Richard Campbell presentation from the 2017 Institute of Public Works Engineering Australasia (IPWEA) leadership workshop. Richard covers the changing face of landfill environmental compliance reporitng through automated monitoring technology.

1. Landfill Compliance Monitoring.
Achieving long term efficiency.
Richard Campbell
richard@hydroterra.com.au
www.hydroterra.com.au

2. Richard Campbell
Managing Director - HydroTerra
 Richard Campbell has over 25 years working in the environmental
industry, initially as a consultant hydrogeologist specialising in the
waste, contaminated land and mining sectors. Richard was formerly
a practicing EPA accredited Auditor (contaminated land), before 12
years ago establishing HydroTerra.
 HydroTerra is a company that specialises in environmental
monitoring, monitoring system design and integration of innovative
monitoring technologies.

3. How Many Landfills in Victoria?
 The Victorian EPA data in 2014 indicated
that there are over 100 active landfills in
Victoria, in both council and private
ownership, and at least 245 closed
landfills, with the majority having closed
at least 10 years ago
 These landfills require monitoring during
operation and post closure

4. Assessment & Management of landfill risk
to the environment
 In Victoria we have a rigorous process of assessing & managing landfill risk: it
is quite expensive and produces a high level of rigour
 The audit process holds the activities together and in general we stick to the
plan

5. What’s the Issue?
Ongoing Compliance
Costs
- Monitoring
- Reporting
- Auditing
Lots of Planning &
Oversight

6. Compliance Documents Drive Monitoring
Scope.
Scope of Monitoring & Reporting
Approved Monitoring Plans
EIP – Operational Monitoring
Monitoring Data Collection
.
Field & Analytical
Data Reporting
Compliance Reporting

7. How to constrain the pear? Its not about
the planning it’s the implementation.
Field & Operation
Inspection
Monitoring Data Collection
.
Field & Analytical
Data Reporting
Compliance Reporting

8. Field Data Collection Costs

9. Automation:
Technology is not a limiting factor
Gas, Water Quality, Leachate level, Dust, Wind
Lysimeters etc.

10. How about automate & monitor the
operation?
Lets look at three of the big ones:
A) leachate/groundwater
B) Landfill gas
C) Cap Infiltration
So what technology do we have:
1. Continuous leachate level and conductivity
2. Continuous landfill gas
3. Continuous moisture monitoring

11. Leachate Monitoring: Technology is not a
limiting factor
Water Quality & Leachate level

12. Gas Monitoring: Technology is not a limiting
factor
GASFLUX TECHNOLOGY
Flow
 Unrestricted thermal-based sensor
 Range: 0-60 L/hr, LOD 0.1 L/hr
Gases
 CH4, CO2, O2,CO,H2S, VOCs…
Account for cross-interface effects
Easy installation to any borehole diameter
Long-term deployment

13. We can now measure continuous Gas
concentrations & Flux

14. Cap Infiltration
Soil Moisture/Lysimeter:
 AIM:
To implement real time monitoring of the Lysimeters and weather stations data for
compliance monitoring.
 HOW DO THEY WORK?:
 Weather station, soil moisture probes, data loggers, seepage measurement using
tipping bucket rain gauges, etc.
 Lysimeters connected to GSM communication hub to check and update parameters;
 troubleshooting, repair and cleaning of equipment is required
 Lysimeter connect to DataStream Server

15. To Automate or Not?
 Decision process:
 Frequency of Measurement Required (Operational or Compliance)
Cost Benefit
 Frequency X unit costs for manual measurement = manual cost. Convert this to a 3 year cost.
 Equipment (assume 3 year depreciation).
An example:
Automated telemetered groundwater level: Assume $3,000 - $4000. manual equivalent cost-
$25.00. Makes sense if frequency exceeds 3000/25 = ~120 measurements in 3 years.
Automated landfill gas monitoring: Assume ~$12,000 Manual Equivalent $55.00
Makes Sense if Frequency Exceeds 12,000/55 = 218 measurements in 3 years
OR Makes sense if imminent threat needs to be managed.

16. Laboratory Analysis
 NATA accredited
laboratories
 Primary & Secondary
Laboratories
 Water Quality Analysis
(Groundwater &
Surface Water)
 BPEM Analytical suite.
 Average cost per
sample $280.00

17. REPORTING
 Factual
 Comparison with agreed criteria
 Summary of what has happened
 A lot of graphs & tables plotted with approved criteria.

18. What needs to be reported?
1 Introduction A summary including:
 The site name, licence number and monitoring period;
 Timeline of key activities in period (New cells started, severe
weather events, EPA inspections).
2 Monitoring
Program
A summary referencing the required program and what actually
happened.
3 Roles &
Responsibilities
Summary tabulation of all parties and their responsibilities in:
 Landfill operations,
 Monitoring, management
 Monitoring sampling, measurement, analysis
 Monitoring reporting
 Quality Control
 Auditing

19. Reporting of Field Activities
4 Field Work A summary of field works undertaken, observations of note and refence to
Appendix D containing the comprehensive field records generated from
DataStream IPad forms for monitoring programs for:
o Landfill Gas;
o Groundwater;
o Leachate;
o Surface Water
o Site Inspections
5 Laboratory
Analytical
Results
 Summary table of all laboratory report numbers for each sub-program and
copies of NATA Certificates.

20. Reporting: Data Analysis
6 Data Analysis
& Discussion
Discussion and reference to tabulation of monitoring data against screening
criteria.
 Times series plots of key data sets such as:
o Weather, Rainfall, Wind speeds & Direction;
o Groundwater Levels
o Leachate levels;
o Groundwater & Leachate quality parameters;
o LFG concentrations, pressures & flow;
o Water quality plots.
7 Laboratory
Data Quality
 A description of the components of data quality review.
 Conclusions on the validity of the laboratory data for all samples by sub-
program and event.

21. Discussion & Conclusions
8 Discussion &
Conclusion
Discussion of:
o Non-compliances with the verified monitoring program;
o Non-compliances with required outcomes of the BPEM;
o Data uncertainties;
o Historical trends;
o Exceedances of beneficial use criteria and action triggers;
o Action taken in response to exceedances;
o Monitoring infrastructure maintenance requirements and proposed
changes to monitoring infrastructure;
o Matters for consideration in updating the risk assessment and monitoring
program including a review of the conceptual model and reference to
Figures 2 - 7;
o Matters for consideration by the Auditor including recommendations for
additional and/or replacement monitoring infrastructure.

22. Completion Statement
8 Completion
Statement
 A checklist of all monitoring events and data sets
generated, confirming completeness of monitoring against
the Monitoring Plan.
 Summary Listing any exceptions, departures of missing
information and explanations for the data absences.

23. Figures: GIS & Automated
9 Figures Figure 1. Plan of premises
Figure 2. Site monitoring plan illustrating monitoring locations
Figure 3. Interpolated contoured watertable surface (most recent)
Figure 4. Watertable level trend plots
Figure 5. Leachate level trend plots
Figure 6. Concentration trend plots for key parameters, TDS,
methane.
Figure 7. Spatial plots of landfill gas concentrations;
Figure 8. CSM/conceptual hydrogeological cross section showing
relative levels of waste, leachate RWLs and groundwater RWLs (vertical axis
should be scaled) and locations of potential receptors.

24. 10 Appendices Appendix A EPA Licence
Appendix B. Verified monitoring program
Appendix C. Groundwater wells, leachate sumps, and Land Fill Gas
monitoring wells - bore logs and construction details.
Appendix D. Groundwater, surface water, leachate, and field record
sheets (copies of IPad generated originals)
Appendix E. Equipment calibration certificates (all subcontractors)
Appendix F. Signed chain of custody and laboratory sample receipt
records
Appendix G. Tabulated monitoring data
Appendix H. NATA-stamped laboratory certificates with reports
Appendix I. QA/QC reports
Documents: Appended.

25. Risk Management – Auditor Oversight

26. Reality of Money – Average Site

27. Reality of Money – Large Site

28. Something to think about!
Cost to the State?
Guestimate Only.
Assume 345 sites!.

29. Savings:
So where is the low hanging fruit?

30. Potential Savings
 1. Bring data collection in house through staff training and technical support, look at a
synergistic model between internal staff and subcontractors rather than a total out source
model. Facilitate this using common mandated processes, SOPs and data collection
platforms.
 2. Automate manual field reporting using Ipad based technology to minimise field reporting
time.
 3. Look at cost benefit analysis of automation versus manual field data collection.
 4. Standardise data management, file naming and document storage and set automated
reporting routines. Use a collaborative approach to reporting facilitated by external
contractors but supported by internal staff.
 4. Establish an agreed document storage and report framework with the agreed Auditor.
 5. Minimise Auditor time by providing the information in the format that they want.
 6. Enter dialogue with your Auditors on potential changes to your analytical requirements.

31.  The collation of monitoring infrastructure and monitoring activities and the
subsequent routing of all data into a common platform generates many areas
of improved efficiency both in timeliness of action and reduced reporting
time.
HydroTerra: DataStream Compliance
Management System
Benefits of a Structured Management
System Combined with Automation,
Data Management & Reporting
Functionality.

32. SOLUTION: - DATASTREAM COMPLIANCE

33. The Concept

34. Data Management Solutions
 Manage all your data on a singular platform!
 Customised automated reporting
 Compliance monitoring made easy!
 Web based tool – access data anywhere
 Laboratory Data Management
 Real time Sensor Data
 Field Inspection Reporting
 Currently implemented on 14 Landfills in Victoria!

35. Landfill Monitoring Solutions
 Real time data display
 Google map interface
 Subcontractor data management in a common platform

36. Reporting
 Customised folders
 Customised templates with auto populating
 IPad based reporting
 Auto filing of IPad generated reports.

37. DATASTREAM COMPLIANCE FOLDER
STRUCTURE
 Routing Files to folders
automatically.
 Discipline in filing.
 Auditor access.

38. Laboratory Data Reporting
 Laboratory Trend Data
 Analyte Exceedance
Tables vs Criteria.

39. Savings:
So where is the big fruit, difficult to get, but
ultimately the biggest saving?

40. Laboratory Analysis
 There is a strong argument that laboratory analysis is less important than
higher frequency field indicators (sensor and manually measured) for EC, pH,
T, redox and level for preliminary identification of plumes and rate of
migration. A reduction in analytical requirements will significantly reduce
long term monitoring (sampling and analysis) costs.
 The challenge: this requires Auditor facilitated correction of the approved
monitoring plan.

41. Process in Summary.
Field & Operation Inspection and
in house staff)
Monitoring Data Collection
- Manual (contractors & in house)
- Automated (rare, typically operations driven)
- SOP driven.
- Lab Analytical NATA accredited (external)
.
Field & Analytical Data Reporting
Factual Compliance Reporting
In house and external consultants/contractors.
Compliance Auditing
PI Insurance required.

42. www.hydroterra.com.au
Thank You!