Fingal County Council - Dunsink Landfill

FINGAL COUNTY COUNCIL - DUNSINK LANDFILL

FACILITY For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

MONITORING REPORT: BIOLOGICAL SURFACE WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT FOR 2016

WASTE LICENCE REF. NO. W0127-01

JANUARY 2017

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:25 FINGAL COUNTY COUNCIL - DUNSINK LANDFILL FACILITY

MONITORING REPORT: BIOLOGICAL SURFACE WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT

WASTE LICENCE REF. NO. W0127-01

User is Responsible for Checking the Revision Status of This Document

Rev. Description of Changes Prepared Checked Approved Date: Nr. by: by: by: 0 Issue to Client BD/MG TR TR 30-01-2017

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Client: Fingal County Council

Keywords: environmental monitoring, residual landfill, biological water quality assessment, surface water, macroinvertebrates

Abstract: This report details the results of the annual biological assessment 2016 for surface water at Dunsink Landfill, Dunsink Lane, Finglas, County Dublin.

LW15/164/08/Rpt008 (Part 5)

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:25 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1. INTRODUCTION...... 1 2. BIOLOGICALASSESSMENT...... 2 3. RESULTS...... 4 4. CONCLUSION...... 10

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX I MAPS

APPENDIX II SSRS FIELD SHEETS

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

LW15/164/08/Rpt008 (Part 5) i/ii

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:25 LIST OF TABLES PAGE

TABLE 2.1: BIOLOGICAL MONITORING LOCATIONS...... 2 TABLE 2.2: Q-VALUES AND ASSOCIATED WATER QUALITY STATUS ...... 3 TABLE 3.1: SUMMARY OF SSRS AND Q-VALUE SCORES FOR THE SAMPLING SITES AT DUNSINK LANDFILL 2016 5 TABLE 3.2: SUMMARY OF QVALUE SCORES FOR SAMPLING SITES 2005-2016 ...... 5 TABLE 3.3: SUMMARY OF SSRS SCORES FOR SAMPLING SITES AT DUNSINK 2014 & 2016* ...... 6

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 3.1: SITE KS1 SAMPLING LOCATION PHOTO ...... 6 FIGURE 3.2: SITE KS2 SAMPLING LOCATION PHOTO ...... 6 FIGURE 3.3: SITE KS3 SAMPLING LOCATION PHOTO ...... 7 FIGURE 3.4: SITE KS3A SAMPLING LOCATION PHOTO ...... 7 FIGURE 3.5: SITE KS4 SAMPLING LOCATION PHOTO ...... 8 FIGURE 3.6: SITE KS6 SAMPLING LOCATION PHOTO ...... 8

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

LW15/164/08/Rpt008 (Part 5) ii/ii

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:25 Section 1 Fingal County Council – Dunsink Landfill Annual Biological Assessment 2016

1. INTRODUCTION

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued Fingal County Council with waste licence Reg. No. W0127-01 for its landfill at Dunsink Lane, Finglas, County Dublin on 9 January 2004.

The facility is situated in west County Dublin, approximately 8km from Finglas village. The landfill is located just inside the M50 motorway and is bounded to the south by Elmgreen Golf Course, and Dunsink Observatory and to the North by Cappagh National Orthopaedic Hospital. The Scribblestown stream runs through the site, from the North Western boundary to the eastern side of the site, and is fed from tributaries on site (Northern Tributary, Southern tributary, Dunsoghly tributary) before flowing east off site, to join the Tolka River.

Fingal County Council retained Fehily Timoney & Company (FT) to carry out the routine environmental monitoring required under the conditions of the licence.

The biological assessment of surface waters was last completed on site in 2014, before the 2016 survey. The 2015 survey was not completed as sampling conditions at each sampling station (bank erosion from horse access, leading to stream sedimentation) meant the sites were deemed unsuitable to complete the survey in 2015.

Biological assessment of surface waters was carried out at seven watercourse sites in and around Dunsink Landfill by FT staff on 14 September 2016. Unless otherwise specified, monitoring was carried out at those locations set out in Table D.1.1 of the licence and in Drawing W0127-01 biological monitoring locations which is included in Appendix I.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

LW15/164/08/Rpt008 (Part 5) Page 1 of 10

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:25 Section 2 Fingal County Council – Dunsink Landfill Annual Biological Assessment 2016

2. BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

2.1. Macroinvertebrate Survey

Biological monitoring of surface water quality was undertaken by means of a macroinvertebrate ‘kick sampling’ survey in accordance with Schedule D.5 of the waste licence (W0127-01) on 14 September 2016 at seven locations. Unless otherwise specified, monitoring was carried out at those locations set out in Table D.1.1 of the licence and in Drawing W0127-01 SW monitoring locations which is included in Appendix I.

Table 2.1: Biological Monitoring Locations

Sampling Station Location

Approximately 10m downstream of surface water sampling point SW19 on KS1 Scribblestown Stream KS2 Approximately 20m downstream of the site surface water attenuation pond onsite Towards the eastern boundary of the site, close to where the Scribblestown stream KS3 leaves the site. It is downstream of the confluence of the Scribblestown stream and Dunsoghly Tributary. KS3a Upstream of the confluence of the Scribblestown stream and Dunsoghly Tributary. KS4 On Scribblestown Stream, downstream of KS2 KS6 On the Dunsoghly tributary to the Scribblestown Stream

2.2. SSRS Methodology

Biological water quality assessment, or macroinvertebrate sampling, was carried out by means of Small Stream Risk Score (SSRS) methodology. SSRS is a biological risk assessment system for detecting potential sources of pollution in 1st and 2nd order streams. It was developed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in association with the Western River Basin District (WRBD) with the primary aim of supporting the programme of measures for the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The main objective of For inspection purposes only. the WFD is the achievement of ‘Good’ Consentwater of status copyright inowner all required water for bodies any other use.by 2015.

The SSRS methodology was carried out according to the training manual (2009) SSRS Training Manual – a Pollution Investigation Tool for Use in the Field1. Samples were collected from the six stream sites by means of a two-minute kick sample, collecting all macroinvertebrates in a 1 mm pond net attached to a metal frame. Stone washes and weed sweeps were also carried out where possible. Macroinvertebrates were identified on the bankside, or collected and preserved for later identification. A field sheet was filled in for each site, and a risk score was calculated (see attached field sheets in Appendix 2).

The SSRS method is a rapid field methodology for risk assessment that is based solely on macroinvertebrate indicators of water quality and their well-understood response to pollution. The SSRS method is a method for defining streams that are ‘at risk’. The method produces a continuous score and threshold values are used to decide on the degree of risk at a site. It is possible to compare ‘before’ and ‘after’ scores, which may be useful in assessing the potential impact of a development2.

Results of the SSRS place water bodies in to one of three categories:

At risk (Score = <6.5) Probably at risk (Score = 6.5-7.25) Probably not at risk (Score = >7.25)

1 Small Streams Risk Score (SSRS) Training Manual – A Pollution Investigation Tool for Use in the Field – White Young Green, February 2009 2 Guidance on Application and Use of the SSRS in Enforcement of Urban Waste Water Discharge Authorisations in Ireland, Environmental Protection Agency, April 2015.

LW15/164/08/Rpt008 (Part 5) Page 2 of 10

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:25 Section 2 Fingal County Council – Dunsink Landfill Annual Biological Assessment 2016

In addition to the presence and abundance of macroinvertebrates, physico-chemical characteristics of the environment are also recorded during the assessment, these include:

Modifications to the channel Stream flow conditions, Substratum conditions, Degree of bankside shading, Presence of filamentous algae, Presence of sewage fungus, Colour, velocity and clarity of the water, and DO, water temperature, conductivity and pH (where required).

2.3. Q-Value System

Macro-invertebrates were also identified to the level required for the EPA Q-Value rating system3. Based on the relative abundance of indicator species, a biotic index (Q-rating) was determined for each site in accordance with the biological assessment procedure used by the EPA3. Table 2.2 below, describes the quality status associated with each Q-Value.

Table 2.2: Q-Values and Associated Water Quality Status

Water Framework Directive Biotic Index Quality Status Ecological Status

Q5 High

Q4-5 High Unpolluted Waters

Q4 Good

Q3-4 Moderate Slightly Polluted Waters For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Q3 Poor Moderately Polluted Waters Q2-3 Poor

Q2 Bad

Q1-2 Bad Seriously Polluted Waters

Q1 Bad

3 In Toner et al., 2005. Water Quality in Ireland 2001–2003. Environmental Protection Agency.

LW15/164/08/Rpt008 (Part 5) Page 3 of 10

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:26 Section 3 Fingal County Council – Dunsink Landfill Annual Biological Assessment 2016

3. RESULTS

3.1. Site KS1

The streambed at this location consisted of boulder, and silt. It was a heavily vegetated location and only a weed sweep was completed due to dense vegetation on the stream course and lack of open stream area to sample. Leaf litter was present and stream shading was high. The stream wet width was 1.4 m and the average depth was 13 cm. The water was slow flowing, and clear. There was horse access downstream of the sampling site. This location was given a SSRS risk score of 0. The Q value score was Q2-3. This site is shown on Figure 3.1, and the accompanying field sheet is available in Appendix 2.

3.2. Site KS2

This was on the Scribblestown Stream downstream of the surface water attenuation pond. The banks were well vegetated and shading was low. The stream wet width was 1.3 m and average depth was 12 cm. The substrate was stoney, with slight siltation. The flow was low and discharge was clear. This location was given an SSRS risk score of 0. The Q value score was Q3. This site is shown on Figure 3.2, and the accompanying field sheet is available in Appendix 2.

3.3. Site KS3

This site is located on the Scribblestown Stream, near the exit point from the site. The wet width was 0.65 m and the average depth was 12 cm. The water was slow flowing and clear. The streambed consisted of cobble, gravel and silt. There was leaf litter present and moderate levels of siltation. Shading was low. There was horse grazing access on banks of the stream. This location was given an SSRS risk score of 1.6. The Q value for this site was Q2-3. This site is shown on Figure 3.3, and the accompanying field sheet is available in Appendix 2.

3.4. Site KS3a

This site is located in the east of the landfill For on inspection the Scribblestown purposes only. Stream. The bank wet width was 2.7 m Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. and the depth was 7 cm. The water was clear with a slight colour with low velocity. There was a low degree of shading at the site and the substrate was boulder, cobble, gravel and silt. Leaf litter was present This location was given an SSRS risk score of 0.8. The Q value for this site was Q2-3. This site is shown on Figure 3.4, and the accompanying field sheet is available in Appendix 2.

3.5. Site KS4

This site is located on the Scribbletown Stream close to the confluence of the stream and the Northern Tributary. This site was heavily vegetated and obtaining a full kick sample was difficult. The wet width was 1.5 m and the average depth was 10 cm. The velocity was slow and the water was clear. The substrate was boulder and silt. The level of shading was low. This location was given an SSRS risk score of 1.6. The Q value for this site was Q2-3. This site is shown on Figure 3.5, and the accompanying field sheet is available in Appendix 2.

3.6. Site KS6

The site is located on the Dunsoghly tributary. The wet width was 1.2 m and the depth was 5 cm. The water flow was slow and the water was clear. The substrate was dominated by silt. There was leaf litter present and heavy siltation. The stream shading was moderate.

LW15/164/08/Rpt008 (Part 5) Page 4 of 10

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:26 Section 3 Fingal County Council – Dunsink Landfill Annual Biological Assessment 2016

This location was given an SSRS risk score of 0.8. The Q value for this site was Q2. This site is shown on Figure 3.6, and the accompanying field sheet is available in Appendix 2.

3.6.1. All Sites

A summary of the scores (Q-values and SSRS) for each site is available in Table 3.1. Table 3.2 shows the Q-value results for the 2005-2016 surveys, for comparison. Table 3.3 shows summary of SSRS scores for 2014 and 2016 surveys.

Table 3.1: Summary of SSRS and Q-value Scores for the Sampling Sites at Dunsink Landfill 2016

Scores KS1 KS2 KS3 KS3A KS4 KS6

SSRS Score 0 0 1.6 0.8 1.6 0.8

SSRS Score <6.5 stream <6.5 stream <6.5 stream <6.5 stream <6.5 stream <6.5 stream Category at risk at risk at risk at risk at risk at risk

Equivalent Q Q2-3 Q3 Q2-3 Q2-3 Q2-3 Q2 Value Rating

Q Score Poor status Poor status Poor status Poor status Poor status Poor status Category

Table 3.2: Summary of Q Value Scores for Sampling Sites 2005-2016

Sampling KS1 KS2 KS3 KS3A KS4 KS6 Period

2005 Q3 Q3 Q3 - - -

2006 Q3 - For inspection Q3purposes only. - - - Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. 2007 Q2-3 - Q3 - - - Dec. 2008 Q2-3 Q3 Q3 - - - Aug. 2009 Q2-3 Q2-3 Q2 - - - Dec. 2009 - Q3 Q2-3 Q3 Q3 Q2

Sept. 2010 Q3 Q3 Q2-3 - - Q1-2

Sep-11 Q3 Q3 Q3 Q3 Q3 Q3 Aug. 2012 Q3 Q3 Q3 Q3 Q3 Q2

Sept. 2013 - - Q3 Q3 Q3 -

Aug. 2014 Q2 Q3 Q3 Q3 Q3 Q3

Sept. 2016 Q2-3 Q3 Q2-3 Q2-3 Q2-3 Q2

LW15/164/08/Rpt008 (Part 5) Page 5 of 10

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:26 Section 3 Fingal County Council – Dunsink Landfill Annual Biological Assessment 2016

Table 3.3: Summary of SSRS Scores for sampling sites at Dunsink 2014 & 2016*

Sampling KS1 KS2 KS3 KS3A KS4 KS6 Period

2014 SSRS 2.4 1.6 2.4 3.2 3.2 1.6 Score

2016 SSRS 0 0 1.6 0.8 1.6 0.8 Score

*: Biological survey was not completed in 2015

Figure 3.1: Site KS1 Sampling Location Photo For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Figure 3.2: Site KS2 Sampling Location Photo

LW15/164/08/Rpt008 (Part 5) Page 6 of 10

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:26 Section 3 Fingal County Council – Dunsink Landfill Annual Biological Assessment 2016

Figure 3.3: Site KS3 Sampling Location Photo

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Figure 3.4: Site KS3A Sampling Location Photo

LW15/164/08/Rpt008 (Part 5) Page 7 of 10

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:26 Section 3 Fingal County Council – Dunsink Landfill Annual Biological Assessment 2016

Figure 3.5: Site KS4 Sampling Location Photo

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Figure 3.6: Site KS6 Sampling Location Photo

LW15/164/08/Rpt008 (Part 5) Page 8 of 10

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:26 Section 3 Fingal County Council – Dunsink Landfill Annual Biological Assessment 2016

3.6.2. Interpretation of Results

As discussed in the introduction of this report, the biological survey was not completed in 2015. Previous surveys at these locations from 2005-2014 carried out biological monitoring by means of calculating EPA Q- Values or using the Q-Rating system and SSRS scoring system. Q-Rating is generally more useful in larger rivers and less applicable to 1st and 2nd order streams and streams such as those within Dunsink Landfill.

The SSRS scores calculated in the current 2016 survey has shown that Sites KS1-KS6 are all ‘at risk’ category of SSRS scoring. Whilst scores are lower than 2014 values, this may be attributable to a number of factors. Some of the sampling sites (KS1, KS4 and KS6) were heavily silted or vegetated, with a lack of riffle habitat and less than ideal for carrying out kick sampling surveys available. For KS2, the sampling point was moved further downstream compared to the sampling location in 2014 (which was located on the still section of the waterbody at the outlet pipe near SW7) where there was a clear sampling point. Scores overall reflect the dominance of Group 4 and Group 5 invertebrates and thus poor water quality.

The Q-Value was also calculated for the Dunsink sites and is shown on Table 3.2. In previous surveys the Q-values calculated were mostly Q2 or Q3 which is classed as ‘Poor status’ according to the Water Framework Directive (WFD) (see Table 3.2). The 2014 scores also indicated that all sites achieved ‘poor status’ attaining scores of between Q2 and Q3. Q value scores overall have remained similar to 2014 results.

None of the sites have moderate or good water quality that would be indicative of the ‘not at risk’ category in SSRS or Q4 ‘good status’ in Q sampling.

Results overall for SSRS and Q values for 2016 were broadly similar to the 2014 survey. As discussed, the stream conditions onsite were heavily vegetated and/or silted at a number of locations, which was a limiting factor in the carrying out kick sampling surveys.

3.6.3. Water Framework Directive Classification

The current Water Framework Directive Score for the Scribblestown Stream on the section entering the Tolka River has been checked though the EPA Envision map viewer (http://gis.epa.ie/Envision/). The current score classifies the stream as at “poor status”.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

LW15/164/08/Rpt008 (Part 5) Page 9 of 10

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:26 Section 4 Fingal County Council – Dunsink Landfill Annual Biological Assessment 2016

4. CONCLUSION

4.1. Scribblestown Stream

The biological data from 2016 indicate SSRS “stream at risk” conditions for all sites assessed on the Scribblestown Stream both within and downstream of the landfill, which was overall similar to previous surveys. The Q values overall still indicate poor status waters. With the absence of an upstream control site, it is difficult to interpret if the low scores are related to the landfill or not. The landfill is currently closed, capped and the category of at risk is unlikely to change due to heavily silted stream conditions on site and lack of riffle habitat. This is reflected in the low scores of the 2016 survey and absence of Group 1, Group 2 species and dominance of Group 4, Group 5 species.

As indicated in the EPA monitoring results (according to the Envision Map viewer), the stretch of the Scribblestown Stream entering the Tolka has been classed as “poor status”.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

LW15/164/08/Rpt008 (Part 5) Page 10 of 10

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:26 Appendix I

Monitoring Locations Map

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:26 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:26 Appendix II

SSRS Field Sheets

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:26 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

EPA Export 02-04-2017:02:55:26