Table 11. For the majority of determinands it was possible to increase source concentrations 10 times or more without exceedance of the EAL. For the inorganic substances with a partition coefficient at, or close to zero (chloride, fluoride and sulphate) the model showed exceedances at a 10-fold increase in source concentration. Further iterations of the model were used to determine the maximum increase in source concentration which would not cause an exceedance of the EAL.

Table 11: Increases in leachate concentration from rogue load assessment

Determinand Increase in Co leachate Actual leachate concentration without concentration modelled causing exceedance of EAL (mg/l) at point of assessment Antimony >10 1 Arsenic >10 0.6 Benzene >10 0.1 Benzo (a) pyrene >10 0.001 Cadmium >10 0.2 Chloride X 4 1840 Chromium >10 1 Copper >10 6 Fluoride X 1.3 3.25 Lead >10 1.5 Mercury >10 0.02 Nickel >10 1.2 Phenol >10 3 Sulphate X 2 3000 Zinc >10 12

Table 11 indicates that with a leachable concentration of 18400mg/l chloride, 3.25mg/l of fluoride and 3000mg/l of sulphate across the entire site, there is a low likelihood of impact at concentrations greater than the EAL at the downgradient boundary of the site. This suggests, in addition to the notes in 2003/33/EC on differing limits for chloride and sulphate discussed in section 4.2.1, there can be some tolerance in the leachable limits for these three substances above the inert WAC. It is proposed that the leachable limit for chloride and sulphate is set at the EQS. For fluoride it is proposed that the UKDWS of 1.5mg/l is used as the leachable limit.

April 2020 Page 17 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

6. Summary and Conclusions

The suitability of the proposed scheme at Leen Valley Golf Club has been assessed both qualitatively and quantitatively. The site is above the Cadeby Formation, which is generally regarded as a principal aquifer, but is described as clay in the vicinity of the site. The saturated zone is considered to have a horizontal hydraulic conductivity, which may discharge in to the surface water regime. The likelihood of seepages from the proposed fill migrating into the surface water regime has been assessed quantitatively and the scheme is considered to be acceptable.

The strict importation controls will limit material types and require both WAC analysis and leachability testing as presented in Tables 2 and 3 of this report. A rogue load assessment has demonstrated that there is tolerance within the acceptance criteria, such that an unknown acceptance of a quantity of non-inert material will have a low likelihood to cause unacceptable impacts on the surface water regime.

The quantitative assessment has assumed that as a worst case there is groundwater flow in the Cadeby Formation. However, the surface water regime is considered to be the more sensitive receptor in this assessment. It will be important to monitor the quality of the Baker Lane Brook before, during and after the development. Recommended monitoring details are presented in Table 6.

April 2020 Page 18 Hydrogeological Risk Assessment, Leen Valley Golf Club, Hucknall, Nottingham

REFERENCES 1. AAe: 2019: Report reference 193082/WRP. Leen Valley Golf Club, Waste Recovery Plan. 2. AAe: 2019: Report reference 193082/ESSD. Leen Valley Golf Club, Environmental Setting and Site Design. 3. AAe: 2019: Report reference 193082/IP. Leen Valley Golf Club Importation Protocol. 4. Ashfield District Council: 2009: Strategic Flood Risk Assessment. 5. BGS: 1990: Technical Report WA/90/1. Nottingham: A geological background for planning and development. 6. Envireau Water: 2020: Flood Risk and Drainage Assessment 7. EU : 2003/33/EC : Council Decision of 19 December 2002 establishing criteria and procedures for the acceptance of waste at landfills pursuant to Article 16 of and Annex II to Directive 1999/31/EC. The Council of the European Union

April 2020 Page 19

36 Dunster Road Nottingham NG2 6JE.

APPENDIX 1

Consim Files

1752\HRA

Electronic copies of Consim files supplied separately

1752\HRA